Trump endorses the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in freewheeling Cabinet meeting

[Right_in_Virginia]

You’re right. We should do it your way, remain uninvolved, and leave things to the regional players.

I didn't say we remain uninvolved.  I said there are  ways to affect an outcome other than sending Americans for decades on end to die in non-winnable "wars".

We also have economic clout .... it is both a carrot and a stick.  Let's use this for a while and give the military stick a rest and our men and women a chance to reach 30.

[sneakypete]

How does this differ from what I said?

And what makes you so sure Afghanistan won't have the same affect on us?

@Right_in_Virginia @kevindavis

Yes,the war in Afghanistan did bankrupt the USSR,but even more importantly,they LOST that war and had to retreat home in shame in front of tv cameras BECAUSE they lost that war.

The primary reason they lost was because they had the economy of a 3rd world nation and were trying to fight a "First World War" in a country where their prime military assets (air and armor) were as much a liability as they were an asset. Tanks need room to maneuver and flat terrain to cross quickly to crush enemy and enemy positions,and the USSR armor was more of a liability than it was an asset in those mountain passes.

As for their aircraft,they were designed to survive a fight with the aircraft of other major powers at high altitude and at high speed.  They didn't/don't handle worth a damn flying low and slow,not be shot at FROM ABOVE by 15th century goobers with shoulder fired rockets.

Then factor in that the vast majority of the Soviet military might was composed of poor draftees that were treated brutally by their leadership,and forced to be there against their will,which mean the mass of the Red Army had no interest in fighting unless it was in self-defense,and even then it could probably be said that many of them were more interested in fighting their leaders than they were the official enemy. After all,nobody from Afghanistan was in charge back home and causing their families to live lives on a 1920's level.

Not that the US will do any better using conventional weapons and tactics. We will do better and last longer because of the quality of our soldiers and their willingness to follow orders,but if we don't get "medieval on their asses" we are going to fail also. Maybe not as quickly,but fail just the same.

AND WE HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN EVEN IF WE WIN OTHER THAN BRAGGING RIGHTS. Which are,IMNSHO,a pretty piss-poor reason to fight a war.

Yeah,we SHOULD be fighting Islam and Muslims. In FACT,we MUST fight them if we want to retain our freedoms,but we need to fight them here first,and send the survivors back to whatever Shitstainistan they left to come here. Once we have freed America from the danger of Islam,we have options,and until we do this I don't even  want to hear a whisper about freeing anyone else,including them,from the mental disease they call a religion.

[sneakypete]

The massive size of the Soviet Union, cost of satellite nation central control from Moscow, with little ROI, and unsustainability of the communist model is what bankrupted them. They never had anywhere near the amount of personnel and material committed to Afghanistan, as we did in Vietnam. Additionally, the logistics of getting men and supplies there was much simpler and cheaper.

@edpc

True,every word of it,plus more.

The president also wondered aloud, during the cabinet meeting, why Pakistan was not fighting in Afghanistan. There’s no delicate nuance to this: The entire reason why the Taliban exists, is because of Pakistani influence within the country.  It’s exactly what we do not want. He is simplistic and naïve in his understanding of regional world issues and history.

WHY is it that you can't see that Trump is sending a subtle message here? WHY are you always assuming he is an idiot? "Managing" other leaders is what he does and has always done. The only difference is he now has to manage political leaders instead of business leaders,and the water is a LOT shallower.

[sneakypete]

What have we accomplished in Afghanistan?  We're now negotiating with the Taliban. 

I think there's a class of citizens who just don't want to believe the world will survive without our blood and treasure continually spilling in all four corners of the Earth.  There are other ways to affect an outcome.

@Right_in_Virginia

The ONLY  thing we need to negotiate with the Taliban is how and when they die. What we NEED to do is start with the simple (for us) act of cutting off their funding. No money equals no food,clothing,munitions,or transportation to fight a war. We DO have the money and the power to shut them down.

All we are lacking is the will because the instant we shut down the terrorism wars is the same instant that unemployment starts to go through the roof and US munitions,clothing,transportation,food suppliers,etc,etc,etc start to shut their doors. The millionaire and billionaire investors will no longer be pulling in huge guaranteed profits,and the union jobs will be gone.

Maybe even more important is "where" these things happening will take America. Who knows what the reaction will be once George and Gina Goober find out they have been played for fools to benefit the wealthy and their political brothers? The Terrorism Wars have been THE major distraction that has kept Americans as well as 'murikans from taking a closer look at the corruption,theft,and lies of our own government. Take that away and who knows what might happen?

[sneakypete]

So we should cut and run like paper tigers?

@kevindavis

Are you SERIOUSLY proposing we continue to fight a war that we obviously have NO intention of winning?

[edpc]

WHY is it that you can't see that Trump is sending a subtle message here? WHY are you always assuming he is an idiot? "Managing" other leaders is what he does and has always done. The only difference is he now has to manage political leaders instead of business leaders,and the water is a LOT shallower.

Probably because he has no depth of knowledge or intellectual curiosity to attempt understanding the situation. He believes what he thinks at any given moment, reality be damned. Skimming a history book and glancing at a map would confirm what we had discussed above.  With his access to briefings, the president should know it, as well. He also contradicts himself, quite often. Just before Thanksgiving, we were hearing how important it was to have Saudi Arabia as an ally against a serious Iranian threat in a dangerous world. During the cabinet meeting, just yesterday, he said Iran was ‘trying to survive’ and implied they are on the verge of falling apart, economically and politically. So, which is it? The regional players he believes should be involved in various situations are not true allies, with our interests in mind. ISIS was pushed out of Iraq, largely by Shia militia groups, under command of an Iranian Quds Force general. Turkey in Syria. Pakistan in Afghanistan. Both have been duplicitous, at best. These are not leaders or nations you can manage, or rely upon, in the least.

[sneakypete]

Probably because he has no depth of knowledge or intellectual curiosity to attempt understanding the situation. He believes what he thinks at any given moment, reality be damned. Skimming a history book and glancing at a map would confirm what we had discussed above.

@edpc

LOL! Have you read any history books lately? They should all start with "Once upon a time........"

They are all written by history professors from various colleges,and the only creatures MORE ignorant of the real world than professors are school teachers. Politicians just pretend to be that ignorant to cover for their stealing and pulling in bribes.

 

With his access to briefings, the president should know it, as well. He also contradicts himself, quite often. Just before Thanksgiving, we were hearing how important it was to have Saudi Arabia as an ally against a serious Iranian threat in a dangerous world.

Yeah,and it is the DUTY of a President to tell lies in order to cover for needed allies as situations change. It's called "politics". In MY not so humble opinion,we should nuke Saudi Arabia and be done with it,but the chances of me being elected president are pretty damn slim. They are a pus pustule on the face of the planet. Oxygen thieves,each and every one.

During the cabinet meeting, just yesterday, he said Iran was ‘trying to survive’ and implied they are on the verge of falling apart, economically and politically. So, which is it? The regional players he believes should be involved in various situations are not true allies, with our interests in mind. ISIS was pushed out of Iraq, largely by Shia militia groups, under command of an Iranian Quds Force general. Turkey in Syria. Pakistan in Afghanistan. Both have been duplicitous, at best. These are not leaders or nations you can manage, or rely upon, in the least.

I don't give a rabid rats ass what any of those ragheads think. Trump is playing the hand he was dealt when he first sat at the table,and has no choice but to play it to the best of his ability while trying to shift the focus to a more pro-American and less Globalist POV. BUT.....,he is a President,not a dictator,and he has to deal with argumentative congresscritters and US Senators,almost all of whom are maneuvering for personal gain instead of what is good for the country. Kinda like trying to herd rabid mice,but it seems to be the prime part of any president's job.

[TomSea]

Reagan delegated. I have no doubt, some of Trump's advisors could take this being delegated duties well. The problem is now, there is a lot of turnover.