United States signs peace deal with Taliban

[nittany03]

Google News - <!-- "> '> --><title>

news.google.com

Boots on ground to be drawn down to 8,600 within 135 days. The remainder to withdraw within 9.5 months. A prisoner exchange between the Afghan government and Taliban is to occur by March 10th. The US is to launch an "administrative review" of sanctions. In return, the Taliban is to start negotiations with the Afghan government on a political way forward in Afghanistan, and renounce US-deemed terrorist organizations.

According to the article, the whole thing is basically conditional on the Taliban honoring the cease-fire and holding up their part of the agreement.

 

[Brett327]

Ultimately, a good thing if the deal holds. We should have been out of Afghanistan at least 10 years ago.

 

[Jim123]

The Naval War College standard line is that historically we haven't always been great at wrapping up hostilities- certainly not at the end of messy conflicts (WWII and the Axis unconditional surrender is considered to be a clean example; the messy examples are pretty obvious).

So we'll see how this attempt plays out.

Medieval civilizations eventually move out of their dark ages. Dark ages are, well, they're backward and ultimately unsustainable...

 

[Brett327]

I'm continually amazed at the amount of post conflict planning the allies did during WWII, and while it resulted in sustained cessation of hostilities, the Allies have maintained enormous garrisons in Axis nations to this day - albeit to counter cold war threats.

With chaos being the one constant in the international order, sustained peace is hard.

 

[hlg6016]

That is good news, Time to start bringing folks home.

 

[jmcquate]

Ultimately, a good thing if the deal holds.

Taliban gonna Taliban.................civil war on the horizon. Soviet withdraw part II. Once we're out, we ain't coming back. Best shitty option of all the shitty options.

 

[Brett327]

Taliban gonna Taliban.................civil war on the horizon. Soviet withdraw part II. Once we're out, we ain't coming back. Best shitty option of all the shitty options.

Frankly, the entire premise for our presence is faulty. The idea that democratizing Afghanistan as a mean of preventing another Al Qaeda attack seems quaint now in retrospect. Terrorists don't require a failed nation host state to train, or plan an attack. Even so, they could just as easily move to any number of other places in the world to do that kind of thing if Afghanistan wasn't working out for them.

We should have gone in, routed AQ, crushed the Taliban leadership to teach them a lesson, declare victory, then gotten the fuck out. Whole thing shouldn't have lasted more than 90 days. #hindsightbeing2020

 

[nittany03]

Frankly, the entire premise for our presence is faulty. The idea that democratizing Afghanistan as a mean of preventing another Al Qaeda attack seems quaint now in retrospect. Terrorists don't require a failed nation host state to train, or plan an attack. Even so, they could just as easily move to any number of other places in the world to do that kind of thing if Afghanistan wasn't working out for them.

We should have gone in, routed AQ, crushed the Taliban leadership to teach them a lesson, declare victory, then gotten the fuck out. Whole thing shouldn't have lasted more than 90 days. #hindsightbeing2020

I hate to say it, but part of me wonders whether our being able to install democratic regimes in Germany and Japan was a direct result of how destructive WWII was. As in by the end, there was enough "fuck it, we'll do what you want, just make it stop" sentiment for us to get away with it.

Whereas in OEF and OIF, perhaps it was over so fast that the enemy psychologically didn't feel beaten yet. Not that I'm encouraging going all Curtis LeMay as a general COA, but we need to understand where the "other guy" is psychologically to understand what war termination objectives are feasible from his point of view. Which we flat-out didn't do in the early 2000's.

 

[taxi1]

Terrorists don't require a failed nation host state to train, or plan an attack.

They pretty much do, and will go wherever they can find a lawless zone.

The internet can only get you so far...

I agree it’s time to move on. I expect the Taliban will play nice until we are gone, then take over Afghanistan again with the backing of the Paks.

 

[Brett327]

They pretty much do, and will go wherever they can find a lawless zone.

The internet can only get you so far...

I agree it’s time to move on. I expect the Taliban will play nice until we are gone, then take over Afghanistan again with the backing of the Paks.

I'm fairly certain you could set up an AQ boot camp here in the Nevada desert and no one would be the wiser. They'd fit right in with all the meth labs. The 9/11 hijackers did the bulk of their work in western countries. I contend that the part of the operation in Afghanistan was convenient, but hardly a necessary part of the overall operation that could have been carried out in a dozen other places, which is my point. Even if we had turned Afghanistan into a model democracy with the Taliban completely vanquished, AQ could have easily gone elsewhere. It's whack-a-mole on a global scale. It's an unachievable strategy.

 

[Pags]

I hate to say it, but part of me wonders whether our being able to install democratic regimes in Germany and Japan was a direct result of how destructive WWII was. As in by the end, there was enough "fuck it, we'll do what you want, just make it stop" sentiment for us to get away with it.

Whereas in OEF and OIF, perhaps it was over so fast that the enemy psychologically didn't feel beaten yet. Not that I'm encouraging going all Curtis LeMay as a general COA, but we need to understand where the "other guy" is psychologically to understand what war termination objectives are feasible from his point of view. Which we flat-out didn't do in the early 2000's.

I think a lot of post WWII success had to do with the fact that both Germany and Japan were high functioning societies prior to the war. While they weren't necessarily democracies they had prior democratic vestiges and high levels of societal and technological advancement. Its arguably easier to get Porsche to stop making Tigers and start making cars then it is get a tribal people to make a 500yr leap.

 

[jmcquate]

N
Bottom line, make that part of the world irrelevant.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Frankly, the entire premise for our presence is faulty. The idea that democratizing Afghanistan as a mean of preventing another Al Qaeda attack seems quaint now in retrospect. Terrorists don't require a failed nation host state to train, or plan an attack. Even so, they could just as easily move to any number of other places in the world to do that kind of thing if Afghanistan wasn't working out for them.

We should have gone in, routed AQ, crushed the Taliban leadership to teach them a lesson, declare victory, then gotten the fuck out. Whole thing shouldn't have lasted more than 90 days. #hindsightbeing2020

I agree except the 90 days part. Not getting Bin Laden complicated things. I’m glad we’re finally getting out though.

 

[Griz882]

My first Afghanistan tour was late 01 through 02...hard to believe we have been at it so long. I am glad it is over and hope the Afghans can find some level of peace and stability.

 

[Brett327]

I am glad it is over and hope the Afghans can find some level of peace and stability.

LOL