War in Afghanistan "over"

[Guylee]

Hey did you guys hear that the war in Afghanistan is over?

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2014/12/29/afghanistan-war-officially-ends/21004589/

Yeah me either. They told us the name was changing to Freedom Sentinel, but nobody mentioned that means the war is over. Must be nice for ol' Barry-O to sit back and puff a (possibly Cuban) cigar and claim he ended the war when ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING HAS CHANGED.

[cstone]

Did the Afghan tribesmen get the memo?

I heard that the combat operations aren't really over until the President flies out to an aircraft carrier and announces it in front of a banner.
54393

[Sarcasm2]

[brutal]

Army Times, a Gannett company.

[facepalm]

How fucking liberal is that org?

[Bailey Guns]

Did the Afghan tribesmen get the memo?

I heard that the combat operations aren't really over until the President flies out to an aircraft carrier and announces it in front of a banner.
54393

[Sarcasm2]

I remember the media and liberals everywhere constantly harping on the "mission accomplished" thing. But Obama does/says virtually the same thing and he's some kind of hero.

[bobbyfairbanks]

Im so glad I've spent almost a decade of my life in that country. I've only been shot fragged blown up and hit with a hatchet.


What did we get out of it again, besides a serious case of go fuck your self US gov.

[dirtrulz]

Does that change the pay the soldiers receive now that it isnt a war zone. If so it is a bunch of crap.

[KestrelBike]

I remember the media and liberals everywhere constantly harping on the "mission accomplished" thing. But Obama does/says virtually the same thing and he's some kind of hero.

I had always heard that the banner wasn't for Bush, but for the USS Lincoln that had ended a long deployment mission.
http://csis.org/blog/bush-never-said-%E2%80%9Cmission-accomplished%E2%80%9D
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mission-accomplished-whodunit/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Accomplished_speech
Whether meant for the crew or not, the general impression created by the image of Bush under the banner has been criticized as premature, especially later as the guerrilla war began. Subsequently, the White House released a statement saying that the sign and Bush's visit referred to the initial invasion of Iraq. Bush's speech noted:
"We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We are bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous."[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Accomplished_speech#cite_note-main551946.shtml-10)"Our mission continues...The War on Terror continues, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide."

[mcantar18c]

It shouldn't. Still should be HDP

[Mick-Boy]

We've had one KIA and two WIAs this trip... I wish they had gotten better circulation on their memo.

[davsel]

Who won?

[KestrelBike]

the afghanis. they always win. they can outlast anyone. we cant spend enough to win, russia couldnt spend enough to win.

No one's tried genocide yet. Soviets started to take the gloves off, but not nearly enough. Ghengis Kahn kinda won.

[Mick-Boy]

Afghanis are money. Afghans are people.

Alexander the Great did it (sort of, through marriage). Genghis Khan did. His legacy still exists in the Hazara population that's present in the area to this day.

I guess the question to ask is "What were our goals in Afghanistan?"

-Defeat Al Qaeda?
-Defeat the Taliban?
-Deny a staging/training/operating area to Al Qaeda?
-Conquer the country?
-Establish a stable government?

How much military involvement is needed for our national goals? Is increased or decreased military involvement helping or hurting those goals?

[bobbyfairbanks]

did we accomplish any of those goals? And if we did, will it have made a difference in 2 years,5 years, 10 years, next month?


and to answer you question...

I am clearly dont know all the facts when it comes to national security (or anything else probably)
but...
I think the more involved we are the worse off our country is. If there were good numbers, would they show there were more terrorists or at least USA haters then or now? I would think now. We have created an entire generation of people who may have been somewhat undecided about the US, but are now decided that we are the devil. How can we think of Afghans as terrorists in their own country? We attacked them. If a country sent their military here, attacked us, decided they would show us the proper way to live, how to make money, tell us we couldnt be armed, what would we be? Think about it folks.


I take my hat off to you sir.

[BushMasterBoy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w9yAvrS7dc

[mcantar18c]

post

I've known plenty of them who genuinely appreciated what we had done/were doing.
I've also known plenty of them who hated everything about us.
Then there are the ones that are nice to your face and gladly accept your help and gifts (food, medical, etc.), and then turn around and play nice with the Taliban too. Some of those are playing both sides, others are just trying to get by as best they can.
I definitely don't think we've created an entire generation of people that now hate the US. We've done a lot of good in some places.

[Zombie Steve]

Who runs the poppy trade now?

[bobbyfairbanks]

Oh let me guess. The US Tax payer? Oh wait no we have been paying the DEA to go on combat ops to shut that down and tried to force afghan farmers from a cash crop to growing corn in the desert.

[wctriumph]

Never mind.

[Chad4000]

Who won?

bahhahaha lol

[flogger]

Shouldn't there be a parade or something like VE and VJ day? I'll bet the 10,000 'Sentinels' like the news!

It's always amazing how the media will bury things like this.

[Mick-Boy]

There's more than a little painful truth in this one. I guess that's what makes for good satire.



http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/01/afghanistan-americas-longest-war/

KABUL – With the stroke of midnight last night marking the end of NATO’s joint combat mission in Afghanistan, Duffel Blog looks back on 13 roller-coaster years of history that gripped a nation and forged a generation of American heroes and FOBBITs:

November 2001: Aided by US Special Forces and a coalition bombing campaign, Northern Alliance fighters sweep Afghanistan and uproot the Taliban from Mazar-e-Sharif, Bamiyan, Herat, Kabul, and Jalalabad – so basically nowhere we’ve ever heard of.

December 2001: Osama Bin Laden located in Tora Bora, which clears that up.

March 2002: The coalition scores a net victory with Operation Anaconda, but that’s not cheering anyone up when Peter Jackson’s The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring suffers a harrowing defeat at the 74th Oscars to that Russell Crowe suckfest, A Beautiful Mind.

March 2003: Troops shocked and awed at how shitty the food around here’s gotten all of a sudden.

May 2003: From Kabul, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declares an end to “major combat” operations, which is embarrassing, because that speech was meant for Baghdad.

October 2004: Afghans flock to the polls for the first time since that hazy summer of 1969. Says one nostalgic voter, “What a long, strange trip it’s been.”

2005: No news is good news, so that thing in Afganistan (sp?) must be going great.

2006: ???

May 2007: The top Taliban commander for Afghanistan, Mullah Dadullah, is killed in Helmand Province, demonstrating once and for all the indomitable might of coalition air superiority and top-of-the-line weapons technology over a man with one leg.

Mid-2008: With civilian casualties from coalition airstrikes mounting, Afghan President Hamid Karzai implores American officials that his people have endured enough freedom.

November 11, 2008: Taylor Swift drops Fearless, and we’re in love.

2009: Under a new counterinsurgency strategy, troop levels surge to an all-time high for the war. That’s 142,000 problems for the folks in J-6, who will spend deployment asking, “Have you tried turning it off and on again?”

November 2009: With Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Activision brings real Afghan action to living rooms everywhere. So grab a remote and hup two, soldier! There’s a war on!

June 2010: US Army golden boy and future City University of New York professor Gen. David Petraeus replaces “Runaway” Gen. Stanley McChrystal amid scandal.

May 1, 2011: Gah!! He was in Pakistan?! All this time?!? Our Garmins were way off …

2012: Attacks on coalition forces by Afghan military counterparts — so-called “green on blue” attacks — emerge as a prominent and alarming Taliban tactic. “Which is weird,” says a Pentagon representative, “because that’s not what we trained them to do.”

February 2012: US troops at Bagram burn some Qurans, but who will notice? Oh, no, wait. A bunch of fucking people die for this one.

March 2012: Preliminary peace talks between United States and Taliban representatives in Qatar are suspended suddenly, when Taliban representatives learn they’re involved in preliminary peace talks with the United States.

2013: We’re new here, but can someone please explain all this construction on base? Are those stairs made of fucking marble?!

Mid-2013: As Afghans officially take the lead on nationwide security, ISAF gifts state-of-the-art command centers to local police and military forces. Swell news for the Afghans, who were really hurting for some copper wire and a few good corners to shit in.

April 5, 2014: Blood, sweat, and some $700 billion USD spent in Afghanistan since 2001 have all set the conditions for a make-or-break presidential election between who and who, again? Now keep it down. We’re watching Game Of Thrones.

December 28, 2014: The NATO ceremony bringing a formal end to 13 years of war is carried out in secret, due to the threat of Taliban attacks in the Afghan capital. We are not making this up; 2014 was the bloodiest year in Afghanistan since 2001. Womp womp.

December 28, 2014: President Obama hails the “responsible conclusion” to America’s longest war. “Responsible, like calling a cab when you’ve had to much to drink,” he explains. The President assures veterans and their families that our country is safer for their sacrifices and offers everyone listening a coupon to Denny’s.

January 1, 2015: Approximately 10,800 American troops remain in Afghanistan, roughly the same number as in parts of 2002, 2003, and 2004, when we were at war. Happy New Year, and welcome home.

Mostly.

[BushMasterBoy]

Between Iraq and Afghanistan we spent over 4 trillion dollars! And we still can't get a new VA hospital built in Denver!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/study-iraq-afghan-war-costs-to-top-4-trillion/2013/03/28/b82a5dce-97ed-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html

[Jesus-With-A-.45]

Im so glad I've spent almost a decade of my life in that country. I've only been shot fragged blown up and hit with a hatchet.


What did we get out of it again, besides a serious case of go fuck your self US gov.

My thanks, appreciation & respect for what that's worth. This president has given a lot of men & woman that scarified more in one day than he has in 50 years a very raw deal.

FBHO

[<MADDOG>]

Afghanis are money. Afghans are people.

Alexander the Great did it (sort of, through marriage). Genghis Khan did. His legacy still exists in the Hazara population that's present in the area to this day.

I guess the question to ask is "What were our goals in Afghanistan?"

-Defeat Al Qaeda?
-Defeat the Taliban?
-Deny a staging/training/operating area to Al Qaeda?
-Conquer the country?
-Establish a stable government?

How much military involvement is needed for our national goals? Is increased or decreased military involvement helping or hurting those goals?

Interesting question...

Food for thought gentlemen: do you not find it interesting the 30E (+/-) latitude line from the ME up to Europe is being destabilized in one form or another? The Russians are "paying" for their excursion into Ukraine/Crimea (if not more), Iran is seeing it allies being dismantled by civil war while concurrently looking at a Sunni caliphate being born to its west, and the Saudi's are effectively tanking the entire global oil market (again hitting the Russians, Iran, Venezuela, etc).

Why use a military when you can achieve the same means by money?

[KestrelBike]

Interesting question...

Food for thought gentlemen: do you not find it interesting the 30E (+/-) latitude line from the ME up to Europe is being destabilized in one form or another? The Russians are "paying" for their excursion into Ukraine/Crimea (if not more), Iran is seeing it allies being dismantled by civil war while concurrently looking at a Sunni caliphate being born to its west, and the Saudi's are effectively tanking the entire global oil market (again hitting the Russians, Iran, Venezuela, etc).

Why use a military when you can achieve the same means by money?

I can't believe that the Saudis are doing any of this on purpose. They are doing the best they can to keep their heads above water while the US enjoys a production renaissance. AFAIUnderstand, Saudis are hugely dependent on USA oil $$ for defense and their basic economic livelihood. Everybody else in the ME hates them, but they're the big rich kids on the block with apaches (and the US who would have protected them to protect US oil interests), so no one can touch them (yet).