" if there was a clean sensible thing to do we would be doing it" I don't believe there is not a clean sensible thing to do. I believe it's all just being given up. We are going to go right back to where we started. Except now we have just handed over 20 years of investment. The ppl there are VERY poor. Is there really NOTHING we could do that is clean and sensible except stand there and say "They don't have the will to fight?"Who has the will to fight when they are steeped in third world poverty? Honestly claining ppl don't have the will to fight in that scenario comes across as just like being so out of touch with reality or a deliberate lie. Ppl were literally clinging to exteriot of airplane. How many women were in support of the new militants? Where is the committment to people's self-determination. Where are the sources of info that give us a general overview of sentiment for political leanings by region and gender in Afghanistan,? Are we really to believe this is the ppls will and ALL the forces of the greatest militaries in the world were incapable of effecting permanent change? I think it's absolutely preposterous to suggest there is nothing else that can be done.

@Flowerwall then maybe you should be running things.

@hankster I am not in charge of any such things and yes it is easy to criticize something from a distance, but we are capitalists that can't help others improve and develop their own economies? We couldn't use millitary power to help stabilize and then put some good American know how to work and help buiild their economic and internal governmental institutions. Why spend 20 years then drop it all?

@Flowerwall we could have spent 40 then dropped it. perhaps, similar to national leaders, your expectations don't line up with the potentials. what you may be seeing as the dysfunction in that place is how the culture there is different. I'm not defending it, nor accusing it of anything except being resistant to the only kind of changes capitalism knows. its not a simple problem, that capitalism or military might can solve apparently. And yeah its a stinker. no win win. life can be that way.

@Flowerwall capitalism just ain't all its cracked up to be. whether there is anything else better or not don't make it a fix all.

@hankster I just came across a comment on this specific point that says the US should have stayed for 50 years because it takes time to change the trajectory of an entire society. Examples such as Japan and Germany were mentioned, though I don't know how comparable the two nations are to this example. I a think the non-intervetionist position cannot be the default stance in all situations though the American ppl will often revert to asking why and distrusting the true goals of our military operations and non-interventionism becomes popular among the public especially when the conflict is long-term.

@Flowerwall i can see an argument for the long term influence, but not where there exist an armed active effective resistance to the effort. 200 years would not likely be enough. there is no end in sight for expenditures of $ and lives for that place. the nation is in tatters, to spent to be rebuildable now, perhaps later. it's too war weary. we the people are also war weary, at least of this one. americans like to believe their winners. the industry will need to find another when there pockets need filling again.

@hankster too spent to be rebuildable = perfect breeding ground for terrorism = we lose. And that whole process is unfolding currently

@Flowerwall yep kinda. the war didn't change that. been unfolding for 40 or 50 years at least.

@hankster The situation will continue to deteriorate now whereas before there was atleast some level of stability acheived.In the chart explaining the financials, incomr per capits more than doubled in time from 2002 to 18. Yeaterday I watched a video of ordinary Afghanis being interviewd a couple years back. One talked about his produce vending businesd thriving when there is no conflict. Of course now him and others like him are probably doing terribly. As video states economy is crashing and I am sure the sense of security is turned upside down for most.

@hankster Also I misspoke in previous paragraph when saying "non-interventionism should not be the default stance". I am correcting it to say it should not be assumed as the best response to all situations. As the post I referred to originally pointed out, and I repeat it becuz I think it's a valid point, chose to engage in conflicts only when you absolutely must and then plan to create an outcome that is a win. That is the strategy we should be employing.

Additionally there is also the question of what the goals were in Afghanistan. I read a lengthy breakdown of the missing components to the operation. I cannot state which are accurate as I am not as well informed in the details of the entire events, but it is interesting to hear the experts debate what exactly happened and surely even as ppl not up close in the conflict we can all agree non-interventism here lead to what can only be described as a complete loss of progress.

@Flowerwall please understand i have no intent to be rude nor dismissive. this can be rehashed and discussed forever but its a pointless endeavor here. blue in the face. the most critical thing for many Americans is that many parents and siblings will have a chance to hug their loved ones again, too many have lost that opportunity. there is no correct solution or answer, just bring those soldiers home. it's good i think to think about, but folly to imagine war can be right or fixed or just and without errors. this effort was a dead horse way back and the leaders, generals, public etc. couldn't face it. got to move to next. pride is not a very good teacher. it cripples learning. just brush our teeth and eat our vegetables is probably the best we can do.

@hankster Pride? You must be mistaken on wherr I stand or why I am discussing it. I do not mean we should always win because of pride, no absolutely not, it's because we saw that by choosing to engage in a conflict it was for the right reason, we were furthering a good cause. But once that cause has been selected then you don't give up. This was the lengthy point by point break down I read and quite frustrated I couldn't find again. One point was we did not have a clearly defined objective, is this true? I am not sure. I think most know what the general objective was. Another thing I read said that Afghanistan only was like a war in the beginning. Then it became primarily a task of nation building and we were not getting that job done to our full potential. Yes, it still did require our Armed Forces and there were some loss of life, but the work of nation building was the task at hand. I cannot further comment on that part of it, however we all saw the end and it was harrowing. But that's OUR end there. Yes happy the service members are safe, but we haven't avoided threats altogether and not everyone's lives have gotten better. Some have gotten much, much worse over there. And time will tell just how bad and if that trouble will boil over in other parts of the world. We'll see. Time will tell.

@Flowerwall you maybe sure, but the mood of the nation when this started was vengeful. our pride was stung, and something had to be done seemed to be the attitude. thats how pride did its part in creating the mess.

@hankster To say there was no element of vengeance would be false, but to say there was ONLY an element of vengeance would be equally false. I cannot debate the neccessity of the war or the nation building that was to occur with full access to all supporting facts and related reasoning. It did last 20 years and under the terms of four presidents, so apparently from the perspective of those who have earned highest ranks in our military and politics, those who should have access to all of the supporting details, clasdified info, etc., it was a neccessary, sustained endeavor.

I do also realize there is arguement that states some of this is on Trump. I haven't heard a genuine, factual debate on the topic however, just the useless, devoid of real infirmation, name calling that tends to typify a lot of political discussions online.

We don't have a need to know? So sure let's just invest 20 years into a region, drop it like a hot potato and don't expect to know anything. Nothing from this perspective is making any sense at all! When you look at Afghanistan, what's going on in Afghanistan, it's making every single of one of the world leaders who were involved, but especially the US, look like we have all caved and lost our own way! And that is a horrible, horrible, horriblr thought.

What's the whole point? So you are acknowledging it appears that noone knows whats going on and somehow you think it's copacetic and Biden is right?

Did I stutter? Did I write it in German? French?

Your the one who asked ‘What are we doing here’ right? That first sentence I was talking about elected officials. And next time, check your spellings before you write because I don’t know what copestead ict ans means.

@CuddyCruiser Well what do our allies think? Forward to 6:18, which us the last 25 seconds, to hear it summed up.