Was It Folly For The Us And Uk To Withdraw From Afghanistan?

[ichkeria]

The Afghan general quoted below plainly thinks so

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58068299

[maggiebee]

Ah TTT, man's inhumanity to man rears its ugly head again.

[douglas9401]

Fighting with both hands tied behind their backs was never going to work
Better to have admitted so at the outset and just said no to involvement.

[Bobbisox1]

We should never have gone in in the first place , it’s tribal and trying to bring factions together to live in peace has never worked in the region and yet we’ve lost a lot of British men and women by getting involved

[ichkeria]

The trouble is, you put Afghanistan at the mercy of the Taliban and you surely return to the problem you had at the start, wherte the country becomes a breeding ground for world terrorism.
We promised the Afghans we would stick it out, and in fact we were winning. The hard work had in many ways had been done.

[Mozz71]

Tora- //no, the place cannot be civilised, just let them kill each other, the whole sheet whole is not worth a single western life. //

And all the civilians caught in the crossfire Tora? Tough luck I assume? I mean, given your stance on immigration, you're not gonna let them shelter over here.

[naomi24]

We were never going to win.

[Bobbisox1]

The Taliban have taken hold again ich , us leaving gave them the green light, I feel sorry for the Afghanis who are caught up in this ( again)

[naomi24]

And speaking of immigration I think it’s shameful
that we’re not allowing the interpreters who worked for us to come here. They’re marked men.

[ToraToraTora]

it's not about "winning" naomi, it's about installing a civilised system and infrastructure. First the British then the Russians then the septics have tried the place is beyond help.

[ichkeria]

"The Taliban have taken hold again ich , us leaving gave them the green light, I feel sorry for the Afghanis who are caught up in this ( again)"

In rural areas certainly, That was why I asked the question. This general still seems optimistic, but plainly I would answer my own question with an emphatic "yes"

[ToraToraTora]

mozz: "And all the civilians caught in the crossfire Tora? Tough luck I assume? I mean, given your stance on immigration, you're not gonna let them shelter over here. "- the lines are blurred, the civilians are part of it, no regime can prosper for long without the civilians on their side.

[naomi24]

TTT, 18.08. I tend to agree with you.

[ToraToraTora]

naomi: "And speaking of immigration I think it’s shameful
that we’re not allowing the interpreters who worked for us to come here. They’re marked men. " - yes we should let them in.

[ichkeria]

The Russians never really tried to civilise anyone. They went in to shore up a dictator. Arguably it was their invasion which sowed the seeds for what we see now, because it mobilised forces that we once aided and abetted but are now out of control

[Mozz71]

Naomi @ 18:08 Utterly agree. Those people a western conspirators in the eyes of the Taliban. We owe them.

Tora @ 18:10 I disagree. We've been shaking the hornet nest for too long, it just doesn't seem right to now rabbit, leaving innocents to get stung.

[naomi24]

We could be there forever, mozz, and nothing would change.

[Atheist]

I think that Afghanistan has long been the land that Russia wanted to conquer to gain access to India, and that Britain wanted to hold to keep India for itself. The poor Afghanis were caught in between these two imperial powers and did their best to resist them.

[Mozz71]

Then Naomi, we should have an acceptable immigration law that allows in the genuine victims of our involvement in the Middle East.

[naomi24]

Yes, let all
38 million of them in. It’s always our fault.