Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (47) |
Author: albaby1 SILVER
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84361 
Subject: Re: Inheriting a far more dangerous world
Date: 09/24/24 12:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 14
*How* we left feeds directly into that - the collapse of the Afghani government was well under way and the Taliban were in fact driving on Kabul during the evacuation. It was very...South Vietnam-like.

In the specifics? Sure. But there's no plausible scenario where under a Trump Administration, the prior Afghani government would have resisted falling to the Taliban upon our withdrawal. Their armed forces and domestic security forces were utterly incapable of preventing that takeover. The same outcome would have occurred under Trump - it was baked into our decision to withdraw from the country, and Trump had already made that call.

Do we still have troops in Iraq?
What about Syria?


And in Cuba. But we have absolutely no control over the government in those countries. Merely retaining a military base or troop presence isn't enough to let us prevent domestic forces that we dislike from seizing control of the government.

Once Trump decided we were going to withdraw from Afghanistan, the country was going to fall to the Taliban. The assumption that Trump (and later Biden) made was that the Afghani security forces were capable of resisting the Taliban. That proved to be completely false. Since Trump would not have had any reason to revisit that assumption - nor any willingness to spend years and untold resources trying to change the readiness of the Afghan forces even if he knew it was wrong - there was no way that things would have turned out any differently.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to albaby1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (47) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community