Armchair Generals

Russell Michaels

Russell is inside his own mind, a comfortable yet silly place. He is also on Twitter.

Related Post Roulette

30 Responses

  1. Chip Daniels says:

    The Afghan military, who wanted to fight

    Sorry, this is just not so.

    The Afghan military had a pre-arranged agreement with the Taliban and cheerfully surrendered in exchange for cash and prizes, ordering their troops to lay down their weapons. They abandoned their own kinsmen without so much as a thought. The leaders of the country flew away with sacks of money stolen from their countrymen, ignoring the plight of their people.

    There are no stories of Afghan Dunkirks, because there are no Afghan Churchills. There are no stories of Afghan Resistance, because they have no De Gaulles.

    There were no Alamos, no Thermopylae, no heroic last stands by plucky Afghan fighters because their leaders had already sold them out.

    Instead there are the Malalas, shot and maimed, who had to flee because their own countrymen refused to defend them.Report

    • Oscar Gordon in reply to Chip Daniels says:

      Interview I heard with an Afghan soldier was they didn’t fight because no one told they had to, which aligns with your point that the military leadership had already decided to do nothing.Report

  2. the last American military casualty was well over a year ago, in February of 2020.

    Which is the same moth that the US and the Taliban signed the agreement for complete American withdrawal. I’ll put my armchair general hat on and say that’s not a coincidence, and that if the US had broken that agreement and decided to stay, the killings would have resumed.Report

  3. North says:

    An excellent summation of the neocon position.Report

    • Russell Michaels in reply to North says:

      Not really. I have no intention to favor nation building, but the status quo before we left was certainly better than the Taliban taking over the country in a few weeks.Report

      • North in reply to Russell Michaels says:

        The status quo, immediately prior to our leaving, was based on Trump making a deal for us to leave prior to Biden’s election. Thus the Taliban had ceased attacking us. Had Biden reneged then you can be sure the status quos would not of held and we’d have resumed mailing American servicemembers home in bags and pouring more money into that country promptly. While this would have no doubt delighted the military, their contractors and the usual suspects on the right it would have pleased no one else.Report

        • Mike Schilling in reply to North says:

          It’s not complicated. Trump agreed to leave in 2021 in return for no bad news until the election and began an immediate drawdown of troops based on this agreement. Anyone saying “The situation was stable with only 3000 Americans”. (and there’s an awful lot of them) is ignoring that.Report

      • Brent F in reply to Russell Michaels says:

        An unsustainable status quo.

        The ANA was losing ground during the Trump “surge.” To keep a status quo going America would as a baseline be a bigger commitment than that. Otherwise you’re just dragging this thing out longer waiting for something change in your favour.Report

  4. CJColucci says:

    Granted that the Biden administration’s planning for the evacuation was deficient, that leads to the question of how much better the results would have been if it weren’t? Once the war aims expanded from taking out a discrete bunch of thugs, which was hard but doable, to, well, whatever our war aims were, winning in any meaningful sense was out of the question. Once we committed, rightly, to getting the f**k out in a reasonably near future, the difference between keeping a 4-digit-sized force there a bit longer and getting out a bit sooner probably didn’t matter much. To be cold-blooded about it, how many more Afghanis would we have been able to extract with better planning? There’s nothing much else we could reasonably have hoped to accomplish.Report

    • Russell Michaels in reply to CJColucci says:

      It makes the effort of what we did over the last 20 years pointless. We wasted all that blood and treasure for functionally no true global gain of any kind.Report

    • Philip H in reply to CJColucci says:

      There’s also the minor – and for neocons inconvenient – fact that the Administration has evacuated 17,000 people in the last week, bringing the total evacuation to over 22,000 since the start of July. I don’t see those numbers as particularly bad, but I also haven’t seen any hard numbers on how many Afghans WANT to be evacuated.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Philip H says:

        The argument that I’d give is something like this:

        Of course we had to say that we weren’t getting anybody out. If we said “we’re getting these people out”, the Taliban would have captured them first! So we had to lie and do it behind the scenes. We’re competent but pretending to be incompetent is an important part of our competence!”, it’d sort of tip our hand.

        (And if I wanted to argue against the above argument, I’d open with something like “so everything that looked like it might have been a mistake was a feint and it was a demonstration of how meta-competent you are?”)Report

        • North in reply to Jaybird says:

          That’s an argument you wouldn’t want to launch until you can be confident it’ll be a post hoc assertion.Report

          • Jaybird in reply to North says:

            If it can deflect the argument until the next news cycle, you’re good.

            Hey! There’s a guy trying to bomb the Library of Congress! Look over there!Report

            • North in reply to Jaybird says:

              Mmmm I feel that just doing what he’s doing, putting his head down and trying to muscle through the withdrawal period, is as likely to work. I feel like claiming to be playing 4d chess is a high risk approach unless you can do it in a setting where the outcome has already been determined and it’s a satisfactory one. For instance if most to all of the Westerners and a large number of Afghan refugees are withdrawn and Afghanistan is off his plate, that’s when I’d try claiming that it was all meta-competence; not before.Report

            • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

              I think the straightforward answer is that you can’t give that kind of vote of no confidence in the Afghan government if you think there’s even a chance it can hold out for 90 days. Hell even if you strongly suspect it can’t, is the fallout really any worse for not having precipitated a mildly less bad version of what we’re witnessing now 3 months ago? I don’t think so.

              But IMHO the entire line of thinking is way too meta. This is another situation where what’s important to the establishment just isn’t to the American people.

              Contra the latest in woke broke anti-colonialist theory the US has always been uncomfortable as an imperial power. Yea, we’ve been willing to assert ourselves in our hemisphere and we took the mantle of world power out of necessity during the Cold War but have never been great at it or particularly committed at the popular level. If we really want to get meta I think the more interesting question is, now that the unipolar moment has passed, are we just reverting back to mean? A strong, but inward looking nation, interested in our own ongoing social and political experiments but deeply ambivalent about the rest of the world, and the Old World in particular.Report

  5. Chip Daniels says:

    While everyone in the West is freaking out about the Taliban taking over, the people who were ostensibly the leaders of Afghanistan, that we propped up for decades, ae eagerly negotiating to be a part of the new Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/you-wouldnt-know-it-from-the-us-news-coverage-but?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Talking-Points-Memo+%28Talking+Points+Memo%3A+by+Joshua+Micah+Marshall%29Report

  6. Jaybird says:

    Meet The Press hasn’t gotten the memo that we ought to be talking about Trump instead.

    Report