Afghanistan

File: boneyard.jpg (15KB, 198x255px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 198x255px

I know Trump said we are not nation building anymore, we are killing terrorists, but he also said we will have victory, for the ones who died fighting. What would constitute a victory in this situation? How can that be realistically achieved?

>>138631214
Seriously, why Trump decided to stay in Afghanistan?

>>138631988
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdfcf-cvJL4

>>138632213
Sum up please, this is too long
You really have nothing to win in Afghanistan why do you even care about this piece of land?

Afghanistan will always be a shit hole as long as it's Islamic.

cant you us guys give the usbek part to ubekistan, the tadjik part to tadjikistan, the pashtun part maybe independend maybe to pakistan
and then give a chunk of it to iran for the afghan shias, and then those countrys figure shit out?

We are not leaving Afghanistan until China is defeated, I will see to that. We won't abandon a strategic territory on China's western flank.

>>138631214
Yeah, you're right, but it doesn't matter. We shouldn't get out because it's what would be good for that country but because it's what's good for us. These worthless expensive military ventures are destroying this country.
>>138631326
>What would constitute a victory in this situation?
Oh, nothing, that's the point. Just like Vietnam, like Iraq, Korea, both the "World Wars" and all these other meaningless wars there's nothing to be achieved except the practice of war. But that's enough to be profitable so it will continue.

>>138631214
Difference is Obama did not want to kill his fellow muslims.

>>138632965
Lol, no shut the fuck up. Islamic or not Afghanistan is a mess.

>>138631214
we are still in there for a combo of reasons. some of which i dont know.

my guess is Mill industry complex/test shit out get rid of old inventory. Also str

File: 800px-BamyanBuddha_Smaller_1.jpg (215KB, 800x1190px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 800x1190px

>>138633535
It used to be cool.

File: tradition.jpg (91KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 480x640px

>>138633300

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRbq63r7rys

Bitter lake

>>138631326

Maybe let the Afghans work out a setup that works, instead of trying to impose a western-style democracy on them that's not going to work with their backwards retarded tribal culture?

Maybe that's why Trump was talking about not forcing our way of life on other people and shit? Gee, who'd a thunk

>>138634138
Adam Curtis dropping the red pills.

>>138631214
It's just neo-colonialism. Afghanistan was never really meant to be democratically unified, and democracy doesn't work in that part of the world anyway.

No, the goal was mainly exploitation of resources, Namely CIA control over the opium trade, and natural gas and mines in the region.

There are currently talks to replace the outgoing American troops with mercenaries under the purview of (((Stephen A. Feinberg)) The head of DynCorp Intl. No doubt to ensure that said exploitation continues.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/10/world/asia/trump-afghanistan-policy-erik-prince-stephen-feinberg.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/25/world/asia/afghanistan-trump-mineral-deposits.html

>>138635409


>https://nytimes com/2017/07/10/world/asia/trump-afghanistan-policy-erik-prince-stephen-feinberg.html
https://unvis.it/www.nytimes.com/2017/07/10/world/asia/trump-afghanistan-policy-erik-prince-stephen-feinberg.html
>https://nytimes com/2017/07/25/world/asia/afghanistan-trump-mineral-deposits.html
https://archive.is/CjXjs

>>138631326
Victory means more $$ to the military-industrial complex. We'll get victory, don't you worry.

I'm fucking done with trump unless he pulls out some strong immigration reform, he is shit

>>138635788
Trump's just a convenient scapegoat, the same thing would be happening no matter who the president was.

>>138635409
>CIA controlled opium trade and other resources that no one has ever exploited from Afghanistan
If the CIA wanted opium they could grow it in our backyard, and not have to rely on unpredictable savages.
http://myfox8.com/2017/05/23/nc-deputies-find-500-million-worth-of-opium-poppy-plants/

Why can't Trump big back old style imperialism and allow us soldiers to rape and kill and maim and steal and allow white Americans to establish settler colonies?

>>138636479
Smart criminals know not to shit where they sleep.

>>138636724
Smart criminals know not to get in the mix with unstable and unpredictable fanatics.

File: bush_doing_it_wrong_1.jpg (12KB, 240x232px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 240x232px

>>138637904
You don't say.

>>138638069
You can say that the failed soviet invasion of Afghanistan, was a key factor in the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the betterment of the world.

>>138635788
>strong immigration reform
lol you do realize he's doing the opposite

>>138631214
Who gives a fuck, just withdraw and let the sandniggers kill each other. Every year we waste hundreds of billions of dollars in the Middle East that could be used to police our borders instead.

>>138638688
Do you honestly think the world is a better, safer place today than it was in the mid-eighties?

Honestly?

>>138631214
Afghanistan failed because the Western institutional models cannot inherently succeed in places like Afghanistan. For thousands of years of human history, invading armies had no problem occupying land and stabilizing their regimes in favor of their small ruling caste. From the Greeks in Persia to the Turks in India to the Dutch in Indonesia, the models of occupation that were 'normally' practiced were far superior than how Globalist militaries handle occupation. This is because Democracy only works in homogenous yet intelligent populations. If a population is diverse, Democracy falls due to ethnic infighting. If a population isn't intelligent, it falls due to Left-Wing populism. It's politically incorrect to say what I have said, but it's the reason why Afghanistan's occupation fell apart. The American military/intelligence lacked the imagination to successfully create an occupational system that could govern Afghanistan, because they were operating with moral norms that weren't applicable to this war.

Unironically, Neofeudal governance would've been the successful model to occupy and control Afghanistan. Here's the definitive answer to how Afghanistan could've been won.

>Elevate key warlords by giving them the right to tax their territory in exchange for loyalty.
>Then monopolize key industries to finance the support of a central government.
>Finally, appoint a central leader with the support of the United States military to serve as a Head of State.

This is exactly how humans have governed occupied hostile territories for thousands of years, from Timur to Seljuk to Seleucids to every other conqueror in the world. The US government failed to follow that time-and-tested model, which is why it lost Afghanistan.

>>138640019
>Elevate key warlords by giving them the right to tax their territory in exchange for loyalty.

Why would Taliban leaders settle for that when

1. they know their interests don't align,
2. they were already administering and taxing those territories
3. and that despite setbacks, their campaign of guerilla warfare was still effective?

>>138631326

There can be no victory in Afghanistan.

It has literally never been an option.

>>138640019

It doesn't succeed because of our hubris.

We are unable to process that a region does not want and will not conform to our systems, under any penalty or any subjugation.

>>138641699
I know my posts on 4chan get monitored and locked, so I'm careful not to state things that are radioactively politically incorrect. But I'll make an exception for this debate. I'm also willing to admit when I'm wrong due to not having the complete picture and/or not considering some foreign element.

Let's pretend I'm a Turkish Warlord from Central Asia. Say the Ghaznavids. Those fuckers had absolutely managed to succeed in governing Afghanistan regardless of the whims of the Natives.

>1. Rather than elevate locals whom I know would betray me, I invite my own kind, IE: Turks, to become Warlords of the region.
>2. I then specifically recruit locals to form the kernel of my military, to fill the ranks of soldiers, so that by recruiting the local population, I effectively 'disarm' one less soldier on the other side. I also pay them better than the Taliban.
>3. This point is more tricky. To defeat Guerilla warfare, look at how Vladimir Lenin conquered Central Asia at the expense of the Islamists. By recruiting people into productive economic endeavors rather than letting them remain idle, the Guerillas were less likely to draw from the support of the population in general.
>4. Finally, the United States Military remains as an auxiliary force that serves as the Kingmaker, in case any of the Warlords decide to rebel.
Basically, if we followed historical models, the plan would be to turn Erik Prince into Sabuktigin, have him recruit Westerners that would live in Afghanistan and tax the natives, while conscripting more natives to fill the ranks, and then utilizing economic development to pull the population into productive actions.

Point 3 will always be a problem, as Islamists will use Ideology, to try and pull the population into conflict. But as long as Warlords maintain and control the tax base, occupation is achieved within the nation.

>>138643191
But again, this topic is so politically-incorrect, it's taking a huge risk to write this stuff down. And I don't think Westerners are capable of such politically incorrect actions. Yet this is the model that has historically worked in Afghanistan, but in England with the Normans, Jersualem with the Crusaders, etc. The fact that we deviated from this model meant we are very unlikely to succeed in this task.

>>138633535 / >>138631988 / >>138633535
Ahmed, time to blow up or leave France.

>>138631214

You are acting like the goal is a unified Democratic Afghanistan the next time we pull out all we have to do is not care about what happens to them and it will fix itself. As long as we leave them with the rules don't f*** with us and we won't come after you they'll work just like every other country that you don't care about and never need to hear about

Afghanistan has villages in the mountains that think the Russians are still occupying. There are known enemy locations and imaginary lines that we will not cross to avoid getting into it because there is no strategic value in doing so. Strategic value changes with Military policy which has changed direction so many times in that country. From find and kill the bad guy, to let's build their roads and win their hearts. And elevating warlords is certainly something we HAVE done. We have trained small armies employed by these warlords with SF.

>>138643191
What kind of westerners would be suitable for the task of governing their own fiefdoms? Your example may have been culturally different, but the still had the same religion and similar enough ethnic ties.

How did Lenin pull it off? Also, iirc most of the Soviet military personnel in Afghanistan were actually pulled from the USSR's Central Asian soviets, rather than Russia proper.

>>138645608
Was in Khan Neshin in 2009, can confirm Hajis thought we were Ivan

>>138645766
>What kind of westerners would be suitable for the task of governing their own fiefdoms?

If they couldn't be found, then my point is defeated and I am wrong. Western Civilization therefore is (probably) incapable of governing Afghanistan. However, historically, 'Nobility' emerged throughout the world precisely because they were capable of occupying highly diverse populations in foreign territory with their retinues. Meaning, you had a Count, who paid off about a thousand men, utilizing tax collection and private businesses to secure his support for the population. So for example, imagine a Mercenary Company owns a bunch of farms and mines, and collects taxes from the local population, and utilizes that to support themselves and pay off occupying forces. They fight off Islamist Guerillas, but they still generate enough revenue to support themselves.

>Your example may have been culturally different, but the still had the same religion and similar enough ethnic ties.

Well. What the Turks inevitably did was abandon Tengrism and converted to Islam. Ethnicity doesn't matter as much as religion. But then again, there have also been instances of religious and ethnic Nobility governing territory, like Muslims in India or Christians in Indonesia. Again, this may make my idea impractical to implement, as conversion may have to take place to work. But the beauty of Feudalism, is, unlike """"multiculturalism""" and """liberalism""" Feudalism is truly a government style that transcends race or religion.

>How did Lenin pull it off?

From what I understand, he rewarded Communist party members better than what the Islamists could offer, through industrialization. People valued being a Communist more than being an Islamist. Social Utility is a non-understood theory in Western Elites.