Trump announces change of heart on Afghanistan

“My original instinct was to pull out, and historically I like following my instincts, but all of my life I heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office,” Trump said in a prime-time address to the nation from the Fort Myer military base in Arlington, Virginia. “However, our commitment is not unlimited, and our support is not a blank check. The American people expect to see real reforms and real results.”

There you have it. We are staying in Afghanistan.

I wonder what changed his mind.

“We must stop the resurgence of safe havens that allow terrorists to threaten America,” Trump said. “We are not nation-building again. We are killing terrorists.” “Our troops will fight to win” the president said. “We will fight to win. From now on, victory will have a clear definition.”

www.politico.com...

a reply to: JinMI

As much as I'm against continued war, this is the first time in a long time that a president said, "Win the war" versus "Contain the enemy".

a reply to: DBCowboy

Then we get to fall back on that idea that we can defeat an ideology.

Personally, I don't see a way to bring the area back from it's war torn state while still being there. Through proxy, maybe, which it sounds like this may be more of. However that seems to be the most fertile breeding ground for extremists to get their hands on weapons and minds.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: DBCowboy

Then we get to fall back on that idea that we can defeat an ideology.

Point taken.

originally posted by: JinMI
I wonder what changed his mind.

Probably his new Chief of Staff.

Source

In 2010, Kelly's 29-year-old son, First Lieutenant Robert Kelly, was killed in action when he stepped on a landmine while leading a platoon of Marines on a patrol in Sangin, Afghanistan.

Robert Kelly's death made John Kelly the highest-ranking military officer to lose a child in Iraq or Afghanistan.

ETA

a reply to: JinMI

What changed his mind, is that pretty much everyone involved agrees that we need more troops there. We're losing with the current strategy, which means the status quo must change. That leaves us with two options. We either pull out, and create yet another failed state and terrorist haven for all the ISIS people to flock to, or we stay and fight. Staying means we need to commit more troops.

Despite the rhetoric of the speech, some of the news surrounding it before it came out, said the administration would be open to diplomacy and creating a peace deal with the Taliban.

Who knows if you can trust that though, considering in this same speech Trump threatened war with Pakistan if they don't start killing terrorists inside their own borders.

a reply to: JinMI

But he cant win the war with 4000 more troops.

I say bring in 300,000 troops and get it done

Hope EVERY and all technology and equipment is available there to support an ongoing cycle of death to otherwise incredible men and women who could have chose differently, but made it clear as so very few do, to serve whatever you can fill the blank with in order for YOU... the common folk, to carry out your jobs...watch your favorite shows, and bicker and bolster the political soup hand fed to you daily.

Don't forget your bib...it spills sometimes..

Keyword in this comment:

COMPLICIT.

This was the one area in which I felt most hopeful about Trump. This is McMaster talking. He and Kelly have him by the short hairs now. The neocons have won.

a reply to: Aazadan

That leaves us with two options. We either pull out, and create yet another failed state and terrorist haven for all the ISIS people to flock to, or we stay and fight. Staying means we need to commit more troops.

You didn't include a prerequisite to winning or details of what would entail one. That is my bicker with this strategy.

I get it. Force them out and reinforce an Afghani government capable of defending itself an stabilization, then our job is done. On one hand great, lets get it done. On the other, we've had 16 years to do this.

I don't want to see our soldiers risking their lives there. I don't believe it is a winnable war. It will continue as long as there is an ideology.

That said, I also think the pressure should remain on the terrorist factions by fully utilizing drones and further advancing drone technology to fight there.

a reply to: JinMI

I wonder what changed his mind.

Well, first of all, kudos to Trumps new speech writer.......

What changed his mind? His generals, including Kelly, his new press secretary. The Trump presidency is lame duck dead. It's all admin and bureaucracy now. The oval office is being run by generals.

What he said during his eloquent speech, his rationale was to say that pulling out of Afghanistan right now would create a vacuum that new terrorists would fill.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Nazi-ism is an ideology. The world did a fairly good job of getting rid of it, of course there will be those that will try to bring it back. . . .

It's a bit of a disappointment, but not very much of a surprise. GOP Presidents always need a good war before the mid-terms, and if pouring even more time, effort, money, and ammunition into Afghanistan serves that purpose in Trump's view then I suppose we ought to be grateful, given the alternatives.

More suggestively, I wonder whether Trump's change of heart came (in part) because he was worried about his public perception on issues of national security. The never-ending drip-drip-drip of Russian collusion chatter hasn't helped him establish much credibility as a 'safe pair of hands'.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
I don't want to see our soldiers risking their lives there. I don't believe it is a winnable war. It will continue as long as there is an ideology.

That said, I also think the pressure should remain on the terrorist factions by fully utilizing drones and further advancing drone technology to fight there.

Don't be such a defeatist.... those drones are your friends... Better WiFi, perpetually... can't miss those next episodes....God forbid..

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grimpachi

Nazi-ism is an ideology. The world did a fairly good job of getting rid of it, of course there will be those that will try to bring it back. . . .

Fair point.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Aazadan

That leaves us with two options. We either pull out, and create yet another failed state and terrorist haven for all the ISIS people to flock to, or we stay and fight. Staying means we need to commit more troops.

You didn't include a prerequisite to winning or details of what would entail one. That is my bicker with this strategy.

I get it. Force them out and reinforce an Afghani government capable of defending itself an stabilization, then our job is done. On one hand great, lets get it done. On the other, we've had 16 years to do this.

I think we're in agreement on this issue. I would rather just leave. I fully realize that such an action would create a terrorist state, but I'm not so sure I care. Out of terrorism eventually rises stability as the terrorists get a state and settle down, or get wiped out and die. In either event, I'm not really convinced of a reason why we should have to stay in order to try and nation build (and that's what this is, even if Trump claimed otherwise).

On the other hand, I do see the point of the generals, and even the point Trump is making. It's not in the short term geopolitical interests of the United States to pull out. In those jobs, they need to look at national interests and current climates, not how things will look in 50 years. As a matter of national policy, I don't think we really have any choice other than to stay. I think that's going to hurt us in the long run but national interests basically require us to prop up a stable puppet government.

One thing is for sure: This isn't ending at 4000 troops, and it's not ending before the next election.

The real irony in all of this though? Trump has acted the same on military issues as Hillary would have.

This is a very strange war. The Taliban doesn’t have big countries behind them supposedly like N Vietnam did in Russia and China… However, has fought the US to almost a standstill. How does that happen?

With all the technology and military power how is it that the US doesn’t crush the Taliban?

Here's another weird thing.

Trump and the Russians are close?

Russia is sending weapons to Taliban, top U.S. general confirms

www.washingtonpost.com...

KABUL — The general in charge of U.S. forces in Afghanistan appeared to confirm Monday that Russia is sending weapons to the Taliban, an intervention that will probably further complicate the 15-year-old war here and the Kremlin’s relations with the United States.
When asked by reporters, Gen. John Nicholson did not dispute claims that the Taliban is receiving weapons and other supplies from the Russians.

Something just doesn't smell right about this war.

Guess who else supports the Taliban?

Americas supposed ally Pakistan!

Why Pakistan Supports the Taliban

www.military.com...

US National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster, on a recent trip to Afghanistan, called on neighboring countries, and especially Russia and Pakistan to stop supporting the Taliban in its quest to continue to "perpetuate the very long war" which has gripped Afghanistan since 2001. McMaster's visit came on the heels of recent requests by US military commanders to increase he deployment of American troops by "a few thousand". Currently there are around 8,400 US troops deployed in theater.

Something sinister is going on over there. Our troops are dying, civilians are dying and this looks like a war they want to keep going on and on and on and on and on and on...

Damnit!We need to leave now!All of it!The Middle East,Afghanistan-which will bleed into Pakistan.End rant.