Meng needs to be shipped off to the US seven months ago. Longer we keep her the longer she’s a problem. China can fuck right off
Provincial capital in Afghanistan falls to the Taliban
- Thread starter mandrill
- Start date
I think we should put her on a plane back to China. If the U.S. wants her, they can send in Delta Force and/or the 101st Airborne. Naive Trudeau created a problem that we really don't need.
Bad enough the U.S got us into Afghanistan but that, apparently, is because of Article 5 (or was it 4?) of our NATO treaty.
Once again, Miss Meng broke no Canadian law, none.
They also killed Keystone XL and now Biden wants OPEC to lower oil prices so the U.S. can buy more oil from the Middle East (nice, eh). Fracking has a short shelf life and that means "fracked oil" is or will soon be history.
That doesn't say much....every ally the US have is their doormat...Afghanistan should've been a 2-4 year operation tops...but the goal post moved further and further...in the first 2 years they were there, I was like, yeah, get that sob (OBL) 10 years later...it was nothing but a display of US power and high tech weaponry...pretty much marketing the products to the middle east countries...I won't say US gained nothing from Afghanistan....billions if not trilions had been made....
Just because the weeds will always grow back is no reason to never look after your lawn.
Wait to chew up the next outside power that tries to take it over. It's like history hasn't taught anybody anything...
There are not many candidates left.
Turkey, Erdman is nuts, but I don't think so.
India probably not.
China is too clever.
NATO countries tried already
Russia no way tried already.
Who is dumb enough to want Afghanistan? It doesn't even have a warm water port? It's a landlocked country with no natural resources worth talking about. It is no prize.
Didn't Alex the Great say: "What a shitty country, let's move on"?
![afghanistan-country-map-gizi-1-2-000-000-[4]-7423-p.jpg](https://terb.cc/xenforo/data/attachments/69/69686-18b6b87f5be58d5f7b580f7109d136f7.jpg "afghanistan-country-map-gizi-1-2-000-000-[4]-7423-p.jpg")
Didn't Alex the Great say: "What a shitty country, let's move on"?
Last edited:
Can you explain this in real English?
The West occupies Ghan and holds most of its provinces with military force for a couple of decades. As soon as the west leaves, shit reverts to the prior state of being within 12 months.
How is this "looking after your lawn"?
Your lawn is a perennial task and it belongs to you and it's right next to your house. Ghan is like looking after a patch of wasteland about 30 miles from your house in the middle of nowhere for no apparent reason except you took a dislike to the coyotes who used it as a shitting place. After twenty years of weeding, mowing and turd-removing, you say "It's fine now." and you leave. And it goes back to being a wasteland 30 miles away from your house and the coyotes shit there again the very next day.
20 Years Of War In Afghanistan Has Cost US Taxpayers Over $2.2 Trillion
FRIDAY, AUG 13, 2021 - 12:45 PM
Just a reminder that as the D.C. think tank pundit class of chicken-hawk keyboard warriors and armchair interventionistas who helped get the US into this unnecessary 'forever war' in the first place writhe in frustration and pain while beholding from afar the American Empire in rapid retreat in Afghanistan, the US has wasted literally trillions over years propping up a government that now appears to barely be putting up a fight.
"From its start in 2001 through April 2021, the war in Afghanistan has cost U.S. taxpayers approximately $2.261 trillion, according to estimates earlier this year from the Costs of War Project at Brown University," Fox News reviews of the disturbingly high figures. All that as the US public now sits back and witnesses US-trained Afghan forces retreat "without a bullet being fired"...
And further as a number of veterans and independent analysts are now pointing out: "The Pentagon spent $88 billion dollars training the Afghan Army for 20 years It collapsed in 1 month." It remains that "Not one general or politician will face consequences for this."
Meanwhile as of Friday morning after the Taliban had already captured about a dozen major cities and provincial capitals in a mere week, spurring emergency evacuation efforts to begin at the US embassy in Kabul (in preparation for the inevitable), the Taliban is now in control of the country's second largest city of Kandahar, along with Herat - the latter being the third largest.
The Pentagon late in the day Thursday confirmed it was sending up to 3,000 troops to assist in the evacuation of diplomatic and other staff from the large Kabul embassy. The embassy typically has thousands of Americans working there at any given moment, including over 1,000 deemed 'diplomats'.
Thus a significant logistics and security effort will ensue to get most of them to the international airport, also as the US State Department urges any remaining US citizen anywhere in the country to depart immediately, even offering to pay the airfare back to the states.
* * *
Here's Rabobank's commentary of the currently unfolding Afghan disaster...
But tumble the cards will, nonetheless, and quicker than people think – and very uncomfortably.
For a physical example, after 20 years of war, $2 trillion in spending, and many lives lost, on 14 April, US President Biden announced a full US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. On 2 July, US forces left Bagram airbase overnight. The comfortable thinkers in comfortable jobs in DC were sure the well-funded, US-trained Afghan army would defeat the Taliban: instead, they fled, or handed their weapons over to them. The Taliban are now threatening Kabul, and the US is sending 3,000 troops back in order to evacuate all of its citizens and its embassy, reminiscent of the 1975 helicopter retreat from Saigon.
This is not a political critique of the decision to withdraw. The key point is that the expensive US presence in Afghanistan was --like the QE that ironically paid for a slice of it-- just a house of cards, for all of the comfortable DC assumptions otherwise.
The second point is that the geostrategic ramifications of this event will reverberate for years. Markets could care less: but they may well care about some of the uncomfortable potential outcomes, from renewed terrorism to refugee flows to war: and all the powers in the region, from China to Russia to India to Pakistan to Iran, will have an interest in what happens in the country – as will the US.
On one level, this is a humiliation for a US already being told its position as global hegemon is in tatters. Then again, the States survived the 1975 debacle and came back even stronger. More near term, what is happening in Afghanistan may mean less US flexibility over negotiations with Iran --which has just agreed to join the Shanghai Cooperation Council-- though that is far from certain given the obvious US imperative to disentangle itself from the Greater Middle East regardless. More importantly, however, it suggests the risk of the US being far more likely to draw red lines in the Indo-Pacific so the Afghan retreat does not define its approach to security guarantees in that region. And red lines open up fat-tail geopolitical risk scenarios that comfortable markets don’t want to look at.
FRIDAY, AUG 13, 2021 - 12:45 PM
Just a reminder that as the D.C. think tank pundit class of chicken-hawk keyboard warriors and armchair interventionistas who helped get the US into this unnecessary 'forever war' in the first place writhe in frustration and pain while beholding from afar the American Empire in rapid retreat in Afghanistan, the US has wasted literally trillions over years propping up a government that now appears to barely be putting up a fight.
"From its start in 2001 through April 2021, the war in Afghanistan has cost U.S. taxpayers approximately $2.261 trillion, according to estimates earlier this year from the Costs of War Project at Brown University," Fox News reviews of the disturbingly high figures. All that as the US public now sits back and witnesses US-trained Afghan forces retreat "without a bullet being fired"...
And further as a number of veterans and independent analysts are now pointing out: "The Pentagon spent $88 billion dollars training the Afghan Army for 20 years It collapsed in 1 month." It remains that "Not one general or politician will face consequences for this."
Meanwhile as of Friday morning after the Taliban had already captured about a dozen major cities and provincial capitals in a mere week, spurring emergency evacuation efforts to begin at the US embassy in Kabul (in preparation for the inevitable), the Taliban is now in control of the country's second largest city of Kandahar, along with Herat - the latter being the third largest.
The Pentagon late in the day Thursday confirmed it was sending up to 3,000 troops to assist in the evacuation of diplomatic and other staff from the large Kabul embassy. The embassy typically has thousands of Americans working there at any given moment, including over 1,000 deemed 'diplomats'.
Thus a significant logistics and security effort will ensue to get most of them to the international airport, also as the US State Department urges any remaining US citizen anywhere in the country to depart immediately, even offering to pay the airfare back to the states.
* * *
Here's Rabobank's commentary of the currently unfolding Afghan disaster...
But tumble the cards will, nonetheless, and quicker than people think – and very uncomfortably.
For a physical example, after 20 years of war, $2 trillion in spending, and many lives lost, on 14 April, US President Biden announced a full US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. On 2 July, US forces left Bagram airbase overnight. The comfortable thinkers in comfortable jobs in DC were sure the well-funded, US-trained Afghan army would defeat the Taliban: instead, they fled, or handed their weapons over to them. The Taliban are now threatening Kabul, and the US is sending 3,000 troops back in order to evacuate all of its citizens and its embassy, reminiscent of the 1975 helicopter retreat from Saigon.
This is not a political critique of the decision to withdraw. The key point is that the expensive US presence in Afghanistan was --like the QE that ironically paid for a slice of it-- just a house of cards, for all of the comfortable DC assumptions otherwise.
The second point is that the geostrategic ramifications of this event will reverberate for years. Markets could care less: but they may well care about some of the uncomfortable potential outcomes, from renewed terrorism to refugee flows to war: and all the powers in the region, from China to Russia to India to Pakistan to Iran, will have an interest in what happens in the country – as will the US.
On one level, this is a humiliation for a US already being told its position as global hegemon is in tatters. Then again, the States survived the 1975 debacle and came back even stronger. More near term, what is happening in Afghanistan may mean less US flexibility over negotiations with Iran --which has just agreed to join the Shanghai Cooperation Council-- though that is far from certain given the obvious US imperative to disentangle itself from the Greater Middle East regardless. More importantly, however, it suggests the risk of the US being far more likely to draw red lines in the Indo-Pacific so the Afghan retreat does not define its approach to security guarantees in that region. And red lines open up fat-tail geopolitical risk scenarios that comfortable markets don’t want to look at.
India (Mogul Empire) also tried and failed.
Just because it's unlikely to be soon does't mean it won't happen eventually...
you forgot to add you are now bringing home and resettling ~20,000 coyote pups "refugees"
I think the Sikhs beat the Afghans in 3 wars but I think the 4th war was a tie.
Afghan–Sikh Wars - Wikipedia
Afghanistan is now Talibanistan. Canada will take in 10,000 Afgan refugees, I'm sure you righties love that.
Sure thing, Notty. I'm sure the Chinese and your Russian buddies would treat us REAL GOOD.
