ADVERTISEMENT

Some of the military moves Trump is making just going to cost us money?

Gmoney4WW

I.T.S. Legend
Gold Member
Jul 4, 2007
27,817
12,025
113
Moving from 4500 troops to 2500 in Afghanistan? Won't Biden just send an equal # or greater back, after he gets in office. So we are just out the money to transport the troops back to the states, and then back to Afghanistan again? Some of these moves just seem like a waste of money by Trump to make a senseless point.

Then there is the idiotic question about attacking Iraqi nuclear sites. That could be a whole lot graver end game by Trump. Thank god Pompeo, and others close to Trump seemingly convinced him otherwise.
 
Last edited:
I really don’t want to respond but this really triggers me. Please dont take sides about a subject you know nothing about! 20 yrs of war is enough. No amount of money will bring back the friends I lost over there. We tried, we failed, it’s Time to come home!
 
I really don’t want to respond but this really triggers me. Please dont take sides about a subject you know nothing about! 20 yrs of war is enough. No amount of money will bring back the friends I lost over there. We tried, we failed, it’s Time to come home!
additions at the end of post

Go ahead and be triggered. I asked a question about something that only seems logical to me. It's got nothing to do with the buddies who you lost. It has to do with whether a move by Trump is going to just get reversed with a sizeable cost to the US. You are so impertinent on issues I am perfectly capable of discussing.

No personal attacks, whatever.

It does not take being in the trenches in war to discuss this subject. It is in reality an economic discussion, not a military question. The only issue that is in reality, a military question, is the issue of Trump attacking Iraqi nuclear facilities. That would have possibly achieved even more of your buddies going in harms way. I'll talk about this subject all day long. My grandfather won the Silver Star as the Captain of a Mine Sweeper, my uncle fought in Korea. I have had long conversations with the both of them about this. Several of my cousins joined the military, and I considered joining for a period. But I don't need those things to justify talking about this subject. Just like you aren't required to give your military service as justification.

I could throw out the fact that I majored in economics, and ask you not to talk about this subject. (Which holds about as much weight.) But I won't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gold*
Oh nos. You hurt a trumpist’s feelings.

I kind of think McConnell will block this somehow. He’s got too many buddies who make money off this. But it is a great unforced error to watch.
 
Oh nos. You hurt a trumpist’s feelings.

I kind of think McConnell will block this somehow. He’s got too many buddies who make money off this. But it is a great unforced error to watch.
You personally pay for this excursion as a tax payer so I would assume you care how your money has been spent. This strategy we followed for Afghanistan for the Last 20 yrs has failed. Staying there is not keeping our homeland safe! We failed. Russia failed. England failed. No invading force has ever conquered Afghanistan. It’s time to leave! Add Syria and Iraq to that failed policy list as well.
 
You still aren't getting the point. If Biden & the military leadership disagree with you, which they do, then we are wasting more money.

Now we just add transporting them to and from the states. We just got a round trip for 2000+ soldiers added to the tab. And that's just afghanistan, we haven't even talked about Iraq.
 
You personally pay for this excursion as a tax payer so I would assume you care how your money has been spent. This strategy we followed for Afghanistan for the Last 20 yrs has failed. Staying there is not keeping our homeland safe! We failed. Russia failed. England failed. No invading force has ever conquered Afghanistan. It’s time to leave! Add Syria and Iraq to that failed policy list as well.

but I don’t want to trigger you bro! Your feelings will get hurt. I’m trying to make this a safe spot for your sads in that you know you supported a racist, idiot, law breaking president and it sucks.
 
When people on both the right and left talk about how we just need to leave Afghanistan they always talk about the human cost of staying there but they never address the human cost of leaving. When I was in Sangasar (one of Mullah Omar’s hometowns) little girls were allowed to attend school. This would have been impossible without our constant presence. What happens to them when we leave? There’s a decent chance they and their parents will be killed/beheaded. This happened once while we were there, so what do you think happens when the Taliban are given free reign again?

If people think we should leave and protecting American life is worth allowing the atrocities that will follow, ok, but say that. No one ever seems to confront the truly difficult choice we have. They pretend it’s all upside.
 
And they never talk about oil interests there.
Mineral interests, yes, but I believe China has become the biggest beneficiary there. I don’t think there’s enough oil there for others countries to care about though, unless something has changed.
 
Mineral interests, yes, but I believe China has become the biggest beneficiary there. I don’t think there’s enough oil there for others countries to care about though, unless something has changed.
I'm not talking about in that country.(oil) We need a presence in the middle east somewhere. If that's afghanistan, if that's Iraq, we need to have military somewhere in that region. We need them there for military and oil interests.
 
It might not be the best justification for a presence in afghanistan, but it is decent justification for an iraqi presence.
 
When people on both the right and left talk about how we just need to leave Afghanistan they always talk about the human cost of staying there but they never address the human cost of leaving. When I was in Sangasar (one of Mullah Omar’s hometowns) little girls were allowed to attend school. This would have been impossible without our constant presence. What happens to them when we leave? There’s a decent chance they and their parents will be killed/beheaded. This happened once while we were there, so what do you think happens when the Taliban are given free reign again?

If people think we should leave and protecting American life is worth allowing the atrocities that will follow, ok, but say that. No one ever seems to confront the truly difficult choice we have. They pretend it’s all upside.
I don't know... the US has done it before. Just ask Richard Nixon about what happened to the people behind these folks in line...
04-17-nam-fall-01.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: URedskin54
I don't know... the US has done it before. Just ask Richard Nixon about what happened to the people behind these folks in line...
04-17-nam-fall-01.jpg
I am certainly sympathetic to the Afghane People but they have had 20 years to build their forces up in preparation for our eventual departure. It’s time to move on.
 
I am certainly sympathetic to the Afghane People but they have had 20 years to build their forces up in preparation for our eventual departure. It’s time to move on.

Their forces suck, we know this. So with that in mind, what do we think becomes of the people that supported us and what do we think Afghanistan turns into? I do not accept just ignoring those things because "it's time to move on." Will you support accepting all Afghan refugees who wish to come to the US? Because right now just getting our interpreters over here is basically a lottery.
 
Their forces suck, we know this. So with that in mind, what do we think becomes of the people that supported us and what do we think Afghanistan turns into? I do not accept just ignoring those things because "it's time to move on." Will you support accepting all Afghan refugees who wish to come to the US? Because right now just getting our interpreters over here is basically a lottery.
Russia should and will replace us in Afghanistan. If we were sincere in bringing peace to Afghanistan we would have accepted Russian overtures to assist us long ago because many of the terrorist who were training in Afghanistan were also committing atrocities on Russian soil.
 
Russia should and will replace us in Afghanistan. If we were sincere in bringing peace to Afghanistan we would have accepted Russian overtures to assist us long ago because many of the terrorist who were training in Afghanistan were also committing atrocities on Russian soil.
So it's a mutual menage a trois love affair between you, Putin, and Trump.

Give me a break. Before Trump came in office and supped at Putin's tit, all of the Trump supporters hated Putin and Oligarch ruled Russia.

Everybody loves Putin in Russia, all except anybody who opposes Putin. They are all dead, suffering from poisoning, and/or keeping their mouth shut.
 
The point is...
Lleaving something to Russia's good nature wouldn't have even been considered by Trump's supporters.

Not before they became Trump supporters, and were horn swaggled into leaving anything to Russia.
 
The question asked was who will defend the Afghane people after we leave? I answered the question. Nothing more nothing less!
 
It’s not a suggestion. We are leaving. The question is who fills the void. When we left northern Syria and Iraq, Turkey took over. It’s pretty cut and dry!
 
All of the troops won't leave. Biden won't leave it at 2500 troops. As I said earlier, it will just be a round trip flight with a two month delay. He will send them back just as soon as he gets in office. You seem to have forgotten the point of this whole post. Russia won't come in during those two months and take over while we still have 2500 troops there. They may have the gall to try, but they won't succeed in that limited time. We have troops, and ships all over the middle east, I doubt they even try. It won't take that long to call in the cavalry. If they did try, it would mean war rumblings. Won't happen.
 
The strategy that got us there under Bush failed. You don’t continue to invest money and blood in a failed plan.
 
You are cross talking. It's already been established that our motives there are not just converting it to a democracy. Our interests are oil, economics, power, military bases in various countries, and humanitarian assistance. And just on the humanitarian level, not to mention other more self serving purposes, it doesn't serve us to leave it to Putin.
 
If you value those things which I do not than I guess one could make the argument you are making. It’s called neoconservatism. Make love not war!
 
Last edited:
Wasn't just me. Other posters brought up those issues and/or commented on them. Several of those aspects being looked after are what has made and kept our country one of the leading powers in the world. What a lark. You don't even debate well. Whether it be a negative or positive comment, you can't even keep more than one aspect of a debate in your responses. I'm gonna go play with my dog trigger.
 
There are times in history where one could make the argument that that strategy was necessary however I believe that time has come and gone. Bush’s oil and regime change wars only benefited he and his cronies and have put us in a financial hole we may never dig ourselves out of. I am much more in favor of taking the money we use for foreign wars to improve our medical system, infrastructure, school system, and many more domestic issues. We are broken internally and you can’t fix somebody else until you fix yourself.
 
Seeing as how we have more than 80,000 troops in the Middle East, and Trump is doing nothing to reduce that # significantly, Trump doesn't agree with you. In fact what Trump is doing, for the most part, is just moving them around. He's just moving them around to countries he has business dealings with, and/or wants to do business with.

You won't see the # that are there change drastically through Trump, Biden, and probably the next President.(Be he Republican or Democrat.) Not Unless there is a drastic turnaround in public opinion, and Rand Paul wins the next election.

Back to my original point though, Trump has just wasted our money on a round trip ticket for 2000 soldiers. Seeing as how that was the subject of the topic. Since you couldn't stay on topic because I triggered you, I thought I'd help remind you.(No thanks necessary.)

All so he can cause difficulty for Biden, and leave the tab with the taxpayer. Any other President wouldn't do that, because he'd know the next president was going to just fly them back in.
 
Trump ran on the platform of bringing the troops home and he was lied to, blocked by Congress, and undermined by generals from accomplishing that. The fight Trump had from day one in his administration was against the Neocons. Flynn was the lynchpin for Trump when it came to knowing who those neocons were within the administration who would undermine policies of troop withdrawal. When he was fired for lying to Pence, it took Trump wat too long to get the right people in position to carry out his policies and watch his back. All the Generals who you say were great generals who you admire were stalwart neocons who did everything they could to stop Trump from bringing the troops home. They all follow lock step the Bush ear Neocon doctrine titled Rebuilding Americans Defenses. If Biden decides to go back to Afghanistan or any other area Trump is withdrawing troops from, so be it, but it will be at the expense of the Democratic Party.
 
Let's do a little history. First, will everyone concede the Dwight Eisenhower had more military knowledge than Trump? He inherited Korea. He told the original Kim, either finish the Korea war or he would. After his experience a few years before, his word was taken seriously. We wound up with a stop to hordes of American soldiers been killed daily and went back to the status quo anti bellum.

Fast forward to Vietnam. Nixon, the stupid guy who cheated in an election that should have been a walkover, did the opposite of LBJ and started cutting troops. After much hurrah, we wound up where we were at the start and now we don't have much activity with Vietnam, other than some trade. In both Korea and VN, some of our friends got screwed over. On the other hand, American deaths went way down.

Two wars in Iraq. They resemble the previous ones above. Turkey wouldn't go along because they had their own ambitions. So we went in from one end of Iraq and stuff and people went out the other. Still massive deaths of Americans stopped.

I realize that this short summary is far from perfect. Now let's go way back to the Constitution. The preamble starts off We The People of the United States. It makes promises. But they are not to the whole world. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan are not included in the list. We went into the latter because terrorist training was go on there not because we, like Russia, the UK, and whoever else had failed to civilize that country. Yes it is time. 20 freaking years is a long time. Not only deaths of Americans but lost legs, arms and whatever else. If all the good we accomplished will go away when we leave then it was only temporary good. Most likely another 20 years won't change that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shon46
Let's do a little history. First, will everyone concede the Dwight Eisenhower had more military knowledge than Trump? He inherited Korea. He told the original Kim, either finish the Korea war or he would. After his experience a few years before, his word was taken seriously. We wound up with a stop to hordes of American soldiers been killed daily and went back to the status quo anti bellum.

Fast forward to Vietnam. Nixon, the stupid guy who cheated in an election that should have been a walkover, did the opposite of LBJ and started cutting troops. After much hurrah, we wound up where we were at the start and now we don't have much activity with Vietnam, other than some trade. In both Korea and VN, some of our friends got screwed over. On the other hand, American deaths went way down.

Two wars in Iraq. They resemble the previous ones above. Turkey wouldn't go along because they had their own ambitions. So we went in from one end of Iraq and stuff and people went out the other. Still massive deaths of Americans stopped.

I realize that this short summary is far from perfect. Now let's go way back to the Constitution. The preamble starts off We The People of the United States. It makes promises. But they are not to the whole world. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan are not included in the list. We went into the latter because terrorist training was go on there not because we, like Russia, the UK, and whoever else had failed to civilize that country. Yes it is time. 20 freaking years is a long time. Not only deaths of Americans but lost legs, arms and whatever else. If all the good we accomplished will go away when we leave then it was only temporary good. Most likely another 20 years won't change that.
That's the thing though, we're not leaving. Trump is drawing down our troops from 4500 to 2500. They're is no withdrawal.
 
Each congressman should be given x amount to spend on legislative program. When it's gone, no more spending. Kind of like the real world.
 
Like I said, no one will come out and say “I’m ok with kids getting their heads sawed off and Afghanistan becoming a terrorist training ground again so long as no more troops die in Afghanistan.” That’s the actual choice. There may be some greater good argument that fits, but people need to make it and acknowledge that they’re accepting the trade offs.

I suppose it does matter what you view the role of the US military to be. The old paleo-conservative view that we should only use our military when it is in our national interest doesn’t work for me. The neo-con view that you could ultimately build Afghanistan into a liberal democracy doesn’t work either. But using our military to protect people where we can, in my opinion, is our responsibility as the most powerful country on earth. Maintaining a presence in these countries and providing support allows us to do that and is also in our interest.

And btw 8,000 troops is nothing. They’re at some minimal risk from IEDs or helicopter crash when they travel, but aside from maybe a few SF guys or seals there is no one on the ground doing anything approaching a combat mission in Afghanistan these days.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gmoney4WW
That's the thing though, we're not leaving. Trump is drawing down our troops from 4500 to 2500. They're is no withdrawal.
I'm not sure what Trumps intentions were but they don't count anymore. Also with Biden we don't have much to go on. But when you abandon a military location, you don't take everyone out at the same time. And let's be honest, we still have troops in Germany although there is no need for them to be on the Czech Border, there are still missile units there. Additionally we move troops from all of our services around every time either because somewhere else is a better location or simply because Joe has done his tour and it's time for Fred to replace him.
 
Like I said, no one will come out and say “I’m ok with kids getting their heads sawed off and Afghanistan becoming a terrorist training ground again so long as no more troops die in Afghanistan.” That’s the actual choice. There may be some greater good argument that fits, but people need to make it and acknowledge that they’re accepting the trade offs.

I suppose it does matter what you view the role of the US military to be. The old paleo-conservative view that we should only use our military when it is in our national interest doesn’t work for me. The neo-con view that you could ultimately build Afghanistan into a liberal democracy doesn’t work either. But using our military to protect people where we can, in my opinion, is our responsibility as the most powerful country on earth. Maintaining a presence in these countries and providing support allows us to do that and is also in our interest.

And btw 8,000 troops is nothing. They’re at some minimal risk from IEDs or helicopter crash when they travel, but aside from maybe a few SF guys or seals there is no one on the ground doing anything approaching a combat mission in Afghanistan these days.
The strategy failed long ago. There were plenty of generals who proposed and implemented new strategies but they failed. Historically Afghanistan has never been conquered.....EVER! We tried, we failed, time to move on!
 
The strategy failed long ago. There were plenty of generals who proposed and implemented new strategies but they failed. Historically Afghanistan has never been conquered.....EVER! We tried, we failed, time to move on!

The first time I say we should try to conquer it let me know. Not gonna argue with a strawman
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gmoney4WW
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT