My understanding is that the troop withdrawal was agreed by the previous Trump administration, are you saying he should have reversed it.

If so, how much longer would you keep the troops in Afghanistan. Bear in mind the afghan government has an army.

However, this army is apparently still unable to resist the Taliban.

bennett123 wrote:

My understanding is that the troop withdrawal was agreed by the previous Trump administration, are you saying he should have reversed it.

If so, how much longer would you keep the troops in Afghanistan. Bear in mind the afghan government has an army.

However, this army is apparently still unable to resist the Taliban.

I don't have the answers, both staying and leaving are bad options. However, the speed at which the US is leaving is definitely a tactical mistake. The Taliban feels empowered as the Afghan gov, is suddenly deserted by all NATO countries. Spreading this out over multiple years and leaving a permanent basis like in Germany (remember Afghanistan has an interesting location relative to China and Iran) would be much better.

proest wrote:

I don't have the answers, both staying and leaving are bad options. However, the speed at which the US is leaving is definitely a tactical mistake. The Taliban feels empowered as the Afghan gov, is suddenly deserted by all NATO countries. Spreading this out over multiple years and leaving a permanent basis like in Germany (remember Afghanistan has an interesting location relative to China and Iran) would be much better.

Here is my confusion with the bases, USA bases in the ME folks say its American imperialism, undue influence etc etc etc, yet the USA has bases in Germany and other European countries and .........
Any wonder why the USA goes its own way on international politics, damn if you do, damn if you don't, consistency in the world community is based on politics and little to do with what is taking place on the ground.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/13/politics ... index.html

Wow, so not only are sensitive documents being burned, even small things like American flags are being destroyed to prevent them being used in any propaganda videos. They are also considering relocating U.S. diplomatic facilities to Kabul Airport.

So this massive 800 million dollar embassy is going to cease functioning and for all intents and purposes just going to turn into an empty building with a few caretakers keeping the lights on. What a waste.

By initiating an exit from Afghanistan, Trump did what previous administrations refused to do because nobody wanted to (and apparently some still don’t want to) admit that the whole Afghanistan expedition was doomed from the beginning. By negotiating a “peace” deal, or whatever one may call it, the US got an elegant exit out of the whole mess (that is minimizing US casualties).

Obviously, executing the pullout is tough, especially now it is in its final stages, but if things run smooth (i.e. minimal US casualties), the average American voter will have forgotten everything by the end of the year and Biden can claim to have ended the US’ longest war.

Aaron747 wrote:

Waiting for the wealthy states and well equipped militaries of the Gulf to step in anytime and help the Afghan people...oh wait. Nevermind.

Why would they help Afghanistan when they have not helped Libya, Syria and all those other sub-Sahara nations who have been suffering under Arab Spring and the loss of their people to Europe, those are much closer to home to with much more direct effect.

Aaron747 wrote:

par13del wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Waiting for the wealthy states and well equipped militaries of the Gulf to step in anytime and help the Afghan people...oh wait. Nevermind.

Why would they help Afghanistan when they have not helped Libya, Syria and all those other sub-Sahara nations who have been suffering under Arab Spring and the loss of their people to Europe, those are much closer to home to with much more direct effect.

Exactly. I'm just driving home the point that wealthy Muslim-majority states seem to never lift a finger to help poor Muslim states.

First of all, what make you think they would sixe with the current government controlling Kabul instead of Taliban?

alberchico wrote:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/13/politics/afghanistan-embassy-72-scramble/index.html

Wow, so not only are sensitive documents being burned, even small things like American flags are being destroyed to prevent them being used in any propaganda videos. They are also considering relocating U.S. diplomatic facilities to Kabul Airport.

So this massive 800 million dollar embassy is going to cease functioning and for all intents and purposes just going to turn into an empty building with a few caretakers keeping the lights on. What a waste.

That is less of a waste than letting it be use by potential threat

par13del wrote:

proest wrote:

I don't have the answers, both staying and leaving are bad options. However, the speed at which the US is leaving is definitely a tactical mistake. The Taliban feels empowered as the Afghan gov, is suddenly deserted by all NATO countries. Spreading this out over multiple years and leaving a permanent basis like in Germany (remember Afghanistan has an interesting location relative to China and Iran) would be much better.

Here is my confusion with the bases, USA bases in the ME folks say its American imperialism, undue influence etc etc etc, yet the USA has bases in Germany and other European countries and .........
Any wonder why the USA goes its own way on international politics, damn if you do, damn if you don't, consistency in the world community is based on politics and little to do with what is taking place on the ground.

Russia also condemned US base in Europe as Imperialism, because Russia feel those Eastern European countries should be under them instead of under the US but rhose countries themselves choosed the US
Of course, those local fractions, due to conflicted interest, will always accuse US oresent, which blocked their oath to acquire more and wider power, for something, and Impeeialism is a convenient word given US's distance from those region. But in reality, US is simply functioning as world peacekeeper following WWII and the Cold War. Unfortunately, the sentiment of those opposition are successful, and the US also face an increasing amount of threat from rising number of directions and strength, thus American no matter political orientation, agree it is a bad idea for the US to maintain such global presence, which result in the current situation in Afghanistan we are having.

bennett123 wrote:

My understanding is that the troop withdrawal was agreed by the previous Trump administration, are you saying he should have reversed it.

If so, how much longer would you keep the troops in Afghanistan. Bear in mind the afghan government has an army.

However, this army is apparently still unable to resist the Taliban.

Problem is why over the past 20 years the US failed to build an army that can actually resist Taliban there?
Is it because colonial empire as a concept is already too outdated in the West, that as a Western country, the US no longer have the necessary knowledge in how to successfully develop a foreign place, and to make it be self-sustaining and self-defending?

proest wrote:

I don't have the answers, both staying and leaving are bad options. However, the speed at which the US is leaving is definitely a tactical mistake. The Taliban feels empowered as the Afghan gov, is suddenly deserted by all NATO countries. Spreading this out over multiple years and leaving a permanent basis like in Germany (remember Afghanistan has an interesting location relative to China and Iran) would be much better.

The speed of withdrawl seems to me like calculated. The US appears to have expected Taliban to be able to outpower Afghanistan national government and their milotary force so they want to get out of the situation as quick as possible. They're withdrawing not in anticipation of Afghanistan government taking over those facilities, but are expecting Taliban to take over those facilities, hence the action of destruction of any remaining properties that can no longer be used. If they have made any mistake in speed then it would be they didn't withdraw any faster.

Taliban enter Kabul, say they don’t plan to take it by force

https://apnews.com/article/taliban-e1ed ... c51b8e32a5

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — Taliban fighters entered the outskirts of the Afghan capital on Sunday, further tightening their grip on the country as panicked workers fled government offices and helicopters landed at the U.S. Embassy.

Three Afghan officials told The Associated Press that the Taliban were in the districts of Kalakan, Qarabagh and Paghman in the capital. The militants later pledged not to take Kabul “by force” as sporadic gunfire could be heard in the capital.

ATMs stopped distributing cash as hundreds gathered in front of private banks, trying to withdraw their life savings.

On sky news a minute ago you could see three "Hip" helicopters flying from the presidential palace area. Two were the VIP-version with the square rectangular windows one had the "troop" round windows. That does not necessarily have to mean anything but shots are said to have been heard in the presidential palace area.

Live pictures from Kabul. Taliban said to be moving in "by numbers" now according to the sky correspondent.
https://news.sky.com/watch-live

DTVG wrote:

By initiating an exit from Afghanistan, Trump did what previous administrations refused to do because nobody wanted to (and apparently some still don’t want to) admit that the whole Afghanistan expedition was doomed from the beginning. By negotiating a “peace” deal, or whatever one may call it, the US got an elegant exit out of the whole mess (that is minimizing US casualties).

Obviously, executing the pullout is tough, especially now it is in its final stages, but if things run smooth (i.e. minimal US casualties), the average American voter will have forgotten everything by the end of the year and Biden can claim to have ended the US’ longest war.

That is until another of Taliban's guest conducts another terrorist attack on US soil/forces/citizens again...
I predict that at some point in the next ten years US has to fight in Afghanistan again due to some terrorist attacks brewed there

Taliban have seized the house (palace really) of general Dostum. If you were wondering where the money was going... this is as good a hint as any.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ostum.html

The Taliban have also captured various helicopters including MI-17, OH-6 and Black Hawk. It would appear the Mi-17s are actually being used by the Taliban.

Would have thought they would have taken over the airport by now, a big choke point.

Heard there is a deal being worked out and the existing govt will step down and hand over power to Taliban.

Next would be the creation of Greater Phustostan eliminating the Durand line.
Tough times ahead for the World.

yonahleung wrote:

That is until another of Taliban's guest conducts another terrorist attack on US soil/forces/citizens again...
I predict that at some point in the next ten years US has to fight in Afghanistan again due to some terrorist attacks brewed there

I feel US will return post another Terror attack.

Aaron747 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Exactly. I'm just driving home the point that wealthy Muslim-majority states seem to never lift a finger to help poor Muslim states.

First of all, what make you think they would sixe with the current government controlling Kabul instead of Taliban?

I didn’t say anything about siding with a particular power - just helping the people stuck in the middle. Charity is one of the pillars of Islam.

To word it in another way, what make you think those Middle East countries don't believe it is the best for civilian if Taliban handle it all?

readytotaxi wrote:

Would have thought they would have taken over the airport by now, a big choke point.

They're now thinking in term of how to chair the nation, an important part of that is diplomacy. Controlling the airport and barring those who want to flee from fleeing isn't going to go well to them internationally.

HAWK21M wrote:

Heard there is a deal being worked out and the existing govt will step down and hand over power to Taliban.

Next would be the creation of Greater Phustostan eliminating the Durand line.
Tough times ahead for the World.

That could possibly be a step in right direction, redrawing the borders, but I doubt they would

I notice an eerie silence from the Muslims world over, about what's happening in Afghanistan. The same were all united and making a lot of noise few months back for the Palestinian cause and were calling for war and sanctions on Israel. And now, with a suffering of Afghani's far worse than Palestine, none seem to raise a voice.

HAWK21M wrote:

yonahleung wrote:

That is until another of Taliban's guest conducts another terrorist attack on US soil/forces/citizens again...
I predict that at some point in the next ten years US has to fight in Afghanistan again due to some terrorist attacks brewed there

I feel US will return post another Terror attack.

And it will be only some flag waving muscle rolling for internal US use instead of getting rid of the Middle East “friendly” instigators….
L’histoire se repete…..

par13del wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Waiting for the wealthy states and well equipped militaries of the Gulf to step in anytime and help the Afghan people...oh wait. Nevermind.

Why would they help Afghanistan when they have not helped Libya, Syria and all those other sub-Sahara nations who have been suffering under Arab Spring and the loss of their people to Europe, those are much closer to home to with much more direct effect.

If by "Arab spring" you mean islamists and not peaceful revolution against dictatorships (like in Tunisia where it all started after all), then what help could Gulf countries provide, they are themselves islamists ? If anything they will help the Taliban.

A legitimate criticism of Islam is the failure to evolve a theory of government that works. Eastern Christendom did barely better, and Western Christendom just a small improvement over that. The two big wars of the last century may have destroyed whatever consensus that Western Christendom evolved. One of my best late Catholic friends said his goal was to outlive the Catholic Church, He may have. Our governments may not be that far behind.

Aaron747 wrote:

avier wrote:

I notice an eerie silence from the Muslims world over, about what's happening in Afghanistan. The same were all united and making a lot of noise few months back for the Palestinian cause and were calling for war and sanctions on Israel. And now, with a suffering of Afghani's far worse than Palestine, none seem to raise a voice.

The loud silence speaks its own words.

Before 2001 some Middle Eastern countries recognized the Taliban as the official government of Afghanistan. So don’t be surprised you won’t hear anything.

HAWK21M wrote:

Heard there is a deal being worked out and the existing govt will step down and hand over power to Taliban.

Next would be the creation of Greater Phustostan eliminating the Durand line.
Tough times ahead for the World.

Pakistan finally stopping being 2 faced and taking charge would be a good thing. I'm not saying merging the countries but at least chaperoning the Taliban. Pakistan isn't the most stable country but it's infinitely better than Afghanistan, so they might be able to make it into a real country. If the Taliban are open to it that is, if they just want a place to live in the 7th century with no care for the rest of the world, it won't work. Or if they plan on harboring terrorists again.

Why is it that the Afghan Army doesn't fight? Sorry to say, but it seems that country wants what's going on.

One of the big problems from the rapid takeover of the Taliban is that 1000's of persons and their families who worked with the UN, USA & contractors are at gave risk of being killed as couldn't be evacuated in time.

Another big problem will be the continued border disputes getting hot, especially with Pakistan.

Like many Americans in the aftermath of 9/11/01, we wanted blood revenge on the Taliban for their support of Osama bin Ladin. Like too many when I heard on a October Sunday about 4 weeks after 9/11 we invaded Afghanistan, a part of me wanted a lot of deaths, the country bombed back to the stone age, Osama bin Ladin found and executed with torture. That quickly changed, within minutes, realizing that it was just going to make things worse and we were not going to get Osama. The American taxpayer has spent almost $ 1 Trillion in lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is part of the USA's self destruction, for China an opportunity to be the big world power. The last few days has seen one of the great massive fails of history.

na wrote:

Why is it that the Afghan Army doesn't fight? Sorry to say, but it seems that country wants what's going on.

US failed with the amount of money and equipment they have. Afghanistan national army is in the same position as the US minus the equipment and funding. What make you think they can fight.

Aesma wrote:

HAWK21M wrote:

Heard there is a deal being worked out and the existing govt will step down and hand over power to Taliban.

Next would be the creation of Greater Phustostan eliminating the Durand line.
Tough times ahead for the World.

Pakistan finally stopping being 2 faced and taking charge would be a good thing. I'm not saying merging the countries but at least chaperoning the Taliban. Pakistan isn't the most stable country but it's infinitely better than Afghanistan, so they might be able to make it into a real country. If the Taliban are open to it that is, if they just want a place to live in the 7th century with no care for the rest of the world, it won't work. Or if they plan on harboring terrorists again.

There are also chance of Taliban taking charge

ltbewr wrote:

One of the big problems from the rapid takeover of the Taliban is that 1000's of persons and their families who worked with the UN, USA & contractors are at gave risk of being killed as couldn't be evacuated in time.

Another big problem will be the continued border disputes getting hot, especially with Pakistan.

Like many Americans in the aftermath of 9/11/01, we wanted blood revenge on the Taliban for their support of Osama bin Ladin. Like too many when I heard on a October Sunday about 4 weeks after 9/11 we invaded Afghanistan, a part of me wanted a lot of deaths, the country bombed back to the stone age, Osama bin Ladin found and executed with torture. That quickly changed, within minutes, realizing that it was just going to make things worse and we were not going to get Osama. The American taxpayer has spent almost $ 1 Trillion in lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is part of the USA's self destruction, for China an opportunity to be the big world power. The last few days has seen one of the great massive fails of history.

And this will be the biggest cost for western nations from this. Who the he!! will ever want to put their skin on the line ever again for your far away country, when you will not help back when the time comes and it is clear to those countries that leaving behind those who helped you may lead to their slaughter, and not because of any innocent overlooking.

Already happened with the Kurds. and with various groups in Libya and other nations in the Magreb, that both the US and various European nations deserted.

The latest news is that Ashraf Ghani has fled Afghanistan.

It is surprising that despite the last two decades of US and NATO forces training Afghan Army Forces, they still couldn't defend their country from the Taliban.

c933103 wrote:

na wrote:

Why is it that the Afghan Army doesn't fight? Sorry to say, but it seems that country wants what's going on.

US failed with the amount of money and equipment they have. Afghanistan national army is in the same position as the US minus the equipment and funding. What make you think they can fight.
[quote="Aesma"][quote="HAWK21M"]Heard there is a deal being worked out and the existing govt will step down and hand over power to Taliban.

Taliban are fighting, but the Army not? Ridiculous. What kind of "soldiers" have been employed and trained there if the white flag is the only weapon they use? I think its good that the Allies have left this awful place that always has been one. If only a small percentage of the population wants to live like civilized people, and those even are not willing to fight then it useless to hold on to such country.

Aaron747 wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

One of the big problems from the rapid takeover of the Taliban is that 1000's of persons and their families who worked with the UN, USA & contractors are at gave risk of being killed as couldn't be evacuated in time.

Another big problem will be the continued border disputes getting hot, especially with Pakistan.

Like many Americans in the aftermath of 9/11/01, we wanted blood revenge on the Taliban for their support of Osama bin Ladin. Like too many when I heard on a October Sunday about 4 weeks after 9/11 we invaded Afghanistan, a part of me wanted a lot of deaths, the country bombed back to the stone age, Osama bin Ladin found and executed with torture. That quickly changed, within minutes, realizing that it was just going to make things worse and we were not going to get Osama. The American taxpayer has spent almost $ 1 Trillion in lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is part of the USA's self destruction, for China an opportunity to be the big world power. The last few days has seen one of the great massive fails of history.

Agreed - this will definitely be a massive history lesson in a couple decades' time.

Hopefully the history lesson will be to not seek blood revenge but rather think things through. In particular, make sure you have a viable exit strategy before you put boots on the ground. The Taliban always knew it'd be a matter of waiting things out, just like the Viet Cong before them. You would have hoped we had learned that lesson via Vietnam, but GWB was too busy drugging and draft dodging in those years to take any notice of what was going on around him.

Please provide a link to your source when stating facts or make it clear you are stating your opinion. Thanks.

HAWK21M wrote:

yonahleung wrote:

That is until another of Taliban's guest conducts another terrorist attack on US soil/forces/citizens again...
I predict that at some point in the next ten years US has to fight in Afghanistan again due to some terrorist attacks brewed there

I feel US will return post another Terror attack.

IMO sans allies, I don’t think many other countries will be willing to help.

And to play a brainstorming here: I keep hearing the figure that it only took 2,500 US troops to maintain the status-quo in Afghanistan. This is one of the main arguments made by those who advocated for an indefinite presence, basically the idea that it was minor deployment in the big picture.

I hear some criticism in the backchannels coming out of European capitals about the US decision, for various reasons from long term credibility, to the human rights situation post-departure, to a fear of a refugee wave hitting Europe again.. Assuming they are not so sold on the withdrawal (for the sake of this argument)...

Why wasn't it possible for the Europeans to assign 2,500 troops to replace the Americans? Why, apparently, was it not even considered? I would think that is a mission the European nations as a combined unit, in terms of budget and military power, could deal with rather easily.

This is my problem with the Europeans really. They do have the capabilities but they never exercise it. Well, if the problem of Afghanistan will disproportionately affect the EU, perhaps they should have, in all these years, prepared a plan-B AS WELL (with a scenario of US resolve flagging). Any military or government of any competence would have such plans somewhere in a drawer.

I doubt the Europeans will send much assistance to the US in terms of the problems in the Tri-Nations of Central America that cause so much trouble to them (El Salvador, Honduras in particular), because that problem is not really of a big impact.

na wrote:

c933103 wrote:

na wrote:

Why is it that the Afghan Army doesn't fight? Sorry to say, but it seems that country wants what's going on.

US failed with the amount of money and equipment they have. Afghanistan national army is in the same position as the US minus the equipment and funding. What make you think they can fight.

Aesma wrote:

HAWK21M wrote:

Heard there is a deal being worked out and the existing govt will step down and hand over power to Taliban.

Taliban are fighting, but the Army not? Ridiculous. What kind of "soldiers" have been employed and trained there if the white flag is the only weapon they use? I think its good that the Allies have left this awful place that always has been one. If only a small percentage of the population wants to live like civilized people, and those even are not willing to fight then it useless to hold on to such country.

You took away the air support. You taught them how to fight US style, which requires air support, they didn’t have any air support, game over.

SQ22 wrote:

Please provide a link to your source when stating facts or make it clear you are stating your opinion. Thanks.

If you're referring to my comments on GWB, here's a link: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 43459.html

And it is relevant because GWB was POTUS when we entered Afghanistan without an exit strategy, something he might have understood to be a problem if he actually served in Vietnam.

Derico wrote:

And to play a brainstorming here: I keep hearing the figure that it only took 2,500 US troops to maintain the status-quo in Afghanistan. This is one of the main arguments made by those who advocated for an indefinite presence, basically the idea that it was minor deployment in the big picture.

I hear some criticism in the backchannels coming out of European capitals about the US decision, for various reasons from long term credibility, to the human rights situation post-departure, to a fear of a refugee wave hitting Europe again.. Assuming they are not so sold on the withdrawal (for the sake of this argument)...

Why wasn't it possible for the Europeans to assign 2,500 troops to replace the Americans? Why, apparently, was it not even considered? I would think that is a mission the European nations as a combined unit, in terms of budget and military power, could deal with rather easily.

This is my problem with the Europeans really. They do have the capabilities but they never exercise it. Well, if the problem of Afghanistan will disproportionately affect the EU, perhaps they should have, in all these years, prepared a plan-B AS WELL (with a scenario of US resolve flagging). Any military or government of any competence would have such plans somewhere in a drawer.

I doubt the Europeans will send much assistance to the US in terms of the problems in the Tri-Nations of Central America that cause so much trouble to them (El Salvador, Honduras in particular), because that problem is not really of a big impact.

America started this war, invoked article 5 which forced the Europeans into it. The US is the owner of this mess, not Europe. Enough Europeans have died pointlessly.

aerosreenivas wrote:

It is surprising that despite the last two decades of US and NATO forces training Afghan Army Forces, they still couldn't defend their country from the Taliban.

na wrote:

Taliban are fighting, but the Army not? Ridiculous. What kind of "soldiers" have been employed and trained there if the white flag is the only weapon they use? I think its good that the Allies have left this awful place that always has been one. If only a small percentage of the population wants to live like civilized people, and those even are not willing to fight then it useless to hold on to such country.

Exactly the same thing that happened with the South Vietnam Army, so it should be no surprise.

In the case of VN, yes, soldiers did take salaries from the government, but they viewed their officers and their government overall as corrupt. The only think keeping the whole thing going was money, not patriotism or anything like that. The VC worked at the grass roots level and had the hearts and minds of the people, and in cases where they did not, the old saying "grab them by the ***** and their hearts and minds will follow" is true.

na wrote:

Taliban are fighting, but the Army not? Ridiculous. What kind of "soldiers" have been employed and trained there if the white flag is the only weapon they use? I think its good that the Allies have left this awful place that always has been one. If only a small percentage of the population wants to live like civilized people, and those even are not willing to fight then it useless to hold on to such country.

Well the question is, what kind of training America provided to Afghanistan army?
America predicted this scenario when they planned their exit which is why they destroyed everything they had when exiting. They know Afghanistan army couldn't resist Taliban.
Taliban isn't some random military group, they have been rooting in the country longer than both the US and the now defeated Afghanistan government.
You should also note about the ethnic and religion divide across the country as the border there doesn't follow language/ethnic/religion line, which resulted in Taliban's ability to gather support from some part of the country, but for obvious reason such support divide across demographic line.

Derico wrote:

And to play a brainstorming here: I keep hearing the figure that it only took 2,500 US troops to maintain the status-quo in Afghanistan. This is one of the main arguments made by those who advocated for an indefinite presence, basically the idea that it was minor deployment in the big picture.

2,500 troops, but how many contractors?

Kiwirob wrote:

You took away the air support. You taught them how to fight US style, which requires air support, they didn’t have any air support, game over.

In other words, no viable exit strategy since we never were going to give the Afgans serious amounts of air combat capability, nor could the Afgan army recruit well enough to be a viable army without air support.

Revelation wrote:

aerosreenivas wrote:

It is surprising that despite the last two decades of US and NATO forces training Afghan Army Forces, they still couldn't defend their country from the Taliban.

na wrote:

Taliban are fighting, but the Army not? Ridiculous. What kind of "soldiers" have been employed and trained there if the white flag is the only weapon they use? I think its good that the Allies have left this awful place that always has been one. If only a small percentage of the population wants to live like civilized people, and those even are not willing to fight then it useless to hold on to such country.

Exactly the same thing that happened with the South Vietnam Army, so it should be no surprise.

In the case of VN, yes, soldiers did take salaries from the government, but they viewed their officers and their government overall as corrupt. The only think keeping the whole thing going was money, not patriotism or anything like that. The VC worked at the grass roots level and had the hearts and minds of the people, and in cases where they did not, the old saying "grab them by the ***** and their hearts and minds will follow" is true.

A Vietnamese I know said they don't understand why some would compare the current situation in Afghanistan to Vietnam. In Afghanistan you have Taliban from before the engagement start to now end by retreating, trying but failing to defeat it, which was totally not what the Vietnam War was about.