Finally done in Afghanistan?

[fire4effect]

5 minutes ago, DUNBAR said:

Why am I getting the feeling that, regarding American humiliation, the next few weeks are going to be worse than 9/11, the Iranian Hostage Crisis, and Saigon '75 combined? x10?

And one strategic E-4 or Taliban fighter with an itchy trigger finger away from a free-for-all that neither side will be able to control.

[jrizzell]

State Department says the Taliban has broken its promise to provide safe passage to the airport...NO SHIT! 
If they take American hostages...

There are senior Taliban fighters that were held in Gitmo for years…what do we think their appetite for vengeance or payback is with getting some American “prisoners”? This could be horrendous


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[gearhog]

C’mon, man! The fall of Kabul was 4-5 days ago. Why are we still talking about this? 
 

 

[ClearedHot]

21 minutes ago, torqued said:

C’mon, man! The fall of Kabul was 4-5 days ago. Why are we still talking about this? 
 

 

George - "Chaos was always priced into your decision?"  Biden - "Yes"

I am out of words...

[Clark Griswold]

C’mon, man! The fall of Kabul was 4-5 days ago. Why are we still talking about this? 
 
 

We just but in 2-3 weeks I’m guessing the MSM will have put this on the back burner


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CharlieHotel47]

27 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

George - "Chaos was always priced into your decision?"  Biden - "Yes"

I am out of words...

He is a freaking joke... C'mon, man... 

[arg]

30 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

George - "Chaos was always priced into your decision?"  Biden - "Yes"

I am out of words...

Doesn't that contradict this

https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/south-asia/taliban-vietnamese-army-biden-video-b1903276.html

[CharlieHotel47]

54 minutes ago, torqued said:

C’mon, man! The fall of Kabul was 4-5 days ago. Why are we still talking about this? 
 

 

What is his definition of "taking control"? I have an army bro flying 47s evacuating people in and out. They were handed grenades at one point because the plan was for them to finish evacuating people, throw a grenade in the cockpit of the helo, and run to jump on the last fix wing punching out. Great strategy... not sure if its going work out. 

[Danger41]

I know CENTCOM CC met with Taliban in Doha and I sincerely hope he said that if there’s one hostage or any kind of attack on Americans that we will be launching so many attacks on their gains that Curtis LeMay will be doing back flips from beyond the grave.

[DUNBAR]

2 hours ago, DUNBAR said:

Why am I getting the feeling that, regarding American humiliation, the next few weeks are going to be worse than 9/11, the Iranian Hostage Crisis, and Saigon '75 combined? x10?

Ah, yes.  The infamous, rarely-employed self-quote.

Seriously.  Someone intelligent please walk me through the possibilities.  How do we evacuate 10-15K Americans?  Here is what I can muster, along with my own half-assed probabilities.

A.  The Taliban permits unfettered, free access to the airport.  Perhaps they are tired as hell after living in caves and dodging airstrikes for 20 years.  Perhaps they think an international show of goodwill will be more valuable in the long run.  Perhaps they consider it even more humiliating for America if the Taliban takes the high road.  

Probability: 10%

B.  Biden and company watch a Clint Eastwood or George C Scott movie, grow a pair, and get the fever.  They announce if Americans are harmed, we're bringing back the Rangers, the Marines, and more B-f^cking-52s than you thought possible.  Rules of engagement: Anyone with a beard and old-timey clothes gets killed.  If some non-Taliban get caught up in it, well, they threw down their arms and basically joined the Taliban.  Oh well.

Probability: 5%

C.   More C-17s filled with gold bullion, weapons, and ammo then you thought possible.  The Taliban publicly announce that any nation that can spend $3.5 trillion on "infrastructure" can easily pay $10M per hostage.  The ransom is paid secretly, or publicly.

Probability: 55%

D.  Weeks and months of the worst humiliation imaginable.  Woman and girls become "brides."  Forced religious conversions.  Decapitations.  Torture.

Probability: 10%

E. Weeks and months of gruesome house-to-house fighting.  Thousands of civilian casualties, both Afghani and American.

Probability: 20%

What am I missing?

 

Edited August 18, 2021 by DUNBAR

[GrndPndr]

21 minutes ago, DUNBAR said:

<snip>

D.  Weeks and months of the worst humiliation imaginable.  Woman and girls become "brides."  Forced religious conversions.  Decapitations.  Torture.

Probability: 10%

What am I missing?

I think the probability-weighting for option D should be a heavier (maybe 75%)

Once we are out, these knuckleheads are going to twelfth-century everyone they can get their filthy hands on.

 

[slc]

3 minutes ago, GrndPndr said:

I think the probability-weighting for option D should be a heavier (maybe 75%)

Once we are out, these knuckleheads are going to twelfth-century everyone they can get their filthy hands on.

 

We should've thrown a Hellfire into the Presidential Palace when all those Talibs were gathered around the desk (I know, before you counter, you can't chop the head off this snake). 

It is written into the Koran that is not verbotten to "lie" to one's adversary in order to advance jihad.  In fact, it's encouraged!  They're gonna tell us/the world what we want to here and then do the exact opposite in a few days/weeks.  

[GrndPndr]

1 hour ago, DUNBAR said:

Ah, yes.  The infamous, rarely-employed self-quote.

Seriously.  Someone intelligent please walk me through the possibilities.  How do we evacuate 10-15K Americans?  Here is what I can muster, along with my own half-assed probabilities.

A.  The Taliban permits unfettered, free access to the airport.  Perhaps they are tired as hell after living in caves and dodging airstrikes for 20 years.  Perhaps they think an international show of goodwill will be more valuable in the long run.  Perhaps they consider it even more humiliating for America if the Taliban takes the high road.  

Probability: 10%

B.  Biden and company watch a Clint Eastwood or George C Scott movie, grow a pair, and get the fever.  They announce if Americans are harmed, we're bringing back the Rangers, the Marines, and more B-f^cking-52s than you thought possible.  Rules of engagement: Anyone with a beard and old-timey clothes gets killed.  If some non-Taliban get caught up in it, well, they threw down their arms and basically joined the Taliban.  Oh well.

Probability: 5%

C.   More C-17s filled with gold bullion, weapons, and ammo then you thought possible.  The Taliban publicly announce that any nation that can spend $3.5 trillion on "infrastructure" can easily pay $10M per hostage.  The ransom is paid secretly, or publicly.

Probability: 55%

D.  Weeks and months of the worst humiliation imaginable.  Woman and girls become "brides."  Forced religious conversions.  Decapitations.  Torture.

Probability: 10%

E. Weeks and months of gruesome house-to-house fighting.  Thousands of civilian casualties, both Afghani and American.

Probability: 20%

What am I missing?

 

Apologies for a post on the heels of another, but wanted to say, I think your other weights are very accurate (and sadly entertaining).

Edited August 19, 2021 by GrndPndr
Spell Retard

[ClearedHot]

1 hour ago, Danger41 said:

I know CENTCOM CC met with Taliban in Doha and I sincerely hope he said that if there’s one hostage or any kind of attack on Americans that we will be launching so many attacks on their gains that Curtis LeMay will be doing back flips from beyond the grave.

Do we think they care and what gains are we going to attack...the third compound from the north T intersection?  There is no infrastructure to attack.  We can keep manhunting but we have been doing that for 20 years.

Seriously...they have shown and unbelievable ability to absorb casualties and play the long game...they waited 20 years for this moment and they will make the most of it.  I would look to their motivation, what is in their best interest?  Is it better for them to let us leave peacully, avoid a few casualties on their side and own Afghanistan without much of a fight?  Or, would it be better to wait until we are almost gone and grab a bunch  hostages to make the point that they run Barter Town.  Think about their PR machine (far better than ours) and what kind of play they could get out of defeating the Americans AND parading around a bunch of American hostages...that video alone would recruit extremists into their ranks for a generation. 

I am shocked they haven't rolled any Americans up yet and I hope I am wrong.

[Lockjaw]

I think the meeting went more like "for how much and to who do I write the check out?"

I hope I'm wrong but that's my gut, especially after this afternoon's presser at the Pentagon.

[fire4effect]

14 minutes ago, slc said:

We should've thrown a Hellfire into the Presidential Palace when all those Talibs were gathered around the desk (I know, before you counter, you can't chop the head off this snake). 

It is written into the Koran that is not verbotten to "lie" to one's adversary in order to advance jihad.  In fact, it's encouraged!  They're gonna tell us/the world what we want to here and then do the exact opposite in a few days/weeks.  

If and when we get everyone we want/realistically can out of there no reason we can't make life very miserable from the air for them. Assuming 38 million  Afghans and a high estimate of 100,000 Taliban that's 380 to 1.  I don't get the feeling they have the hearts and minds of the locals as much as they like based on the videos we've seen and as we all know taking territory is a lot easier than holding it. Crank out GBU-39s (minimize collateral damage) by the truckload and go to town. Effectively were airmailing IEDs to them and they can endure the psychology of being hit with no way to shoot back. Basically if it has a crew served weapon/humvee etc. and 3-4 pax it gets hit and anything else we ID as worth going after. In the 90s they ran amok largely because no one was really looking hard but now we most certainly are. My .02

[HU&W]

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

Do we think they care and what gains are we going to attack...the third compound from the north T intersection?  There is no infrastructure to attack.  We can keep manhunting but we have been doing that for 20 years.

Seriously...they have shown and unbelievable ability to absorb casualties and play the long game...they waited 20 years for this moment and they will make the most of it.  I would look to their motivation, what is in their best interest?  Is it better for them to let us leave peacully, avoid a few casualties on their side and own Afghanistan without much of a fight?  Or, would it be better to wait until we are almost gone and grab a bunch  hostages to make the point that they run Barter Town.  Think about their PR machine (far better than ours) and what kind of play they could get out of defeating the Americans AND parading around a bunch of American hostages...that video alone would recruit extremists into their ranks for a generation. 

I am shocked they haven't rolled any Americans up yet and I hope I am wrong.

Their motivation appears to be expel, embarrass, and control.  Our motivation seems to be providing money to military contractors, advancing a narrative, and minimizing political embarrassment.  Sadly, this nexus of priorities doesn’t lend itself a short or conclusive end. 

[jazzdude]

If and when we get everyone we want/realistically can out of there no reason we can't make life very miserable from the air for them. Assuming 38 million  Afghans and a high estimate of 100,000 Taliban that's 380 to 1.  I don't get the feeling they have the hearts and minds of the locals as much as they like based on the videos we've seen and as we all know taking territory is a lot easier than holding it. Crank out GBU-39s (minimize collateral damage) by the truckload and go to town. Effectively were airmailing IEDs to them and they can endure the psychology of being hit with no way to shoot back. Basically if it has a crew served weapon/humvee etc. and 3-4 pax it gets hit and anything else we ID as worth going after. In the 90s they ran amok largely because no one was really looking hard but now we most certainly are. My .02

To what strategic end does this help? Sure, it'd feel good from the tactical operator perspective. But that's expensive (cost of weapons, flight time, basing and associated support and logistics infrastructure).

On top of all of that, Pakistan has been friendly towards the Taliban, so how long does it take for Pakistan to close of overflight rights to deny airstrikes in Afghanistan?

[DUNBAR]

The more I observe the news media and their minimal interest on this topic, the more I'm convinced the answer is a resounding "option C", and everybody knows it.  I suspect arrangements have already been made for colossal and astounding ransom payments.

But that's just pure speculation on my part.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, DUNBAR said:

The more I observe the news media and their minimal interest on this topic, the more I'm convinced the answer is a resounding "option C", and everybody knows it.  I suspect arrangements have already been made for colossal and astounding ransom payments.

But that's just pure speculation on my part.

Considering the Obama administration next-day airmailed what was it again, $1,300,000,000 dollars to Iran, I'd say you're spot on with Option C for the win!

[kaputt]

https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/military-doesn-t-have-capability-to-rescue-americans-who-cannot-get-to-kabul-airport-118991941602
 

“We don’t have the capability to go out and collect up large numbers of people” - Sec Def

We are definitely no longer the nation that won World War II, accomplished the Berlin Airlift, and put men on the moon. We can’t even get everyone successfully home from a conflict we lost.

We still have individuals in this country that are capable of those feats, but not a single one of them resides in our leadership class anymore. 

[arg]

Hot off the presses

 

[pilot]

Front page of CNN. Absolutely skewers Biden. What a disgrace. I have no words…just a lot of raging emotions. 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/19/politics/joe-biden-presidency-under-scrutiny/index.html

[ClearedHot]

"This placed turned into MadMax Quick"

[Premo]

Trending on Reddit right now—Guardian story from 2009.