Afghanistan is Over

[Res Ipsa]

... nobody should be taking victory laps over Afghanistan. Let’s hope we learned some lessons this time around.

Lessons to be learned?

Yes, rather a lot, and so far I think we have only begun to think about what needs to be learned.

Twenty years, vast sums of money spent and many lives lost, and the Taliban simply take over the minute the allies are gone. Let us not kid ourselves: that is not the way it was supposed to be.

Part of the lesson was, I think, hinted at in an article I read by a soldier who had served (if I recall correctly) in both Iraq and Afghanistan. In both countries he saw what appeared to him to be a pernicious system of contracting-out military and politico/social roles to private businesses whose key aim was not to further the state interests of the US and its allies (and certainly not of the Iraqi or Afghan people) but to extract as much money as they possibly can for their owners for the least work possible with the least possible risk. BECAUSE THEY ARE BUSINESSES, AND THAT IS WHAT BUSINESSES ARE SUPPOSED TO DO. They appear to have made a great success of the profit generating thing: not so much of the things the government wanted them to do.

Would it not be a good idea to find out who it was who thought it would be a good and effective idea to spend government dollars this way? And perhaps to see whether there is any evidence that this was done for any reason other than to help political cronies and party donors to make as much out of the war as they possibly could?

I agree, there are all kinds of questions we haven't even thought of. It's something that deserves detailed study on a number of issues. The role of privately military contractors is a great example. For profit businesses are driven by profitability. And the drive is powerful. Using private contractors in this setting requires giving careful thought as to whether the profit motive will result in actions consistent with military and diplomatic objectives. I hope we do the necessary study and soul searching.

[Res Ipsa]

There are between 100 and 200 American citizens who were trapped outside of Kabul and couldn't get out but want to do so.

That isn't true. You're doing precisely the same thing the media is. Blinken said the number of Americans is "likely closer to 100" and they have no idea who they all are, which is why they cannot even put an exact number to it. If they don't know who they are how can anyone know they're "trapped" and "want to leave"?

Consider this ambiguous headline from USAToday: "No option for us': US withdrawal marks terrifying moment for Americans, allies still in Afghanistan"

So are Americans saying "no option for us?" You have to read half way through the article to see it is an Afghan who made that remark. That same article details the issues faced with determining how many US citizens are still there:

The challenge is "there are long-time residents of Afghanistan who have American passports and who are trying to determine whether or not they wanted to leave," he said. "Many are dual-citizen Americans with deep roots and extended families in Afghanistan who’ve resided there for many years. For many, it’s a painful choice."

Closer to 100, and many of them haven't decided if they want to even leave. But that pertinent fact will never find itself in a headline. If there were literally "hundreds" of Americans struggling to leave (as several Right Wing folks have said) then one would think we'd be seeing all kinds of social media video feeds of them begging for help. Or at least direct family members claiming their loved ones want out but can't.

Here's what Blinken said on numbers:

Blinken said fewer than 200 Americans remain in Afghanistan and the actual number is "likely closer to 100."

Given the "likely" qualifier and the lack of detailed information, I think between 100 and 200 is a fair description of the estimate.

[Chap]

Using private contractors in this setting requires giving careful thought as to whether the profit motive will result in actions consistent with military and diplomatic objectives. I hope we do the necessary study and soul searching.

Yeah, that's a hard one, isn't it.

Will the profit motive result in actions consistent with military and diplomatic objectives? Or will using private contractors just turn out to be a really, really good way to enable one's best friends to be cut into the huge uncontrolled splurges of cash that governments generate when there is a war to be fought?

What did Napoleon say about using private contractors? The Duke of Wellington? General Rommel in WWII? General Slim in Burma? General Omar Bradley? Gosh I think they forgot to hire any. However did they manage??

[Res Ipsa]

Using private contractors in this setting requires giving careful thought as to whether the profit motive will result in actions consistent with military and diplomatic objectives. I hope we do the necessary study and soul searching.

Yeah, that's a hard one, isn't it.

Will the profit motive result in actions consistent with military and diplomatic objectives? Or will using private contractors just turn out to be a really, really good way to enable one's best friends to be cut into the huge uncontrolled splurges of cash that governments generate when there is a war to be fought?

What did Napoleon say about using private contractors? The Duke of Wellington? General Rommel in WWII? General Slim in Burma? General Omar Bradley? Gosh I think they forgot to hire any. However did they manage??

I have pretty strong opinions on use of for-profit prisons. Like: "are you out of your freaking mind" opinions. It leads me to be skeptical toward use of private entities in war. If one can harness market forces to accomplish objectives, that's great. But sometimes I wonder how much the notion that private entities are always better at everything than public entities leads to skipping over things that deserve serious thought.

[Xenophon]

I have pretty strong opinions on use of for-profit prisons. Like: "are you out of your freaking mind" opinions. It leads me to be skeptical toward use of private entities in war. If one can harness market forces to accomplish objectives, that's great. But sometimes I wonder how much the notion that private entities are always better at everything than public entities leads to skipping over things that deserve serious thought.

I think when I hear "best" or "better" in these kinds of discussions I generally translate that to faster and cheaper. I remain open to the idea that private military may have very specific use cases that it is well suited for, I'm not convinced that nation building is one of those tasks.

Not unlike the for-profit prison discussion the question remains "what is the job to be accomplished". If your answer is to cheaply outsource the hiding away of people society deems reprehensible then they probably work just fine. If your goal is rehabilitation, reintegration and retaining/rebuilding the dignity of those involved, they fall very short.

[Res Ipsa]

I have pretty strong opinions on use of for-profit prisons. Like: "are you out of your freaking mind" opinions. It leads me to be skeptical toward use of private entities in war. If one can harness market forces to accomplish objectives, that's great. But sometimes I wonder how much the notion that private entities are always better at everything than public entities leads to skipping over things that deserve serious thought.

I think when I hear "best" or "better" in these kinds of discussions I generally translate that to faster and cheaper. I remain open to the idea that private military may have very specific use cases that it is well suited for, I'm not convinced that nation building is one of those tasks.

Not unlike the for-profit prison discussion the question remains "what is the job to be accomplished". If your answer is to cheaply outsource the hiding away of people society deems reprehensible then they probably work just fine. If your goal is rehabilitation, reintegration and retaining/rebuilding the dignity of those involved, they fall very short.

Well put.

[Alf'Omega]

Here's what Blinken said on numbers:

A quote already provided in my response above.

Given the "likely" qualifier and the lack of detailed information, I think between 100 and 200 is a fair description of the estimate.

Sure, but my issue is with the repeated claim in the media that all of these people want out but couldn't get out. That simply isn't known, but saying it like this paints a far worse picture for Biden especially after he said he would get all Americans out. But did he say he'd force all Americans to leave against their will? No one seems to be talking about the people who don't want to leave, or the likelihood that many of the people thought to be in the country had already left. The White House had been saying for more than a week it is impossible to know the exact number of Americans in the country because they're not required to report when they come and go.

[Chap]

... the notion that private entities are always better at everything than public entities ...

What a weird notion that is.

There are some cases, such as the supply of beer, where it is a good idea to let people compete to make beer that can attract enough people who want to buy it to keep their business running. That way there is likely to be a good supply of a variety of beers at reasonable prices. But how about contracting out the provision of judges to profit-making corporations? Clearly not: justice is not something to be sold as commodity - when the barons forced King John to sign Magna Carta, one clause was:

(40). Nulli vendemus ... rectum vel justiciam.

“To no one will we sell ... right or justice.”

And there are many other important things in human existence that are not, or should not, ever be for sale.

[Res Ipsa]

... the notion that private entities are always better at everything than public entities ...

What a weird notion that is.

There are some cases, such as the supply of beer, where it is a good idea to let people compete to make beer that can attract enough people who want to buy it to keep their business running. That way there is likely to be a good supply of a variety of beers at reasonable prices. But how about contracting out the provision of judges to profit-making corporations? Clearly not: justice is not something to be sold as commodity - when the barons forced King John to sign Magna Carta, one clause was:

(40). Nulli vendemus ... rectum vel justiciam.

“To no one will we sell ... right or justice.”

And there are many other important things in human existence that are not, or should not, ever be for sale.

Yeah, it is. But it's the opinion lots of libertarians and many conservatives over here.

[honorentheos]

Sure, but my issue is with the repeated claim in the media that all of these people want out but couldn't get out. That simply isn't known, but saying it like this paints a far worse picture for Biden especially after he said he would get all Americans out. But did he say he'd force all Americans to leave against their will? No one seems to be talking about the people who don't want to leave, or the likelihood that many of the people thought to be in the country had already left. The White House had been saying for more than a week it is impossible to know the exact number of Americans in the country because they're not required to report when they come and go.

If President Biden says the 100-200 number is referring to Americans with intentions of leaving does that change your perspective enough to not attack a qualified, fairly broad statement of fact?

From today's speech:

Now we believe that about 100 to 200 Americans remain in Afghanistan with some intention to leave. Most of those who remain are dual citizens, long-time residents who had earlier decided to stay because of their family roots in Afghanistan.

The bottom line: Ninety-eight percent of Americans in Afghanistan who wanted to leave were able to leave.

And for those remaining Americans, there is no deadline. We remain committed to get them out if they want to come out. Secretary of State Blinken is leading the continued diplomatic efforts to ensure a safe passage for any American, Afghan partner, or foreign national who wants to leave Afghanistan.


https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo ... ghanistan/

Partisanship is a problem in our nation coming from both sides for similar reasons. Distorting facts, viewing news that isn't politically convenient as political attacks to be declared fake news rather than just news, and otherwise making facts a football in a zero-sum political game are causing the destruction of western liberal democracy. It's not a Trump or Biden issue, it's being blindly partisan to the point there is no ability to share common ground that is the foundational problem.

ETA: Apologies. I forgot to thank you for listening to my TED talk. Thank you.