Leaving Afghanistan Not With a Bang But a Whimper

U.S. soldiers learn how to differentiate between types of ordnance and devices they may encounter while out on missions during training to counter improvised explosive devices on Forward Operating Base Tagab in Afghanistan's Laghman province, Oct. 15, 2013. The soldiers are assigned to the 10th Mountain Division's 2nd Battalion, 4th Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team. U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Eric Provost

Leaving Afghanistan: Not With a Bang, But a Whimper -- Stephen M. Walt, Foreign Policy

One of the hardest things for a great power to do is reverse course when it's made a strategic blunder, especially when it involves a war. Fred Ikle wrote a whole book about this problem -- the classic Every War Must End -- where he described many of political obstacles that getting in the way of cutting one's losses and either making peace or just getting out. You know some of the reasons: politicians don't like to admit they screwed up, the fallacy of "sunk costs" continues to drive policy, the military doesn't like admitting defeat, etc. And even when the decision to end a war is made, it usually takes longer to get out than it should.

Case in point: Afghanistan. I don't know if the United States and NATO could have achieved a meaningful victory in Afghanistan had the Bush administration not embarked on its foolish misadventure in Iraq. But it was clear by 2009 that doubling down in Afghanistan wasn't going to produce an effective or fully legitimate Afghan government and wasn't going to produce a strategically more favorable outcome from the perspective of U.S. interests. But President Obama decided to "surge" there anyway, mostly because he wanted to look tough on national security and feared the domestic backlash if he cut our losses and withdrew.

Read more ....

My Comment: We are not leaving Afghanistan with a bang or a whimper .... we are leaving Afghanistan with a lot of crying.