Three Cheers for Leaving Afghanistan, No Matter Who Does It

U.S. Marines/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

It’s official: apparently the reason Donald Trump has been firing all the top leaders at the Pentagon is because he wanted new leaders who would agree to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. I have to admit I didn’t see that coming.

So what should we think about this? There are two serious arguments against it. First, a drawdown is fine in theory, but a rushed and poorly planned drawdown in the waning weeks of a presidency is a terrible way to go about it. Second, this will wreck whatever leverage we have in our current negotiations with the Taliban.

I’m not much impressed with either argument. Sure, a well-planned drawdown would obviously be better, but I’ve seen no evidence that we can’t do this in fairly short order. There are force protection issues that need to be addressed, but that’s doable. There are also concerns about getting sensitive equipment out of the country quickly in case of a sudden Taliban surge, but again that seems like a bit of a remote worry. In the end, if we have no choice but to simply destroy some of this stuff, we’ll live through it.

The second argument carries a little more weight—on the surface, at least. We’re currently negotiating a treaty with the Taliban that trades a troop drawdown for their promise to engage peacefully with the government in Kabul. But if we withdraw on our own, why should the Taliban bother promising anything at all? Why not just wait for us to withdraw on our own?

I think that’s entirely correct. However, I also think the Taliban never had any intention of honoring any treaty in the first place. We are stuck with the same problem in Afghanistan that we’ve had for two decades: If we leave, the Taliban will take over in short order and we’ll have to face the fact that we lost. We fought a 20-year war for literally nothing. No American president has been willing to accept that.

No president until Donald Trump, that is. Given Trump’s personality, I find this sort of inexplicable, but apparently he’s so dedicated to ending a forever war that he’s willing to be the president who lost Afghanistan. This really doesn’t compute, unless he thinks he’s laying a trap for Joe Biden to be the guy in office when the Taliban finally takes over. Maybe.

In any case, I have never believed that there was any end to the war in Afghanistan except one: the Taliban wins. Given that reality, we might as well get out sooner rather than later and simply accept the loss. Regardless of his reasons, that’s what Trump is putting into motion. I’m all in favor of it.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate