QA问答：美军离开阿富汗是一个错误吗?
正文翻译
Was it a mistake for the U.S. forces to leave Afghanistan?
美军离开阿富汗是一个错误吗?
Was it a mistake for the U.S. forces to leave Afghanistan?
美军离开阿富汗是一个错误吗?
评论翻译
US Politics
The US accomplished their main goal. We should have left after Bin Laden was killed.
美国实现了他们的主要目标。本·拉登被杀后我们就该离开的。
The US accomplished their main goal. We should have left after Bin Laden was killed.
美国实现了他们的主要目标。本·拉登被杀后我们就该离开的。
Chris Everett
No.
The mistakes were as follows:
Having no clear, and certainly no achievable goal after the initial destruction of AQ assets.
Attempting, essentially, to buy democracy with pallets of cash, which became nothing more than corruption.
Continuing to think that the endgame was “right around the corner”. Had we assumed being in Afghanistan for 20 years up front, we could have had an orderly plan to end up with something like Uzbekistan, hardly ideal but stable and on a decent trajectory.
不是。
下面这些才是做错的地方:
在最初摧毁阿富汗基地组织的资产后，没有明确的目标，当然也没有可实现的目标。
实质上，他们试图用大量现金购买民主，结果变成了腐败。
一直觉得终局就在眼前。如果我们预先设想要在阿富汗驻扎20年，我们就可以有一个有序的计划，以结束战争，塑造一个像乌兹别克斯坦这样的国家，虽然不太理想，但很稳定，发展势头不错。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
No.
The mistakes were as follows:
Having no clear, and certainly no achievable goal after the initial destruction of AQ assets.
Attempting, essentially, to buy democracy with pallets of cash, which became nothing more than corruption.
Continuing to think that the endgame was “right around the corner”. Had we assumed being in Afghanistan for 20 years up front, we could have had an orderly plan to end up with something like Uzbekistan, hardly ideal but stable and on a decent trajectory.
不是。
下面这些才是做错的地方:
在最初摧毁阿富汗基地组织的资产后，没有明确的目标，当然也没有可实现的目标。
实质上，他们试图用大量现金购买民主，结果变成了腐败。
一直觉得终局就在眼前。如果我们预先设想要在阿富汗驻扎20年，我们就可以有一个有序的计划，以结束战争，塑造一个像乌兹别克斯坦这样的国家，虽然不太理想，但很稳定，发展势头不错。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Running with the Karzai government for as long as we did, in spite of obvious corruption and little respect of his leadership within Afghanistan.
Essentially ceding any and all moral authority because… reasons. We ignored things like sexual abuse (e.g., “Bacha Bazi”), when even the Taliban executes those who engage in it… Yes, we had a lower moral standing the the Taliban here. Congrats, US Military.
Failing to have consistent leadership at any level. A constant churn of officers at all levels meant that there was never anyone the Afghan population could trust.
尽管卡尔扎伊政府在阿富汗存在着明显的腐败现象，他的领导地位也不受尊重，但我们还是和他合作了很长时间。
实质上是放弃所有的道德权威，因为某些…原因。我们忽视了性虐待(例如，“Bacha Bazi”)之类的事情，甚至连塔利班都会处决那些参与性虐待的人……是的，我们的道德底线比塔利班低。恭喜,美军。
在任何层面上都没有一致的领导。各级军官的不断变动意味着阿富汗人民从来没有一个可以信任的人。
Essentially ceding any and all moral authority because… reasons. We ignored things like sexual abuse (e.g., “Bacha Bazi”), when even the Taliban executes those who engage in it… Yes, we had a lower moral standing the the Taliban here. Congrats, US Military.
Failing to have consistent leadership at any level. A constant churn of officers at all levels meant that there was never anyone the Afghan population could trust.
尽管卡尔扎伊政府在阿富汗存在着明显的腐败现象，他的领导地位也不受尊重，但我们还是和他合作了很长时间。
实质上是放弃所有的道德权威，因为某些…原因。我们忽视了性虐待(例如，“Bacha Bazi”)之类的事情，甚至连塔利班都会处决那些参与性虐待的人……是的，我们的道德底线比塔利班低。恭喜,美军。
在任何层面上都没有一致的领导。各级军官的不断变动意味着阿富汗人民从来没有一个可以信任的人。
Officers who delivered honest and blunt assessments about situations were relieved in favor of officers who told their leadership what they wanted to hear. This happened at all levels.
Essentially, no accountability. As long as senior leaders said the right things, they were never in any danger of negative repercussions on their careers or political ambitions.
那些对形势做出诚实而直率的评估的军官被冷落，而那些只告诉领导他们想听的话的军官则得到了帮助。这发生在各个层面。
从本质上讲,没有责任心。只要高层领导人说的是正确的话，他们的职业生涯或政治抱负就永远不会受到负面影响。
Essentially, no accountability. As long as senior leaders said the right things, they were never in any danger of negative repercussions on their careers or political ambitions.
那些对形势做出诚实而直率的评估的军官被冷落，而那些只告诉领导他们想听的话的军官则得到了帮助。这发生在各个层面。
从本质上讲,没有责任心。只要高层领导人说的是正确的话，他们的职业生涯或政治抱负就永远不会受到负面影响。
A complete failure by the Biden administration to have an orderly withdrawal plan (which he apparently was all but given by the Trump administration, and which he promptly dismissed). (Further note that Obama managed a reasonably functional withdrawal from Iraq without major issue. Iraq today, by the standards of the region, has a reasonably functional government that has a reasonable chance of success, a growing GDP, and enough national character to repel ISIS, albeit with modest US help. So I say this not as a partisan issue).
拜登政府在制定有序撤军计划方面的彻底失败(这个计划显然基本就是特朗普政府给他留下的，他很快就否决了这个计划)。(更远点讲，请注意，奥巴马成功地从伊拉克有效地撤军，没有出现重大问题。按照该地区的标准，今天的伊拉克有一个功能合理的政府，有合理的成功机会、不断增长的GDP和足够的国民性格来击退ISIS，尽管美国的帮助并不多。所以我说这不是一个党派问题)。
拜登政府在制定有序撤军计划方面的彻底失败(这个计划显然基本就是特朗普政府给他留下的，他很快就否决了这个计划)。(更远点讲，请注意，奥巴马成功地从伊拉克有效地撤军，没有出现重大问题。按照该地区的标准，今天的伊拉克有一个功能合理的政府，有合理的成功机会、不断增长的GDP和足够的国民性格来击退ISIS，尽管美国的帮助并不多。所以我说这不是一个党派问题)。
Having too many NGO’s around that all had their own goals, many of which were incompatible with each other 》
有太多的非政府组织，他们都有自己的目标，其中许多是互不兼容的。
有太多的非政府组织，他们都有自己的目标，其中许多是互不兼容的。
World History
No. The mistake was going ion there 20 years ago. Nothing was learned from Vietnam
不。这个错误发生在20年前。我们从越南战争中没有学到任何东西。
No. The mistake was going ion there 20 years ago. Nothing was learned from Vietnam
不。这个错误发生在20年前。我们从越南战争中没有学到任何东西。
US Politics ·
Biden ended a Forever War.
Two trillion dollars and 2000 US killed in combat, 30000 wounded, hundreds of American military suicides so that the local mullahs and nabobs in warlords and gov't bureaucrats could shit in $50k gold toilets.
Trump never should have recognized the Taliban. Pompeii was a traitor for meeting with the Taliban.
拜登结束了一场永远的战争。
两万亿美元，2000名美国人在战斗中丧生，30000人受伤，数百名美国军人自杀的代价，让当地的毛拉和军阀以及政府官僚可以在价值5万美元的黄金厕所里拉屎。
特朗普根本不应该承认塔利班。蓬佩奥因为与塔利班会面而成为了叛徒。
Biden ended a Forever War.
Two trillion dollars and 2000 US killed in combat, 30000 wounded, hundreds of American military suicides so that the local mullahs and nabobs in warlords and gov't bureaucrats could shit in $50k gold toilets.
Trump never should have recognized the Taliban. Pompeii was a traitor for meeting with the Taliban.
拜登结束了一场永远的战争。
两万亿美元，2000名美国人在战斗中丧生，30000人受伤，数百名美国军人自杀的代价，让当地的毛拉和军阀以及政府官僚可以在价值5万美元的黄金厕所里拉屎。
特朗普根本不应该承认塔利班。蓬佩奥因为与塔利班会面而成为了叛徒。
Trump Is A Criminal ·
It was a mistake for our forces to stay there after Al Queda had been taken care of.
Our mistakes in the last century should have taught us that you can’t occupy a country and force through a republic that enough of the people aren’t willing to fight for.
在基地组织被消灭后，我们的部队留在那里是一个错误。
我们在上个世纪的错误应该告诉过我们，你不能占领一个国家，强行推行成立一个有足够多的人不愿意为之奋斗的共和国。
It was a mistake for our forces to stay there after Al Queda had been taken care of.
Our mistakes in the last century should have taught us that you can’t occupy a country and force through a republic that enough of the people aren’t willing to fight for.
在基地组织被消灭后，我们的部队留在那里是一个错误。
我们在上个世纪的错误应该告诉过我们，你不能占领一个国家，强行推行成立一个有足够多的人不愿意为之奋斗的共和国。
We need to return to the pre-WWII approach of only sending the military to assist if a nation’s people are actively struggling for democracy and welcome the help.
I suspect though that the military industrial complex has a lot to do with continuing the Korea and Vietnam approach.
Corporations that manufacture weapons were clear winners in this war. They made money hand over fist.
我们需要回到二战前的做法，只有当一个国家的人民积极争取民主并欢迎帮助时，才派遣军队去援助。
我怀疑军事工业联合体与朝鲜战争和越南战争的继续有很大关系。
制造武器的公司显然是这场战争的赢家。他们轻而易举地赚到了钱。
I suspect though that the military industrial complex has a lot to do with continuing the Korea and Vietnam approach.
Corporations that manufacture weapons were clear winners in this war. They made money hand over fist.
我们需要回到二战前的做法，只有当一个国家的人民积极争取民主并欢迎帮助时，才派遣军队去援助。
我怀疑军事工业联合体与朝鲜战争和越南战争的继续有很大关系。
制造武器的公司显然是这场战争的赢家。他们轻而易举地赚到了钱。
The World History of War and Peace ·
You don’t send your military to go across the world to occupy another country and expect that the international community and your own people and the people you are occupying would approve of having this military stay in that country indefinitely; this is especially as soldiers continue to get maimed or killed, all sides are publically committing war crimes, the blatant puppet government erected is absurdly dysfunctional and corrupt even in the best of times, and the reason for staying becomes increasingly unjustified.
你不能派遣你的军队跨越世界去占领另一个国家，并期望国际社会、你自己的人民和你所占领的人民会同意让这支军队无限期地驻扎在那个国家;特别是当士兵们继续致残或被杀，各方都公开犯下战争罪行，公然建立的傀儡政府即使在最好的时期也荒谬地功能失常和腐败，而留下来的理由变得越来越不合理。
You don’t send your military to go across the world to occupy another country and expect that the international community and your own people and the people you are occupying would approve of having this military stay in that country indefinitely; this is especially as soldiers continue to get maimed or killed, all sides are publically committing war crimes, the blatant puppet government erected is absurdly dysfunctional and corrupt even in the best of times, and the reason for staying becomes increasingly unjustified.
你不能派遣你的军队跨越世界去占领另一个国家，并期望国际社会、你自己的人民和你所占领的人民会同意让这支军队无限期地驻扎在那个国家;特别是当士兵们继续致残或被杀，各方都公开犯下战争罪行，公然建立的傀儡政府即使在最好的时期也荒谬地功能失常和腐败，而留下来的理由变得越来越不合理。
Afghanistan was constantly called “Vietnam 2.0”, because once the USA left there was nothing stopping a power vacuum from destroying the frail neo-colony that most of the natives despised. The only real difference is that the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan was so incapable of existing independently as a government and a military that it collapsed while the USA gradually left.
阿富汗经常被称为“越南2.0”，因为一旦美国离开，就没有什么能阻止权力真空摧毁这个大多数当地人鄙视的脆弱的新殖民地。唯一真正的区别是，阿富汗伊斯兰共和国没有能力作为一个政府和军队独立存在，当美国逐渐离开时，它崩溃了。
阿富汗经常被称为“越南2.0”，因为一旦美国离开，就没有什么能阻止权力真空摧毁这个大多数当地人鄙视的脆弱的新殖民地。唯一真正的区别是，阿富汗伊斯兰共和国没有能力作为一个政府和军队独立存在，当美国逐渐离开时，它崩溃了。
Leaving was inevitable. The big mistake was military strategy and leadership:
Bush established the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, laying the foundation for the occupation. He also laid the precedent of relying on high kill counts rather than actually effective anti-guerrilla strategies (which sounds like the same USA mistake in Vietnam).
离开是不可避免的。最大的错误是军事战略和领导能力:
布什建立了阿富汗伊斯兰共和国，为占领奠定了基础。他还开创了依赖高杀伤性武器而不是实际有效的反游击战略的先例(这听起来像美国在越南犯的同样的错误)。
Bush established the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, laying the foundation for the occupation. He also laid the precedent of relying on high kill counts rather than actually effective anti-guerrilla strategies (which sounds like the same USA mistake in Vietnam).
离开是不可避免的。最大的错误是军事战略和领导能力:
布什建立了阿富汗伊斯兰共和国，为占领奠定了基础。他还开创了依赖高杀伤性武器而不是实际有效的反游击战略的先例(这听起来像美国在越南犯的同样的错误)。
Obama, despite assassinating Bin Laden, prolonged the occupation in response to the Arab Spring/Winter and the peak of ISIS.
Trump had a sloppy ceasefire negotiation and made it publicly clear that the USA was disinterested in staying in Afghanistan— which encouraged the Taliban to gear up. Trump then attempted to sabotage Biden’s succession by attempting to stall or block the transfer of documents and authority— including a blatant coup attempt— which disrupted the Biden administration’s ability to strategize and lead in Afghanistan.
奥巴马尽管刺杀了本·拉登，但为了应对阿拉伯之春/阿拉伯之冬运动和ISIS的鼎盛时期，延长了对伊拉克的占领。
特朗普进行了草率的停火谈判，并公开表示美国对留在阿富汗不感兴趣——这鼓励了塔利班加紧行动。随后，特朗普试图通过拖延或阻止文件和权力的转移——包括公然的政变企图——破坏拜登政府在阿富汗的战略和领导能力，从而破坏拜登的继任。
Trump had a sloppy ceasefire negotiation and made it publicly clear that the USA was disinterested in staying in Afghanistan— which encouraged the Taliban to gear up. Trump then attempted to sabotage Biden’s succession by attempting to stall or block the transfer of documents and authority— including a blatant coup attempt— which disrupted the Biden administration’s ability to strategize and lead in Afghanistan.
奥巴马尽管刺杀了本·拉登，但为了应对阿拉伯之春/阿拉伯之冬运动和ISIS的鼎盛时期，延长了对伊拉克的占领。
特朗普进行了草率的停火谈判，并公开表示美国对留在阿富汗不感兴趣——这鼓励了塔利班加紧行动。随后，特朗普试图通过拖延或阻止文件和权力的转移——包括公然的政变企图——破坏拜登政府在阿富汗的战略和领导能力，从而破坏拜登的继任。
And Biden was partially oblivious to the speed and efficiency of the 2021 Taliban Offensive, resulting in all of Afghanistan effectively being conquered in 3.5 months and both civilians and remaining Americans fleeing in a panic. By comparison, the 1975 Spring Offensive in Vietnam took 4.5 months. But the difference isn’t by a wide margin; this really was Vietnam 2.0 in many ways.
拜登在一定程度上忽视了2021年塔利班进攻的速度和效率，导致整个阿富汗在3.5个月内实际上被征服，平民和剩余的美国人都在恐慌中逃离。相比之下，1975年越南的春季攻势花了4.5个月。但差距并不大;阿富汗战争在很多方面都是越战2.0版。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
拜登在一定程度上忽视了2021年塔利班进攻的速度和效率，导致整个阿富汗在3.5个月内实际上被征服，平民和剩余的美国人都在恐慌中逃离。相比之下，1975年越南的春季攻势花了4.5个月。但差距并不大;阿富汗战争在很多方面都是越战2.0版。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
The World History of War and Peace ·
This question demands a complicated answer.
Withdrawal from Afghanistan exposed the westernized population to difficult lifestyle choices in the cities. Womens rights have been curtailed. Starvation is rampant. The Taliban is dangerous and abusive.
On the other hand, the Afgan government was corrupt and abusive. After 20 years the country was still at war and draining the US Treasury and killing Alied troops.
这个问题的答案有点复杂。
从阿富汗撤军使西化的人口在城市中面临艰难的生活方式选择。妇女的权利受到了限制。饥饿猖獗。塔利班既危险又残暴。
另一方面，阿富汗政府腐败和滥用权力。20年后，这个国家仍然处于战争之中，耗尽了美国的财政，杀死了盟军的军队。
This question demands a complicated answer.
Withdrawal from Afghanistan exposed the westernized population to difficult lifestyle choices in the cities. Womens rights have been curtailed. Starvation is rampant. The Taliban is dangerous and abusive.
On the other hand, the Afgan government was corrupt and abusive. After 20 years the country was still at war and draining the US Treasury and killing Alied troops.
这个问题的答案有点复杂。
从阿富汗撤军使西化的人口在城市中面临艰难的生活方式选择。妇女的权利受到了限制。饥饿猖獗。塔利班既危险又残暴。
另一方面，阿富汗政府腐败和滥用权力。20年后，这个国家仍然处于战争之中，耗尽了美国的财政，杀死了盟军的军队。
Now America and NATO are pumping that money into Ukraine, where arguably it is doing more good.
Afghanistan has been a perianal basket case since British times.
As Kipling said:
When you're lying wounded on Afghanistans plains,
And the women are coming to cut up what remains,
You roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
And go to your Gawd like a soldier.
Not much has changed since the 1800′s.
现在，美国和北约正在把这些钱投入到乌克兰，可以说，他们在那里做得更好。
自英国时代起，阿富汗就一直是一个无药可救的国家。
像吉卜林说的:
当你受伤躺在阿富汗的平原上，
女人们会过来把你剩下的身体切碎
你应该滚到你的来复枪前，打爆自己的脑袋，
像个士兵一样去见你的上帝。
自19世纪以来，情况变化不大。
Afghanistan has been a perianal basket case since British times.
As Kipling said:
When you're lying wounded on Afghanistans plains,
And the women are coming to cut up what remains,
You roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
And go to your Gawd like a soldier.
Not much has changed since the 1800′s.
现在，美国和北约正在把这些钱投入到乌克兰，可以说，他们在那里做得更好。
自英国时代起，阿富汗就一直是一个无药可救的国家。
像吉卜林说的:
当你受伤躺在阿富汗的平原上，
女人们会过来把你剩下的身体切碎
你应该滚到你的来复枪前，打爆自己的脑袋，
像个士兵一样去见你的上帝。
自19世纪以来，情况变化不大。
Sam Morningstar
Not at all. It was actually a mistake to attempt to “nation-build” in the first place…and spend two decades occupying the country.
The only reasonable approach would have been to invade the country to specifically root out AQ terrorist cells, support the Northern Alliance, and establish bases in allied nations in the region and monitor the situation. Troops could be sent in for future large-scale operations as needed (to prevent terrorist cells from using the nation as a haven or training ground).
不客气。事实上，一开始试图进行“国家建设”就是一个错误，美国还花了20年的时间占领这个国家。
唯一合理的方法是入侵伊拉克，专门铲除伊斯兰恐怖组织，支持北方联盟，在该地区的盟国建立基地，并监测局势。军队可以根据需要在未来的大规模行动中被派往阿富汗(以防止恐怖分子利用阿富汗作为避难所或训练场)。
Not at all. It was actually a mistake to attempt to “nation-build” in the first place…and spend two decades occupying the country.
The only reasonable approach would have been to invade the country to specifically root out AQ terrorist cells, support the Northern Alliance, and establish bases in allied nations in the region and monitor the situation. Troops could be sent in for future large-scale operations as needed (to prevent terrorist cells from using the nation as a haven or training ground).
不客气。事实上，一开始试图进行“国家建设”就是一个错误，美国还花了20年的时间占领这个国家。
唯一合理的方法是入侵伊拉克，专门铲除伊斯兰恐怖组织，支持北方联盟，在该地区的盟国建立基地，并监测局势。军队可以根据需要在未来的大规模行动中被派往阿富汗(以防止恐怖分子利用阿富汗作为避难所或训练场)。
US Politics ·
Afghanistan in general was a mistake for the US. Biden will take the blame for recent events, but there’s plenty of blame to go around for Bush Jr, Obama, & Trump as well in the way they’ve handled Afghanistan. Bush went in with the intention of getting Bin Laden, but without a clearly defined end goal or exit strategy. Obama stayed the course, neither committing enough troops to fully finish the job of wiping out the Taliban, but not exiting either, changing the mission strategy to a “rebuilding” one. A noble goal but again, not clearly defined. Trump began the exit of troops, stating (wrongly) that the job was done) and Biden merely continued the path of exit. It was pretty much a lose-lose issue for Biden. Finish the exit of soldiers, or remain stuck in there with insufficient troops to do anything. Certainly there was no option of sending more troops in.
From start to finish, the whole thing has been one massive clusterfuck.
总的来说，阿富汗战争对美国来说是一个错误。拜登将为最近的事件承担责任，但小布什、奥巴马和特朗普处理阿富汗问题的方式也有很多责任。布什的初衷是要抓住本·拉登，但没有明确的最终目标或撤退策略。奥巴马坚持了这一方针，既没有投入足够的兵力来完全完成消灭塔利班的工作，也没有撤军，而是将任务战略改为“重建”。一个崇高的目标，但同样没有明确定义。特朗普开始撤军，(错误地)宣称任务已经完成)，而拜登只是继续走撤军之路。对拜登来说，这几乎是一个双输的问题。要么完成士兵的撤离，要么留在那里，却没有足够的军队可以完成任何事情。当然，没有派遣更多军队进入阿富汗这个选项。
从开始到结束，整件事就是一堆乱麻。
Afghanistan in general was a mistake for the US. Biden will take the blame for recent events, but there’s plenty of blame to go around for Bush Jr, Obama, & Trump as well in the way they’ve handled Afghanistan. Bush went in with the intention of getting Bin Laden, but without a clearly defined end goal or exit strategy. Obama stayed the course, neither committing enough troops to fully finish the job of wiping out the Taliban, but not exiting either, changing the mission strategy to a “rebuilding” one. A noble goal but again, not clearly defined. Trump began the exit of troops, stating (wrongly) that the job was done) and Biden merely continued the path of exit. It was pretty much a lose-lose issue for Biden. Finish the exit of soldiers, or remain stuck in there with insufficient troops to do anything. Certainly there was no option of sending more troops in.
From start to finish, the whole thing has been one massive clusterfuck.
总的来说，阿富汗战争对美国来说是一个错误。拜登将为最近的事件承担责任，但小布什、奥巴马和特朗普处理阿富汗问题的方式也有很多责任。布什的初衷是要抓住本·拉登，但没有明确的最终目标或撤退策略。奥巴马坚持了这一方针，既没有投入足够的兵力来完全完成消灭塔利班的工作，也没有撤军，而是将任务战略改为“重建”。一个崇高的目标，但同样没有明确定义。特朗普开始撤军，(错误地)宣称任务已经完成)，而拜登只是继续走撤军之路。对拜登来说，这几乎是一个双输的问题。要么完成士兵的撤离，要么留在那里，却没有足够的军队可以完成任何事情。当然，没有派遣更多军队进入阿富汗这个选项。
从开始到结束，整件事就是一堆乱麻。
Trump Is A Criminal ·
No, it is not a mistake. How many American lives are we going to lose, how many trillions of dollars are we going to spend and how many years are we going to support a corrupt government?
不，这不是错误。我们还要失去多少美国人的生命，我们还要花费多少万亿美元，我们还要支持一个腐败的政府多少年?
No, it is not a mistake. How many American lives are we going to lose, how many trillions of dollars are we going to spend and how many years are we going to support a corrupt government?
不，这不是错误。我们还要失去多少美国人的生命，我们还要花费多少万亿美元，我们还要支持一个腐败的政府多少年?
Veterans Information & Military Matters (VI-MM) ·
I believe it was a mistake to stay one minute past achieving our obxtive. The minute that Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld allowed Osama Bin Laden to escape back into Pakistan, we should have gone home. Besides, it never was about Bin Laden, but rather it was always about Saddam and Iraq. Everyone who is honest knows that this is the truth.
我认为我们在达到目标后耽搁哪怕一分钟都是错误的。在布什、切尼和拉姆斯菲尔德允许奥萨马·本·拉登逃回巴基斯坦的那一刻，我们就应该回家了。此外，它从来都不是关于本拉登的，而是关于萨达姆和伊拉克的。每个诚实的人都知道这是事实。
I believe it was a mistake to stay one minute past achieving our obxtive. The minute that Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld allowed Osama Bin Laden to escape back into Pakistan, we should have gone home. Besides, it never was about Bin Laden, but rather it was always about Saddam and Iraq. Everyone who is honest knows that this is the truth.
我认为我们在达到目标后耽搁哪怕一分钟都是错误的。在布什、切尼和拉姆斯菲尔德允许奥萨马·本·拉登逃回巴基斯坦的那一刻，我们就应该回家了。此外，它从来都不是关于本拉登的，而是关于萨达姆和伊拉克的。每个诚实的人都知道这是事实。
Semper Fi
The US should have left as soon as they kicked that taliban out the first time and told Pakistan to keep their nose out of it and stopped giving them money when they didn't keep their nose out of Afghanistan. Maybe given India a lot of military aid to kick Pakistan's butt instead of pouring money into Afghanistan. What kind of intelligent agency's do we have if they couldn't figure out that the Afghan leadership were thieves, and were going to run with the money when things got hard?
美国应该在第一次把塔利班踢出去的时候就离开，并且告诉巴基斯坦别插手，在他们破坏承诺插手阿富汗的时候停止给他们钱。也许可以给印度大量的军事援助来教训一下巴基斯坦，而不是把钱砸到阿富汗。如果我们的情报机构不知道阿富汗领导人就是个小偷，当事情变得困难时，他们会带着钱跑路，那我们的情报机构还能干什么?
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
The US should have left as soon as they kicked that taliban out the first time and told Pakistan to keep their nose out of it and stopped giving them money when they didn't keep their nose out of Afghanistan. Maybe given India a lot of military aid to kick Pakistan's butt instead of pouring money into Afghanistan. What kind of intelligent agency's do we have if they couldn't figure out that the Afghan leadership were thieves, and were going to run with the money when things got hard?
美国应该在第一次把塔利班踢出去的时候就离开，并且告诉巴基斯坦别插手，在他们破坏承诺插手阿富汗的时候停止给他们钱。也许可以给印度大量的军事援助来教训一下巴基斯坦，而不是把钱砸到阿富汗。如果我们的情报机构不知道阿富汗领导人就是个小偷，当事情变得困难时，他们会带着钱跑路，那我们的情报机构还能干什么?
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
World History
Yes is the honest answer. The bigger mistake was going there in there first place. Anyone who knows anything about Afghan history will know invasion never ends well for them - just ask the Russians and the British.
“是”是最诚实的回答。更大的错误是一开始就不应该去那里。任何对阿富汗历史有所了解的人都知道，对他们来说，入侵永远不会有好结果——问问俄罗斯人和英国人就知道了。
Yes is the honest answer. The bigger mistake was going there in there first place. Anyone who knows anything about Afghan history will know invasion never ends well for them - just ask the Russians and the British.
“是”是最诚实的回答。更大的错误是一开始就不应该去那里。任何对阿富汗历史有所了解的人都知道，对他们来说，入侵永远不会有好结果——问问俄罗斯人和英国人就知道了。
Global Politics ·
For the purpose of national interest and security I personally think the US shouldn’t have physically gone into Afghanistan. Success was achieved by supplying arms to the Mujahideens to thwart the Russians in May’89 and send them scurrying home. That was the US moment and if influence was needed, efforts should be made to keep it that way. Use diplomacy to bring the Mujahideens to your side, keep supporting them with firearms which may even eliminate bin Laden from the equation and 911 along with it. Neglect only allowed the Talibans into power and natured bin Laden’s ideas and plans.
为了国家利益和安全，我个人认为美国不应该亲自进入阿富汗。在89年5月向圣战者提供武器挫败了俄国人并让他们匆忙撤退回家后取得了成功。那是美国的时刻，如果需要施加影响，就应该努力保持这种状态。用外交手段把圣战者拉到你的身边，继续用武器支持他们，甚至可能让本拉登和911一起消失。忽视这一点只会让塔利班掌握权力，并使本·拉登的想法和计划变得自然。
For the purpose of national interest and security I personally think the US shouldn’t have physically gone into Afghanistan. Success was achieved by supplying arms to the Mujahideens to thwart the Russians in May’89 and send them scurrying home. That was the US moment and if influence was needed, efforts should be made to keep it that way. Use diplomacy to bring the Mujahideens to your side, keep supporting them with firearms which may even eliminate bin Laden from the equation and 911 along with it. Neglect only allowed the Talibans into power and natured bin Laden’s ideas and plans.
为了国家利益和安全，我个人认为美国不应该亲自进入阿富汗。在89年5月向圣战者提供武器挫败了俄国人并让他们匆忙撤退回家后取得了成功。那是美国的时刻，如果需要施加影响，就应该努力保持这种状态。用外交手段把圣战者拉到你的身边，继续用武器支持他们，甚至可能让本拉登和911一起消失。忽视这一点只会让塔利班掌握权力，并使本·拉登的想法和计划变得自然。
Undeniably, the adventure into Afghanistan was basically an ego trip. After the anger of 911 subsided, the bruised US ego has to seek retribution. So do you consider the assassination of bin Laden a success any difference between Biden beating Trump at the polls? Terrorists and politicians are one of the same. It depends whose lens you’re viewing the situation.
不可否认的是，进入阿富汗的冒险基本上是一次满足自我的旅行。911事件的愤怒平息后，伤痕累累的美国自尊不得不寻求报复。那么，你认为成功暗杀本拉登与拜登在民意调查中击败特朗普有什么区别吗?恐怖分子和政客是同一类人。这取决于你从谁的角度看问题。
不可否认的是，进入阿富汗的冒险基本上是一次满足自我的旅行。911事件的愤怒平息后，伤痕累累的美国自尊不得不寻求报复。那么，你认为成功暗杀本拉登与拜登在民意调查中击败特朗普有什么区别吗?恐怖分子和政客是同一类人。这取决于你从谁的角度看问题。
So, what’s the latest ego soothing #tag for another failed mission?
There were articles that I’ve read during those 20 years of the US occupation that greed was partly the driving force. Natural resources, oil pipelines and terrorists training camps for Uighur dissidents of which the finished product will go exported exclusively to China to paint their towns red. These may only be conjectural but I wouldn’t place a bet on it against the possibility that it was a US plan all along.
You can go ahead and say whatever you like as I’ve said mine. After all freedom of speech exist, isn’t there?
那么，对于又一次失败的任务的最新自我安慰标签会是什么呢?
在美国占领的20年里，我读过一些文章，称贪婪是部分驱动力。自然资源、石油管道和恐怖分子为...持不同政见者提供的训练营，训练完成后将专门派往中国，把他们的城镇涂成红色。这些可能只是推测，但我不会打赌，这会不会一直都是美国的计划。
你想说什么就说什么，就像我说的一样。毕竟言论自由是存在的，不是吗?
There were articles that I’ve read during those 20 years of the US occupation that greed was partly the driving force. Natural resources, oil pipelines and terrorists training camps for Uighur dissidents of which the finished product will go exported exclusively to China to paint their towns red. These may only be conjectural but I wouldn’t place a bet on it against the possibility that it was a US plan all along.
You can go ahead and say whatever you like as I’ve said mine. After all freedom of speech exist, isn’t there?
那么，对于又一次失败的任务的最新自我安慰标签会是什么呢?
在美国占领的20年里，我读过一些文章，称贪婪是部分驱动力。自然资源、石油管道和恐怖分子为...持不同政见者提供的训练营，训练完成后将专门派往中国，把他们的城镇涂成红色。这些可能只是推测，但我不会打赌，这会不会一直都是美国的计划。
你想说什么就说什么，就像我说的一样。毕竟言论自由是存在的，不是吗?
Semper Fi
We should have pulled out the day after bin Laden was killed. Obama failed . Then big mouth Trump who bitched for years that Obama failed , had FOUR fucking years to pull us out, and he did not have the balls to do it in FOUR YEARS. Then Biden did what he should have done, he got us out.
HOWEVER, he listened to the wrong military and intelligence leaders and more brave Americans died.
But let me say one more thing.
我们应该在本·拉登被杀的第二天就撤出。奥巴马失败了。然后是大嘴特朗普，他多年来一直抱怨奥巴马失败了，结果他花了他妈4年时间要把我们救出来，但是他却没有勇气在4年时间里做到这一点。然后拜登做了他应该做的，他把我们救了出来。
然而，他听从了错误的军事和情报领导，更多勇敢的美国人牺牲了。
但让我再说一件事。
We should have pulled out the day after bin Laden was killed. Obama failed . Then big mouth Trump who bitched for years that Obama failed , had FOUR fucking years to pull us out, and he did not have the balls to do it in FOUR YEARS. Then Biden did what he should have done, he got us out.
HOWEVER, he listened to the wrong military and intelligence leaders and more brave Americans died.
But let me say one more thing.
我们应该在本·拉登被杀的第二天就撤出。奥巴马失败了。然后是大嘴特朗普，他多年来一直抱怨奥巴马失败了，结果他花了他妈4年时间要把我们救出来，但是他却没有勇气在4年时间里做到这一点。然后拜登做了他应该做的，他把我们救了出来。
然而，他听从了错误的军事和情报领导，更多勇敢的美国人牺牲了。
但让我再说一件事。
No matter what, the same thing would have happened. The VERY MINUTE that the Afghans would have seen (as they did), the US pullout, they would have rushed the embassy and later, the airport. The VERY MINUTE the Afghans would have seen our interpreters and others that assisted us “disappear” with their families, they would have known that the pullout was under way and they would have did exactly what they did by rushing the embassy and airport. NO ONE, NO ONE, NO ONE, foresaw the Afghan Army throwing down their arms and running like the cowards they are (most of them) and allowing the Taliban to take over the country in a week. However having said that, we have to remember that their coward president loaded a plane full of cars, cash, and family and fled the country, so what the hell was the military to think and do?
无论如何，同样的事情都会发生。一旦阿富汗人看到(他们确实看到了)美国撤军，他们就会冲到大使馆，然后冲到机场。一旦阿富汗人看到我们的翻译和其他协助我们的人员带着他们的家人“消失”，他们就会知道我们正在撤离，他们就会采取他们所做的行动，冲进大使馆和机场。没有人（重要的事情说三遍）会预见到阿富汗军队会扔下武器，(他们中的大多数人)像懦夫一样逃跑，让塔利班在一周内接管这个国家。尽管如此，我们必须记住，他们的懦夫总统乘着一架装满汽车、现金和家人的飞机逃离了这个国家，所以军队到底该怎么想和怎么做?
无论如何，同样的事情都会发生。一旦阿富汗人看到(他们确实看到了)美国撤军，他们就会冲到大使馆，然后冲到机场。一旦阿富汗人看到我们的翻译和其他协助我们的人员带着他们的家人“消失”，他们就会知道我们正在撤离，他们就会采取他们所做的行动，冲进大使馆和机场。没有人（重要的事情说三遍）会预见到阿富汗军队会扔下武器，(他们中的大多数人)像懦夫一样逃跑，让塔利班在一周内接管这个国家。尽管如此，我们必须记住，他们的懦夫总统乘着一架装满汽车、现金和家人的飞机逃离了这个国家，所以军队到底该怎么想和怎么做?
很赞 0
收藏