Trollminator wrote:
Perch wrote:
So you're saying the US shouldn't have destroyed the US military equipment it GAVE to Afghanistan because it was a gift and that would have been rude? In a country where we were never invited into in the first place. We went in and did what we wanted but we were restricted by "courtesy" not to destroy stuff of value because it was a gift?? Yes, you really ARE a simpleton.
^ reading disability
That might be too kind to explain it. Another arrogant id****. Apparently, he's saying that we SHOULD have done this:
"Hey Afghanistan, we're going to head out now, but best of luck against the Taliban. We trained and equipped you for 20 years, and we're kinda hoping that you can hold on for a while. OH, shoot, but we ARE going to have to destroy the following military equipment that we gave you before we leave [here you can insert a list that includes all small arms ammunition, or Blackhawks and A-29s, and/or anything in-between]. But again, best of luck with the Taliban. See ya."
And how many presidents would have directed that to happen? Zero (including, notably, the monumentally stupid/incompetent Trump).
And how much justifiable criticism would the US have gotten if we did that and the Afghan military (inevitably but perhaps even more quickly) collapsed? With the obvious argument being that it collapsed/collapsed faster BECAUSE we took away useful stuff.
Nice try. Give it rest.
