nortex97 said:

---

Task force smith and our unpreparedness for the Korean War I'd put in a separate category vs. the revolution in military affairs happening now with drones/unmanned combat aircraft etc.

We can deliver military force without nuclear ICBM's or relying on massive bases across the globe looking forward today. Your analogy I think breaks down for that reason.

---

You still need some forward presence but you don't need to be every where.


If we didn't have Lajes AB for refueling during Operation Nickel Grass, the Israelis would have been hosed.

nortex97 said:

---

Task force smith and our unpreparedness for the Korean War I'd put in a separate category vs. the revolution in military affairs happening now with drones/unmanned combat aircraft etc.

We can deliver military force without nuclear ICBM's or relying on massive bases across the globe looking forward today. Your analogy I think breaks down for that reason.

---

I made no analogy. I stated the facts of what the US strategy was post-WWII, and how it failed. You can argue that technology today makes it more likely to be successful. I simply just stated the reality of what has happened in the past when the US started to think that long range bombing capabilities was enough, and that we didn't need a forward presence.

What we had was Portugal willing to let us use it. We had plenty of other bases in Europe that would have worked if those countries were on board.

Bagram isn't that strategic. It's incredibly isolated. Glad none of our guys are still stuck in that ****hole. Even if we controlled it by force we'd be tied to Pakistan to let us resupply it. If we are supplying purely by air, that's a very expensive base.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

Say they give it to us, the military there would be dealing with daily rocket and mortar attacks.

---

This is not the Biden admin. If Trump is going to take Bagram he has a plan for both acquisition and ongoing security.

---

lol, there is no plan for acquisition or ongoing security, not sure what color the sky is in your world.

Ag CPA said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

Say they give it to us, the military there would be dealing with daily rocket and mortar attacks.

---

This is not the Biden admin. If Trump is going to take Bagram he has a plan for both acquisition and ongoing security.

---

lol, there is no plan for acquisition or ongoing security, not sure what color the sky is in your world.

---

Sure thing. Random idea that just popped into his head.

I can assure there has been a plan in place since before the election.

Why do people still think Trump is an idiot? But it's okay if you don't want to believe me, sit back and be proven wrong.

I don't think he's an idiot, I just don't think our foreign policy 'team' has anything resembling a good plan for this. We are busy paying the Taliban; this wouldn't be used to bomb anything in Afghanistan (or, for that matter, China.).

What 'power projection' could be accomplished by parking a Patriot battery and some bombers/fighters with 10K US soldiers/airmen at Bagram? How would it provide any actionable 'intelligence?'

This is just the dumbest thing. There's nothing to do there for us. What if Pakistan says no? Or even India through the tiny Wakhan Corridor? pic.twitter.com/eB4vRxfNGA

— Kaitain 🇺🇸 (@Kaitain_US) September 21, 2025

I strongly recommend Sarah Adams as a follow for folks to realize just how pathetic and misguided our entire strategy this year has been in Afghanistan. I certainly don't believe I suffer from TDS but I am willing to call out ineptitude and failure when I see it, regardless of the political party/leader involved. Oh btw, as we are continuing to pay the Taliban they are holding this guy hostage still;

SAVE HABIBI! @POTUS @JDVance @NCTCKent pic.twitter.com/l7lrM2pXOA

— Queens Ride (@queensride24) September 21, 2025

And mocking us in front of our embassy:

Bomb the U.S. Embassy building! https://t.co/cxcgbWMgWy

— Sarah Adams (@TPASarah) September 21, 2025

I figured it'd be more like Baylor with no dancing.

My 10mo BoG at Kandahar (2011-2012) had 115 rockets hit us. So much fun!

Exactly. There's no need to subject Americans to that experience there. Oh, and apparently we are otherwise focusing on our own homeland?

The Pentagon informed European diplomats that the US was shifting to a "homeland defense" priority, per Reuters.

— Faytuks Network (@FaytuksNetwork) September 20, 2025

Incoherence, thy name is Afghanistan policy.

Monroe Doctrine 2.0. Love that.

Patriot25 said:

---

Why? Is it worth all this rhetoric?

pic.twitter.com/IwSyuGrEy3

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) September 20, 2025

---

Trump should stay out.

The people of Afghanistan have chose Islamic Sharia Law.

We can't save them.

If we do get it back I want my same room back

More in the camp of blow it up. Should have been done the first time. Stay out of Afghanistan -- even the Mongols ended up forsaking it. The British Empire came to loathe it. The Soviets would come to regret going in in '79. Its doubtful if even the Reich could tame it.

titan said:

---

More in the camp of blow it up. Should have been done the first time. Stay out of Afghanistan -- even the Mongols ended up forsaking it. The British Empire came to loathe it. The Soviets would come to regret going in in '79. Its doubtful if even the Reich could tame it.

---

It's a money pit. Stay out.

Vepp said:

---

agAngeldad said:

---

We should have never let Bagram go. It provides a central point for intelligence, location etc that was a huge asset.

---

Spot on. It's easily worth a few american soldiers a year or 2 to keep a foothold in the middle east.

---

Go sign up GI Joe so you can be first in line for the "It's Easily Worth It" sweepstakes.

pagerman @ work said:

---

Vepp said:

---

agAngeldad said:

---

We should have never let Bagram go. It provides a central point for intelligence, location etc that was a huge asset.

---

Spot on. It's easily worth a few american soldiers a year or 2 to keep a foothold in the middle east.

---

Go sign up GI Joe so you can be first in line for the "It's Easily Worth It" sweepstakes.

---

Done my time sir....

Is there another location that can be used for what I assume is mostly surveillance purposes ?

Seems like our troops may be needed more urgently at home.

halfastros81 said:

---

Is there another location that can be used for what I assume is mostly surveillance purposes ?

---

Yes, from orbit, and the NSA data center.

agforlife97 said:

---

Seems like our troops may be needed more urgently at home.

---

Someone is going to have to stay at Bagram to watch all the leftist and gender non-conformers Trump is planning to send there for reeducation.

Thats the only plan that makes sense.

I wouldn't trade a single right wing American for the lives of every man, woman, and child in Afghanistan

It's in the middle of a strategic area near China and Iran. So yes, it shouldn't have ever been given up by Biden in the first place.

MattAg84 said:

---

It's in the middle of a strategic area near China and Iran. So yes, it shouldn't have ever been given up by Biden in the first place.

---

Since it was, blow it up and move on with life

Trump said we would go back if things went south back when he first negotiated the US withdrawal.

Exact words: "I really believe the Taliban wants to do something to show that we're not all wasting time," President Trump said in Washington hours after the agreement had been signed. "If bad things happen, we'll go back."

This shouldn't shock anyone.

MattAg84 said:

---

It's in the middle of a strategic area near China and Iran. So yes, it shouldn't have ever been given up by Biden in the first place.

---

There's nothing strategically important to us there. Zip, zero. Constantinople shouldn't have been allowed to fall either, but we can't fix all wrongs in history with our military.

Even when we were there in 2013 Afghanistan had basically no role in plans for conflict with Iran. A single airbase wouldn't be useful against China either, especially when we're dependent on their ally Pakistan to even access it.

GAC06 said:

---

Even when we were there in 2013 Afghanistan had basically no role in plans for conflict with Iran. A single airbase wouldn't be useful against China either, especially when we're dependent on their ally Pakistan to even access it.

---

Will be interesting if a war with China is averted because Pakistani told us we couldn't fly an airplane over their most sovereign territory.

Good thing they gave a green light when it was time to get OBL.

A few helos in a covert SEAL raid isn't the same as transports and tankers flying up and down the boulevard

Sure but you need on the ground assets too. The question was is there a place that checks the same boxes as Bagram but not surrounded by people that just want you to totally fail.

This. They fall for it everytime.

Most peaceful president ever, but they believe he is going to nuke the world.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

Say they give it to us, the military there would be dealing with daily rocket and mortar attacks.

---

This is not the Biden admin. If Trump is going to take Bagram he has a plan for both acquisition and ongoing security.

It's funny that people still fall for "Trump battling vocal diarrhea and obviously has no real plan" only to find out he had a well designed plan and will likely lead to full success.

---

I agree this is not the Biden admin but you may not have served in Afghanistan or tried to secure a base camp. Bagram would most definitely be attacked as stated and not sure the American public wants to lose one more American in that God forsaken country.

Trump has shown a strong aversion to sending troops into harms way unless he has a good plan and reason.

So again, this isn't Biden. And it's not some Warhawk POTUS beholden to the military industrial complex.

And whilst I appreciate those who have put their boots on the ground, sacrificed their time, blood and in too many cases their lives, our POTUS is charged with a much higher level of decision making and responsibility.

I have no idea if Trump is dead set on Bagram or if it is just him trolling it out there. Doesnt matter. I am confident that if he decides Bagram is worth it it will be the correct decision.

What I tend to dismiss are the folks who sit at a keyboard and type out the details of the war plan in their mind and why it won't work. If I wanted that talk, o would go sit with a bunch of old timers telling me about the great strategy of Normandy and why the Tet Offensive was so devastating.

Again, if Trump has a plan it is almost certainly a bold, beautiful one and it's also certain he hasn't consulted with anyone on f16 and for good reason.