I'm baffled that they made this big of a mistake, but if you operate from the assumption that ANA does not fold, you have no reason to pull out your embassy personnel or civilians in general.
I'm baffled that they made this big of a mistake, but if you operate from the assumption that ANA does not fold, you have no reason to pull out your embassy personnel or civilians in general.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/afghan-government-could-collaps...
> This is from June 23, with the US absolutely expecting the Taliban to win, just for it to take a little while longer.
That's from 3/4 of a month ago and "revised their previously more optimistic estimates" based the events that occurred during the previous week. They still gave the government six more months when it didn't even last one. I think that's broadly consistent with the GP.
I agree with the GP, a lot of the US government statements I've seen recently about the Afghan military situation just sound clueless and dumb. Like someone who's still taking paper estimates at face value in the most simplistic way, when actual events clearly contradict them (e.g. our numbers show the Afghan military is 3x the size of the Taliban, they can still win!). Also the talk of a negotiated settlement just makes them sound like they have their heads up their asses. Why the fuck would anyone make concessions when they're winning so easily? It makes no sense.
Also, in retrospect, symbolic deadlines should be considered a giant a red flag signaling a bad plan.