[rce]

The Pentagon had been warning for months that evacuating the embassy would be a logistical challenge (it's one of the largest in the world) and it would be better to start sooner than later. The State Department was worried about the signal that would send - i.e. that the U.S. did not trust that the Afghanistan military could provide adequate security.

[wonderwonder]

Would hate to insult the Afghanistan military on the way out the door as we condemned them to a fight we were 100% confident they would lose. To risk US lives on not wanting to be insulting is unforgivable.

[flerchin]

They didn't fight.

[wonderwonder]

Exactly, so we gained nothing and lost so much more. Why would they fight? We are publicly stating we expect the Taliban to win in a few months. Why fight and die so that the people abandoning you can have an easy time of it? If I was an Afghan soldier I can already see the writing on the wall. Just blend into the crowd and welcome the regime change, its all you can do.

[xyzzy21]

The equivalent of:

"Someone might call customer support and that would be costly; let's not have customer support at all so avoid that cost altogether!"

[weimerica]

I suppose that’s the best metaphor for the war.

Political decisions creating military problems.

[dragonwriter]

The requirements military action serves are always political. As with software, yes, things would be easier if the requirements were ignored for the sake of implementation, but that misses the whole point of the activity.