Hell yes. We had strategic assets there.

And keeping Bagram, at minimum, would have been a strategic asset for decades. As I said many times during the affair, we should have kept BAF, Jalalabad, and possibly a post in Herat to keep an eye on the Iranians. And NATO probably should have kept Marmal in Masi.

It doesn't mean we need to meddle in their domestic affairs. But we could continue to help the Afghan Army keep the lights on at fractional costs, keeping the TB out of the cities, so y'know, the girls can go to school. ANSF was fighting and dying for their country for the last several years- not us. When we pulled the rug, they smartly decided it was no longer worth it.

In Bagram, which in nearly the safest and most defensible part of the country, we would have been safe for generations. We could have kept dirtbags in jail, had a site for CT operations, an airbase for logistics, a listening post for China and a hundred other good reasons.

That this wasn't presented as an option by the Biden admin is an admission that they had good reason to avoid presenting it.

This is not to say I agreed with all prior major decisions. We should have transitioned to that posture as soon as it was clear in the early 2010's that our strategy to turn Afghanistan into a GCC was not going to work.