Afghanistan Has Fallen

[Fester]

32 minutes ago, 9S_ said:

Is this Joe Biden talking about HIS DECISION to withdraw troops last month or is this Donald Trump?

 Here is Joe Biden going against his own intelligence community assessments regarding the collapse of the Afghan government. In his own decision to go against the intelligence community. 
 

Here is Kamala Harris talking about Joe Bidens decision to withdraw from Afghanistan 

https://nypost.com/2021/04/25/harris-was-last-voice-in-the-room-for-afghanistan-withdrawal/

Barack Obama praising Joe Biden’s decision to withdraw as well as numerous politicians

It was Bidens decision to scrap Trumps Crisis Response Plan which would prevent another Benghazi and set up a response team to evacuate Americans during a crisis

https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/bidens-state-dept-halted-trump-era-crisis-response-plan/

While Trump did withdraw troops on the last day of his presidency:

-Zero nada nil provincial capitals fell to the Taliban

-Kabul didn’t fall to the Taliban

-Begram airbase wasn’t abandoned in the dead of night without notifying any of our allies

-Afghanistan had a a functioning Air Force

This happened under Joe Biden, under his watch, while he vacationed at Camp David:

$1 Billion of American military equipment in the hands of the Taliban 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/disturbing-footage-shows-extent-of-weapons-seized-by-taliban-after-bidens-disastrous-pullout

People getting executed in broad daylight in the streets of Kabul: both women and children. Reports of people being whipped with chains

https://nypost.com/2021/08/18/images-show-barbaric-reality-in-taliban-controlled-afghanistan/
 

And the residents response?

https://www.opindia.com/2021/08/joe-biden-interview-abc-news-afghan-withdrawal-falling-off-airplanes/

Poor buggers probably thought they were getting a free camel ride. RIP.

[Benroon]

[kerryd]

Oh I agree that Biden could have handled it better. 

And may have - if those intelligence estimates had of been accurate. Kind of wonder who provided those ? The same people who told Bush that Saddam had WMDs and was planning on using them ?

I was a bit shocked when I saw the Taliban making all those advances and the Afghan gov't was telling everyone that they were pulling back the troops to defend the major cities.

Then, even as those cities started to fall, American Intelligence estimated that it would take them (3-12) months to take Kabul.

5 days later they were in the city and the Afghan President had fled.

I think a whole lot of people were shocked at how quickly that happened, and it would have happened regardless of who was in office as the US did not have enough troops in the country to do anything.

Quite frankly, it would have still happened if Trump was in charge because he didn't want to be in Afghanistan at all. Which is why he made that deal with the Taliban.

And he certainly didn't want to be there for a 3rd decade. That's why he wanted out by the end of May as he didn't want to still be in the country on the 20th anniversary of 9/11.

Neither did Biden. 

(I am having digs at friends who are Intelligence Officers right now even though they aren't American and obviously had nothing to do with the reports given to Biden. It's still nice to remind them that "military intelligence" is an oxymoron - at least to everyone not in military intelligence.)

Maybe, if those Intelligence Estimates had of taken into account how quickly the Taliban were advancing and what little resistance was being shown by the Afghan Army (as in - no resistance at all) , then maybe there would have been a different outcome.

I kind of expected the Afghan Army would have put up some kind of fight, even if just for a few days, before suddenly switching sides in true Afghan fashion.

But that's one of those things that the Taliban had been able to arrange in the time since they signed the peace deal. The Americans were no longer allowed to "directly target" them and their troop numbers had been drastically reduced.
So the Taliban were able to move around the country easily and make secret deals with various city mayors, warlords and military commanders.

That's how they were able to move so quickly, with little or no opposition. Sheesh - they were able to send delegations to China and Qatar with no problems at all !

 

[mcambl61]

8 minutes ago, kerryd said:

The Americans were no longer allowed to "directly target" them

Please provide a factual reference for that particular statement. 

They were clearly warned that any moves against American citizens would result in a very serious response. 

[Fluke]

47 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

Please provide a factual reference for that particular statement. 

They were clearly warned that any moves against American citizens would result in a very serious response. 

You seem to have misunderstood his point

[mcambl61]

8 minutes ago, Fluke said:

You seem to have misunderstood his point

Not at all, if he is going to make these kinds of claims, then back it up. 

 

Instead it is just more orange man bad blather 

[longwood50]

9 hours ago, KaptainRob said:

Meanwhile, it's my belief that Washington power brokers, lobbyists, senators, and industrialist are the ones who decide policy and it's all based on lining their pockets.  The President being little more than a figurehead, and the same goes for most 'democratic' nations.

Whether Democratic, Socialistic, or Communistic, those who are wealthy control the levers of government.  There are those who believe the government is there to protect them from the evil power brokers.  No the truth is the power brokers use the government to enact policies that benefit them.  Eisenhower after WWII warned the USA about the "military industrial complex".  And consider, as a General he would be someone who was pro military but he saw the prospect that those that benefit from war would forever get the USA involved in wars.  Wars not fought for any noble purpose but rather to line the pockets of those who make the weapons of war. 

[Fluke]

1 hour ago, mcambl61 said:

Please provide a factual reference for that particular statement. 

They were clearly warned that any moves against American citizens would result in a very serious response. 

He meant that the U.S Army were no longer allowed to directly target the Taliban due the an agreement .

[kerryd]

The Doha Agreement.

F. The United States and its allies will refrain from the threat or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Afghanistan or intervening in its domestic affairs.
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-For-Bringing-Peace-to-Afghanistan-02.29.20.pdf

In other words, the US agreed to not to threaten them or use force against them.

Note - supposedly there are annexes to the agreement that are classified as Secret.

"Afghanistan: Background and U.S. Policy: In Brief Updated June 11, 2021
Although no provisions in the publicly available agreement address Taliban attacks on U.S. or Afghan forces, the Taliban reportedly committed not to attack U.S. forces in nonpublic annexes accompanying the accord.  Some lawmakers have raised questions about the executive branch’s decision to classify these annexes."
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R45122.pdf

Secret documents on Trump Afghanistan peace deal shared with Congress
The Trump administration is making available to Congress two secret documents related to the United States' peace agreement with the Taliban, part of the White House's effort to build support for ending the longest military conflict in American history.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/02/secret-documents-trump-afghanistan-119035

There are a number of articles mentioning the secret annexes but none I can find that detail what's in them.
 

[mcambl61]

11 minutes ago, Fluke said:

He meant that the U.S Army were no longer allowed to directly target the Taliban due the an agreement .

And, as I said, there was also a clear understanding that no American citizens were to ever be harmed, and if that was to happen, there would be a severe retaliation. 

 

Obviously, the Taliban has no fear of the obiden disaster 

[mcambl61]

8 minutes ago, kerryd said:

The Doha Agreement.

F. The United States and its allies will refrain from the threat or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Afghanistan or intervening in its domestic affairs.
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-For-Bringing-Peace-to-Afghanistan-02.29.20.pdf

In other words, the US agreed to not to threaten them or use force against them.

Note - supposedly there are annexes to the agreement that are classified as Secret.

"Afghanistan: Background and U.S. Policy: In Brief Updated June 11, 2021
Although no provisions in the publicly available agreement address Taliban attacks on U.S. or Afghan forces, the Taliban reportedly committed not to attack U.S. forces in nonpublic annexes accompanying the accord.  Some lawmakers have raised questions about the executive branch’s decision to classify these annexes."
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R45122.pdf

Secret documents on Trump Afghanistan peace deal shared with Congress
The Trump administration is making available to Congress two secret documents related to the United States' peace agreement with the Taliban, part of the White House's effort to build support for ending the longest military conflict in American history.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/02/secret-documents-trump-afghanistan-119035

There are a number of articles mentioning the secret annexes but none I can find that detail what's in them.
 

Nothing in that verbiage says anything about not using military force against any aggressive moves by the Taliban. 

 

Nothing 

[Poolie]

What about against Afghan civilians?

There are reports of American soldiers using tear gas on Afghan people at the airport. It's on my phone so I cant get it on here.

Anyway, be it Trump or Biden, it's in the Yanks lap and its shameful.

Edited August 19, 2021 by Poolie

[Fluke]

1 hour ago, Poolie said:

What about against Afghan civilians?

There are reports of American soldiers using tear gas on Afghan people at the airport. It's on my phone so I cant get it on here.

Anyway, be it Trump or Biden, it's in the Yanks lap and its shameful.

I disagree .

Its the people of Afghanistan who are to blame .

They let the Taliban walk in and take over with no resistance .

They only have themselves to blame  

[Fester]

4 hours ago, kerryd said:

Oh I agree that Biden could have handled it better. 

And may have - if those intelligence estimates had of been accurate. Kind of wonder who provided those ? The same people who told Bush that Saddam had WMDs and was planning on using them ?

I was a bit shocked when I saw the Taliban making all those advances and the Afghan gov't was telling everyone that they were pulling back the troops to defend the major cities.

Then, even as those cities started to fall, American Intelligence estimated that it would take them (3-12) months to take Kabul.

5 days later they were in the city and the Afghan President had fled.

I think a whole lot of people were shocked at how quickly that happened, and it would have happened regardless of who was in office as the US did not have enough troops in the country to do anything.

Quite frankly, it would have still happened if Trump was in charge because he didn't want to be in Afghanistan at all. Which is why he made that deal with the Taliban.

And he certainly didn't want to be there for a 3rd decade. That's why he wanted out by the end of May as he didn't want to still be in the country on the 20th anniversary of 9/11.

Neither did Biden. 

(I am having digs at friends who are Intelligence Officers right now even though they aren't American and obviously had nothing to do with the reports given to Biden. It's still nice to remind them that "military intelligence" is an oxymoron - at least to everyone not in military intelligence.)

Maybe, if those Intelligence Estimates had of taken into account how quickly the Taliban were advancing and what little resistance was being shown by the Afghan Army (as in - no resistance at all) , then maybe there would have been a different outcome.

I kind of expected the Afghan Army would have put up some kind of fight, even if just for a few days, before suddenly switching sides in true Afghan fashion.

But that's one of those things that the Taliban had been able to arrange in the time since they signed the peace deal. The Americans were no longer allowed to "directly target" them and their troop numbers had been drastically reduced.
So the Taliban were able to move around the country easily and make secret deals with various city mayors, warlords and military commanders.

That's how they were able to move so quickly, with little or no opposition. Sheesh - they were able to send delegations to China and Qatar with no problems at all !

 

Blame game 101

[PBS]

9 hours ago, mcambl61 said:

Nothing in that verbiage says anything about not using military force against any aggressive moves by the Taliban. 

Nothing 

 

Kirby acknowledged U.S. airstrikes alone would not be enough to hold Taliban fighters at bay.  

"Nobody is suggesting, nobody has suggested here at the Pentagon that airstrikes are a panacea that will solve all the problems, all of the conditions on the ground," 

https://www.voanews.com/us-afghanistan-troop-withdrawal/pentagon-us-airstrikes-afghanistan-having-effect-taliban

 

[Rain]

10 hours ago, longwood50 said:

Whether Democratic, Socialistic, or Communistic, those who are wealthy control the levers of government.  There are those who believe the government is there to protect them from the evil power brokers.  No the truth is the power brokers use the government to enact policies that benefit them.  Eisenhower after WWII warned the USA about the "military industrial complex".  And consider, as a General he would be someone who was pro military but he saw the prospect that those that benefit from war would forever get the USA involved in wars.  Wars not fought for any noble purpose but rather to line the pockets of those who make the weapons of war. 

All the while, your beloved Dwight engaged the American military and intelligence services in a record number of covert and overt activities of a nasty nature that the world had never seen......and subsequently, every succeeding President has seen fit to join the club of interfering with foreign sovereigns in one manner or another. I trust you're not slobbering too romantically over an old warhorse who conveniently, and hypocritically, spewed these infamous tomes. 

[RWD]

On 8/17/2021 at 11:04 AM, 9S_ said:

When Bush, Obama and Trump left the White House, Afghanistan had a functioning democracy. In a country that suffered under brutalizations of Taliban, only under Trump, Bush and Obama did girls could go to school, you had girl mayors, girl lawmakers, girl lawyers, girl judges and politicians. 
 

All of this wiped out in less than 1 year under one man, Joe Biden. 
 

All of the provincial capitals fell under his watch. Kabul fell while he was on vacation. All those photos of people escaping the Taliban happened yesterday, August 16 2021. Who is in the White House right now?

Technically no one since Joe is out camping. But he is the US President now who slept as Afghanistan fell

Technically, used aptly to your comment, is that the country didn't fall at all.  Just one puppet regime being replaced by a group who have basically been true to their religous based politics for over 30 years.

 

[dmacarelli]

19 hours ago, mcambl61 said:

You are delusional, trump would have never been stupid enough to vacate Bagram air base and the air support until everyone was able to get out. 

Stop the ridiculous overreaction and vacuous conjecture. 

Same ideas applied to Syria, correct? I seem to remember Trump throwing our Kurd allies under the bus, like they were gutter trash. 

[dmacarelli]

On 8/19/2021 at 6:52 AM, JamesE said:

I'm old enough to remember Trump's speech from way back in June of this year where he took credit that the withdrawal was proceeding and that Biden "couldn't stop the process" and couldn't do anything to stop the withdrawal. You should learn the difference between rescinding an executive order and overturning a negotiated agreement.

Have a look at: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-sign-historic-deal-taliban-beginning-end-us/story?id=69287465

and:

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-wellington-ohio-rally-speech-transcript-first-rally-since-leaving-office at the 22:25 mark.

"I started the process. All the troops are coming back home. They couldn’t stop the process.
21 years is enough. Don’t we think? 21 years. They couldn’t stop the process. They wanted to, but it was very tough to stop the process when other things…yeah. Thank you."

All Biden could have done differently, was to keep the Bagram base open and secure for another month or so, while they provided cover for, and evacuated all of the Afghans who helped with the war effort. They deserved that. And I say that as a centrist democrat. That was a mistake. The withdrawal was not. 

[dmacarelli]

2 hours ago, RWD said:

Technically, used aptly to your comment, is that the country didn't fall at all.  Just one puppet regime being replaced by a group who have basically been true to their religous based politics for over 30 years.

That is amusing. Those clowns would not know a Koran, if it hit them up the side of the head. All the religion part is, is simply a cover for their gangs. They deal in heroin and meth, they kidnap and rape young girls at will, they steal, maim and engage in serial killing as a hobby. There is no religion or spirituality in their game. All of that is simply a cover for their gang banging activities. 

They are now also making huge money by manufacturing and selling crystal meth. Again, no principals, just alot of fake puritanism. However, that supposed ideology does not stop the kidnapping and raping of 13 year old girls. Quite an example of their "faith".

The imposition of Sharia law is simply a way for those men, with little to no self esteem, to keep the women as repressed as possible. Nothing religious about anything in their game. It is all a big show. A rather heinous one, at that. 

Edited August 20, 2021 by dmacarelli

[gummy]

5 minutes ago, dmacarelli said:

That is amusing. Those clowns would not know a Koran, if it hit them up the side of the head. All the religion part is, is simply a cover for their gangs. They deal in heroin and meth, they kidnap and rape young girls at will, they steal, maim and engage in serial killing as a hobby. There is no religion or spirituality in their game. All of that is simply a cover for their gang banging activities. 

They are now also making huge money by manufacturing and selling crystal meth. Again, no principals, just alot of fake puritanism. However, that supposed ideology does not stop the kidnapping and raping of 13 year old girls. Quite an example of their "faith".

The imposition of Sharia law is simply a way for those men, with little to no self esteem, to keep the women as repressed as possible. Nothing religious about anything in their game. It is all a big show. A rather heinous one, at that. 

So could we summarise your post then to simply say perhaps you don't like them ? 

[dmacarelli]

14 hours ago, longwood50 said:

Whether Democratic, Socialistic, or Communistic, those who are wealthy control the levers of government.  There are those who believe the government is there to protect them from the evil power brokers.  No the truth is the power brokers use the government to enact policies that benefit them.  Eisenhower after WWII warned the USA about the "military industrial complex".  And consider, as a General he would be someone who was pro military but he saw the prospect that those that benefit from war would forever get the USA involved in wars.  Wars not fought for any noble purpose but rather to line the pockets of those who make the weapons of war. 

There is no doubt, that the last "righteous war" the US was involved in, was WWII. Since then, just one stupid mistake, after another, and it may not be a coincidence, that all wars fought by the US of any consequence, have been lost since 1945. Every last one. Except maybe Iraq. But that is a big maybe, and we certainly did not fight that war on our own. If anything the overseas adventures the US engages in, only seem to embolden the terrorist super freaks. 

It is truly possible to consider the notion that the US is incapable of winning a real war, despite the massive size of their arsenal, and the top level of the weapons and equipment. Too much hubris? Too much bloat? 

Since 1945, the United States has very rarely achieved meaningful victory. The United States has fought five major wars — Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, Iraq, Afghanistan — and only the Gulf War in 1991 can really be classified as a clear success. But, can it be? When you look at the aftermath, it is a major question mark. Is Iraq a stable nation? Can it get by without major foreign assistance? Are it's institutions functional?

 

 

 

[gummy]

5 minutes ago, dmacarelli said:

There is no doubt, that the last "righteous war" the US was involved in, was WWII. Since then, just one stupid mistake, after another, and it may not be a coincidence, that all wars fought by the US of any consequence, have been lost since 1945. Every last one. Except maybe Iraq. But that is a big maybe, and we certainly did not fight that war on our own. If anything the overseas adventures the US engages in, only seem to embolden the terrorist super freaks. 

It is truly possible to consider the notion that the US is incapable of winning a real war, despite the massive size of their arsenal, and the top level of the weapons and equipment. Too much hubris? Too much bloat? 

Since 1945, the United States has very rarely achieved meaningful victory. The United States has fought five major wars — Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, Iraq, Afghanistan — and only the Gulf War in 1991 can really be classified as a clear success. But, can it be? When you look at the aftermath, it is a major question mark. Is Iraq a stable nation? Can it get by without major foreign assistance? Are it's institutions functional?

They have illegally invaded or interfered in so many nations that by their own judgmental standards, then then the US military could qualify as a terrorist group themselves. Perhaps it is about  time the Chinese became the worlds policemen after all. Perhaps Afghanistan will be the start of that process.

[Fluke]

15 minutes ago, dmacarelli said:

All Biden could have done differently, was to keep the Bagram base open and secure for another month or so, while they provided cover for, and evacuated all of the Afghans who helped with the war effort. They deserved that. And I say that as a centrist democrat. That was a mistake. The withdrawal was not. 

He should have listened to what his intelligence agencies told him about there being the huge possibility that the Afghan Gov call fall very rapidly and that the Taliban would take over , then he could have made arrangements for a timely evacuation .

   But no, he dismissed what the intelligence agencies told him as being "lies" and continued with his belief that the Afghan Government was there to stay .

   His whole strategy was that nothing will change and there will be no need for an evacuation .

  He made a huge costly error of judgement , even after being given relevant information showing the Afghan Gov was in a precarious situation .

   But nevermind  hey, that was five days ago 

[Poolie]

5 minutes ago, Fluke said:

He should have listened to what his intelligence agencies told him about there being the huge possibility that the Afghan Gov call fall very rapidly and that the Taliban would take over , then he could have made arrangements for a timely evacuation .

   But no, he dismissed what the intelligence agencies told him as being "lies" and continued with his belief that the Afghan Government was there to stay .

   His whole strategy was that nothing will change and there will be no need for an evacuation .

  He made a huge costly error of judgement , even after being given relevant information showing the Afghan Gov was in a precarious situation .

   But nevermind  hey, that was five days ago 

The Intelligence Agencies did tell him lies. They told him they were fit for purpose.