Biden stands by decision to withdraw troops, says no leaving without ‘chaos ensuing’

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, 9S_ said:

Wherever the terrorists are. Most likely around the Afghanistan-Pakistan border again. 

That was why I asked.

If you think the Taliban are all sitting in a Western-style HQ then you're in la-la land, like the self-styled "subject matter expert" here.

There is no target - that's the whole problem, and always has been.

1 hour ago, 9S_ said:

Along with their main HQ in Afghanistan. And it sent a very good message

What "main HQ in Afghanistan"?

They didn't have one!

Name any senior commanders that were killed.

Any at all.

(to save you wasting your time, none were)

The only "message" it sent was confirmation that the Coalition couldn't do anything to stop the Taliban except make a lot of noise.

1 hour ago, 9S_ said:

They only attacked in force when Biden was in office in mid-April

Why would they "attack in force" before, when there was no need to?

They simply did what every similar successful resistance group has done before them and slowly secured their territory with minimal opposition.

Why on earth would they have been so stupid as to launch an "attack in force" when they didn't have to?

1 hour ago, 9S_ said:

And looked what happened to Biden’s execution of withdrawal.

Well, as above, feel free to explain how you think it should have been done.

Hopefully you'll do better than the SME's cunning plan to process everyone in Kabul then fly them by helicopter to Bagram to fly out in the same aircraft currently using Kabul, then for the coalition troops to sneak out with no-one noticing although there'd be twice as many as there are now - God alone knows, you couldn't do any worse ...

[Fester]

33 minutes ago, Poolie said:

Ahem.

Yes. See my post 42176 above.

[Stonker]

8 minutes ago, gavi said:

When the Soviets left Afghanistan, they had a general there (by comparison, now, it is still not clear who is the senior responsible in the airport, what is his seniority, etc from the USA side).

That general had leadership (he was the last person to physically leave the country, for example).

The puppet government left behind by the USSR was winning many battles, and collapsed after years, and only after and because the USSR itself collapsed.

The Soviets left with parades, with prior announcements, with a step by step plan, etc.... not like a thieve in the night, not telling anyone, even their allies.

The Soviets destroyed what could not be used by the puppet government, and kept intelligence to understand who was on their side and who wasn't. The USA left weapons behind, and even their own archives so that they do not even know who can be trusted as an Afghanistan who worked for the USA/its allies and who is just trying to infiltrate, having had casualties in their families due to drone bombardments, and hence not being friendly when in the West.

Now, all the allies of the USA know that they cant be trusted in similar situations and, at the next invasion, it will be more difficult to get local support given the level of betrayal operated on their Afghan supporters.

A huge could have been done better, and the USA of the past, would have done it well.

There are very clear historical examples of how to withdraw relatively successfully.

If someone is interested in more details about the Soviet withdrawal, for comparison to the US one, PM me and I will share some info.

Spot on.

I hate to say the Soviets got it right, but as far as their withdrawal goes, they did, 100%.

Did the US coalition learn anything from it?

Not a thing.

[Stonker]

42 minutes ago, 9S_ said:

Easy anything Biden did, do not do

Thanks - you've lived down to all my expectations

[King Cotton]

32 minutes ago, gavi said:

When the Soviets left Afghanistan, they had a general there (by comparison, now, it is still not clear who is the senior responsible in the airport, what is his seniority, etc from the USA side).

That general had leadership (he was the last person to physically leave the country, for example).

The puppet government left behind by the USSR was winning many battles, and collapsed after years, and only after and because the USSR itself collapsed.

The Soviets left with parades, with prior announcements, with a step by step plan, etc.... not like a thieve in the night, not telling anyone, even their allies.

The Soviets destroyed what could not be used by the puppet government, and kept intelligence to understand who was on their side and who wasn't. The USA left weapons behind, and even their own archives so that they do not even know who can be trusted as an Afghanistan who worked for the USA/its allies and who is just trying to infiltrate, having had casualties in their families due to drone bombardments, and hence not being friendly when in the West.

Now, all the allies of the USA know that they cant be trusted in similar situations and, at the next invasion, it will be more difficult to get local support given the level of betrayal operated on their Afghan supporters.

A huge could have been done better, and the USA of the past, would have done it well.

There are very clear historical examples of how to withdraw relatively successfully.

If someone is interested in more details about the Soviet withdrawal, for comparison to the US one, PM me and I will share some info.

Thanks! An excellent post there and good reading too, on that seldom-briefed USSR take on events.

[9S_]

18 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Thanks - you've lived down to all my expectations

Biden did that 

[9S_]

29 minutes ago, Stonker said:

If you think the Taliban are all sitting in a Western-style HQ then you're in la-la land, like the self-styled "subject matter expert" here.

There is no target - that's the whole problem, and always has been.

I never said it was a western style HQ you did.
 

And it was known there were a series of tunnels there akin to Tora Bora to smuggle supplies from their allies in Pakistan and to stage attacks against American forces. 

30 minutes ago, Stonker said:

What "main HQ in Afghanistan"?

They didn't have one!

Name any senior commanders that were killed.

Any at all.

(to save you wasting your time, none were)

Yes they did and it was destroyed using the MOAB. It destroyed their tunnel network from caves to underground tunnels. 

And not just deaths from MOAB but targeted assassination against ISIS and Iranian leaders. 
 

33 minutes ago, Stonker said:

The only "message" it sent was confirmation that the Coalition couldn't do anything to stop the Taliban except make a lot of noise.

And the message was very clear. Why didn’t the Taliban attack when Trump was president? Why did they wait until Joe Biden became president because they knew not to screw around when Trump was in office. They were so desperate they agreed to peace negotiations with Trump. And after that started peace negotiations with the Afghan government. And if the Taliban screws around they can expect “Fire and Fury” as promised from Trump. 

 

36 minutes ago, Stonker said:

2 hours ago, 9S_ said:

 

Why would they "attack in force" before, when there was no need to?

They simply did what every similar successful resistance group has done before them and slowly secured their territory with minimal opposition.

Why on earth would they have been so stupid as to launch an "attack in force" when they didn't have to?

Simple. They heard Joe Bidens speech about withdrawing the forces and they knew he was weak. So weak that the Taliban launched nearly 5000 attacks in the majority of provinces in Afghanistan along with their allies in Al Qaida and ISIL in mid-April 2021. Now these attacks go against the peace deal that was under Trump. Biden ignored that part and pushed the date of withdrawal to the symbolic 9/11 20th anniversary death. 

They did not do it slowly. They took over the country in 11 days all under Joe Bidens watch. 

40 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Well, as above, feel free to explain how you think it should have been done.

 

Easy whatever Joe Biden did, do not do.
 

 

[Alavan]

2 hours ago, 9S_ said:

Yes they did and it was destroyed using the MOAB. It destroyed their tunnel network from caves to underground tunnels. 

And not just deaths from MOAB but targeted assassination against ISIS and Iranian leaders.

2 hours ago, 9S_ said:

They must have used a lot of bombs there, looking at the surface of that border.
What would shiite Iranian leaders be doing in a soenite stronghold? They hate and kill each other.

 

[Guest]

Just watched the Pentagon briefing Rear Admiral Kirby stuttered more than Joe Biden on to Joe Biden it appears the Taliban are dictating the score to him which doesn't surprise me knowing what a weak individual he is he didn't even have the integrity to answer any questions last night.

It will be interesting to know what Joe Biden has promised the Taliban? I've heard unconfirmed reports that Hunter Biden is trying to negotiate a free trade deal for the heroin with the Taliban but its still unconfirmed.

The next few days are critical I'm hoping all the Coalition Troops get out safely and all I can say this would never have happened under Donald J Trump. 

[9S_]

7 minutes ago, Alavan said:

What would shiite Iranian leaders be doing in a soenite stronghold? They hate and kill each other.

Trump did order the MOAB to be dropped on ISIS-K HQ in Afghanistan. Trump also ordered for the assassination of ISIS leader Al Baghdadi. He also ordered for the drone strike against the Iranian Qasem Soleimani. 
 

All attackers served as deterrents. And it worked. It brought the Taliban to negotiation table pursing peace with the US and later with the Afghan government. It was a conditional peace deal that if the Taliban broke the peace (which they did in mid-April 2021 with 5,000+ attacks) the US would respond (which Biden didn’t and caused the Taliban to know that Biden is weak). 

[Stonker]

2 hours ago, 9S_ said:

And it was known there were a series of tunnels there akin to Tora Bora to smuggle supplies from their allies in Pakistan and to stage attacks against American forces. 

Really?

They must have been pretty long tunnels from Pakistan, as it was in Achin district, in the Mamand Valley, Nangarhar province - near the border, but not that near, and no tunnels to move supplies.

 

It was also an attack on Daesh / IS, not Taliban, so the Taliban had no reason to lose any sleep about it as they weren't Afghans.

It was an IS base - nothing to do with the Taliban.

I really do suggest you do a bit of homework before making these sort of absurd comments.

2 hours ago, 9S_ said:

And not just deaths from MOAB but targeted assassination against ISIS and Iranian leaders

WTF are you talking about?

What "Iranian leaders" in Afghanistan?

You've been watching too much Mission Impossible.

2 hours ago, 9S_ said:

And the message was very clear. Why didn’t the Taliban attack when Trump was president? Why did they wait until Joe Biden became president because they knew not to screw around when Trump was in office. They were so desperate they agreed to peace negotiations with Trump. And after that started peace negotiations with the Afghan government. And if the Taliban screws around they can expect “Fire and Fury” as promised from Trump.

"Fire and Fury"?

I really do suggest you do some reading before coming out with this nonsense.

Even the district police chief, Major Khair Mohammad Sapai, said he was disappointed by the MOAB as it had so little effect.

 

"... so desperate they agreed to peace negotiations with Trump" ???

 

I think you've misunderstood who was in charge and who was asking for peace!  

 

This was a re-run of the British "peace negotiations" with the Mahdi in Basrah - it wasn't the Taliban asking for peace, but the coalition saying  "stop attacking us, leave us alone, let us leave in peace and we'll let you do what you want".

Literally.

You really do need to do some homework here and to see what was negotiated.

2 hours ago, 9S_ said:

Simple. They heard Joe Bidens speech about withdrawing the forces and they knew he was weak. So weak that the Taliban launched nearly 5000 attacks in the majority of provinces in Afghanistan along with their allies in Al Qaida and ISIL in mid-April 2021.

How could you be more weak than the peace negotiations, beyond just throwing down your weapons and flying out?

 

FFS, read what the peace negotiations  were about.

 

Do you think the Taliban had been doing nothing from 2016 to 2020?

They'd made hundreds of attacks every year.

In 2019, before Trump stopped peace talks, there'd been more than 8,000 civilian casualties and for the first time ever most had been caused by US airstrikes, nearly 50% more than in 2018.

The Taliban didn't need to attack anyone as the US were doing it for them, alienating the little support the coalition had left.

2 hours ago, 9S_ said:

Now these attacks go against the peace deal that was under Trump

Trump stopped peace talks in September - there was no more "peace deal".

2 hours ago, 9S_ said:

They did not do it slowly. They took over the country in 11 days all under Joe Bidens watch. 

Well, there was no opposition.

They'd been held back by airstrikes before, such as at Kunduz in 2015, but that option had gone.

 

As I asked, and you've failed to give any sort of constructive answer, what could have been done differently given the hand he was dealt and the events of 2020?

 

It was a disaster, chaos, etc, etc, but the disaster was twenty years in the making.

[Stonker]

22 minutes ago, 9S_ said:

Trump did order the MOAB to be dropped on ISIS-K HQ in Afghanistan. Trump also ordered for the assassination of ISIS leader Al Baghdadi. He also ordered for the drone strike against the Iranian Qasem Soleimani. 
 

All attackers served as deterrents. And it worked. It brought the Taliban to negotiation table pursing peace with the US and later with the Afghan government. It was a conditional peace deal that if the Taliban broke the peace (which they did in mid-April 2021 with 5,000+ attacks) the US would respond (which Biden didn’t and caused the Taliban to know that Biden is weak). 

You've totally misunderstood the peace deal. It was the Americans who wanted an end to the fighting, not the Taliban.

The peace deal also ended in September 2020, when Trump walked away - by April 2021 there was no peace deal to break.

Whatever you've been reading, it's wrong.

 

Edit: you seem to genuinely believe that the Taliban were frightened into a peace deal with the US.

You couldn't be more wrong.

 

The peace deal centred around the Taliban guaranteeing that the coalition wouldn't be subjected to any more attacks by IS or anyone from Pakistan or outside Afghanistan, basically the Taliban giving the US their protection, in return for the US leaving by May and not carrying out any operations.

 

In old fashioned terms, it would have been called a surrender - by the US, not the Taliban .

 

It's genuinely hard to believe you've got this so wrong, but so much said here by the SMEs is laughably wrong it shouldn't be such a surprise.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Stonker

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, 9S_ said:

Trump did order the MOAB to be dropped on ISIS-K HQ in Afghanistan. Trump also ordered for the assassination of ISIS leader Al Baghdadi. He also ordered for the drone strike against the Iranian Qasem Soleimani.

That's what I liked about Trump he was proactive and preemptive in The Middle East Al Baghdadi the mass murderer The Washington Post called "an austere scholar" Trump even rubbed it in by bringing Conan The MWD (military working dog) to the White House to show the would be Jihadis that he was crying whilst being chased by a dog.

And Qusam Solemani Iran's top military strategist the drone strike was a masterstroke that was the difference between the Trump and Biden administrations Trump dictated terms to the terrorist and the terrorist dictate terms to Biden.

 

[9S_]

34 minutes ago, Stonker said:

It was also an attack on Daesh / IS, not Taliban, so the Taliban had no reason to lose any sleep about it as they weren't Afghans.

It was an IS base - nothing to do with the Taliban.

I really do suggest you do a bit of homework before making these sort of absurd comments.

Maybe you’re the one who needs to do that because as I said in my comment on 42005

13 hours ago,  Stonker said: 

Military operations by the US ceased in 2014. Maybe you didn't notice.

And we still had a military presence. Trump unleashed the US 2nd most powerful bomb against ISIS in Afghanistan obliterating their main-HQ in Afghanistan. That’s a strong deterrent to not stir stuff up while Trump was in office. And then Biden came along…

 

Please refrain from putting words in my mouth and please do a better job of following the threads

34 minutes ago, Stonker said:

FFS, read what the peace negotiations  were about.

Do you think the Taliban had been doing nothing from 2016 to 2020?

They'd made hundreds of attacks every year.

In 2019, before Trump stopped peace talks, there'd been more than 8,000 civilian casualties and for the first time ever most had been caused by US airstrikes, nearly 50% more than in 2018.

The Taliban didn't need to attack anyone as the US were doing it for them, alienating the little support the coalition had left.

I did and under the peace deal there’s a clause where the US will never recognize the Islamic Emirates and that the US will withdraw so long as the conditions are met, namely: the Taliban will not engage the US or it’s allies. If they did the peace deal is over. 
 

The Taliban agreed and pursued peace negotiations with the Afghan government. In fact the Taliban kept up their agreement until Joe Biden became president where according to the UN report Source the Taliban launched 5,000 attacks with more than 20 allies including ISIS and Al Qaida against the Afghan democratically elected government. Which happened under Joe Bidens presidency and with no meaningful response from Joe. 

34 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Trump stopped peace talks in September - there was no more "peace deal".

Oh really!?! Then what is Biden referring to when he falsely claims his hands were tied?

34 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Well, there was no opposition.

Because of Joe Biden

 

34 minutes ago, Stonker said:

They'd been held back by airstrikes before, such as at Kunduz in 2015, but that option had gone

Because of Joe Biden

 

34 minutes ago, Stonker said:

As I asked, and you've failed to give any sort of constructive answer, what could have been done differently given the hand he was dealt and the events of 2020?

2020 was actually fine and perfect. In 2020 zero provincial capitals fell under Trumps presidency. There was a peace deal with the Taliban and they knew if they reneged on it they would suffer consequences. Even the Taliban entered peace negotiations with the Afghan government. 

 

34 minutes ago, Stonker said:

It was a disaster, chaos, etc, etc, but the disaster was twenty years in the making.

No it wasn’t. It’s a disaster TOTAL DISASTER under Joe Biden. 
 

 

WTF are you talking about?

What "Iranian leaders" in Afghanistan?

You've been watching too much Mission Impossible.
 

Al Baghdadi of ISIS and Qasem Soleimani of Iran

 

Edited August 24, 2021 by 9S_
Context added

[Fester]

From the news it sounds like Biden is sticking to the 31st. He's even worse than I thought he'd be. 

[9S_]

30 minutes ago, Stonker said:

You couldn't be more wrong.

The peace deal centred around the Taliban guaranteeing that the coalition wouldn't be subjected to any more attacks by IS or anyone from Pakistan or outside Afghanistan, basically the Taliban giving the US their protection, in return for the US leaving by May and not carrying out any operations.

In old fashioned terms, it would have been called a surrender - by the US, not the Taliban .

What you’re seeing now under Joe Biden is ABSOLUTE and TOTAL SURRENDER. 
 

Under Joe Bidens disastrous policy the Taliban control more territory than they did when we first invaded in 2001. Is that not an absolute surrender?

 

Under Joe Bidens disastrous policy the Taliban are more equipped than they were when we first invaded in 2001. That sounds like an absolute surrender, doesn’t it?

 

Not only that under Joe Biden, we are now at the mercy of the Taliban regarding evacuations and Joe doesn’t even know what to do. The Taliban all hold the cards because Joe is incompetent. It was Barack Obama who warned that Joe has the ability to F anything and everything up. It was Robert Gates who warned us that Joe Biden has been wrong on every single foreign policy decision for the past 40 years. 
 

We are now seeing the consequences of Joe Bidens failed leadership. The fall of Afghanistan will hurt the US, it’s allies, the region in decades to come. 

[JackIsAGoodBoy]

It is futile to argue with Democrats. They think themselves so superior and all so wise. Now they are coming up with all kinds of excuses of this total failure called Joe Biden.

They cannot even admit their failing policies when moving like a bunch of refugees to Florida or Texas from New York or California because of those failing policies. Oh no, they will vote for the exact same shitty policies in the new states too. That is why you have now failing cities there too because of these locust people.

Edited August 24, 2021 by JackIsAGoodBoy

[JTCarius]

Afghanistan.

Not only the source of 90% of the world's illicit heroin exports but the opium poppy can also be used to make morphine, codeine, and other euphorigenics like... dihydromorphine, dihydrocodeine, ethyl morphine, benzylemorphine, desomorphine, oxycodone, hydrocodone, dipropanoylmorphine, diacetyldihydromorphine, nicomorphine, desomorphine, hydromorphinol and much, much more......

I wonder why China was so quick to stick their noses up the Taliban's butts and recognize them as the ruling authority?

Oh and the 1 trillion dollars worth of rare earth minerals: Iron, copper, gold, nickel, cobalt and .........lithium.
Yes, lithium.A LOT of it. The lithium that makes your cellphone batteries work and will power the coming electric car revolution.....

I hope they keep their hands off the world's second-largest opium production site, right on their footsteps...the golden triangle.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 24, 2021 by JTCarius

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, 9S_ said:

 

WTF are you talking about?

What "Iranian leaders" in Afghanistan?

You've been watching too much Mission Impossible.
 

Al Baghdadi of ISIS and Qasem Soleimani of Iran

 

It would be easier if you were able to use the quote function, but I think this shows the limits of your grasp of reality and the facts pretty adequately.

[Stonker]

55 minutes ago, Fester said:

From the news it sounds like Biden is sticking to the 31st. He's even worse than I thought he'd be. 

I think it'd be more accurate to say that the Taliban is sticking to the 31st.

 

Since they can close access to the airport any time they want, what would be the point in staying longer?

 

Why pretend there's any practical alternative?

 

At least sticking with the 31st means that the Taliban are likely to do the same, while saying now that you're going to go back on the deal, again, could provoke them into restricting access earlier just to show they can.

 

Whoever's to blame, and I've given up trying to explain facts and that choosing the most fragrant dog turd still leaves you with a dog turd,  the Taliban hold the whip hand as they have since Day 1, and the US gave up any chance of leaving with dignity and honour intact long ago.

[bushav8r]

8 hours ago, gavi said:

 

Now, all the allies of the USA know that they cant be trusted in similar situations and, at the next invasion, it will be more difficult to get local support given the level of betrayal operated on their Afghan supporters.

 

Taiwan comes to mind.

[9S_]

4 hours ago, Stonker said:

It would be easier if you were able to use the quote function, but I think this shows the limits of your grasp of reality and the facts pretty adequately.

Ad hominem 

usually used by people who have nothing else of value to add to debate. 
 

Please keep this civil and avoid any personal insults. This isn’t the other forum so do better next time. I have not insulted you and so I expect you to do the same to me and others on this forum. You can disagree with me and others but please do not denigrate others just because they disagree with you. 
 

Hilariously you actually describe Joe Biden! From saying allies do not disagree to the reality all of NATO disagrees what Joe did to some even calling it the “Biggest debacle since NATOs founding,” to Joe’s claim that the airport is safe and secure but the reality on the ground is totally different and absurdly unsafe. From Joe saying come to the airport but many Americans and allies who have tried it either get beaten, chain whipped and have their documents confiscated.   
 

Even some in the media and other politicians question if Biden knows what is really going on regarding his policy

Edited August 24, 2021 by 9S_
Context added

[9S_]

3 hours ago, Stonker said:

Whoever's to blame, and I've given up trying to explain facts and that choosing the most fragrant dog turd still leaves you with a dog turd

Pretty sure it’s Joe Biden. And everyone from NATO allies,

to British Parliaments vote of contempt 

to various US polls showing a plurality of voters blame Joe Biden rather than Trump. 51% blame Biden while only 38% blame Trump

to the MSM who everyday call out Joe Bidens lies 

to stranded Americans left behind in Afghanistan 

to former Obama, Bush and Trump administration officials blame Joe Biden for this mess. For example David Axelrod blaming Joe Biden. It’s a TOTAL DISASTER

Edited August 24, 2021 by 9S_
Typos

[Stonker]

50 minutes ago, 9S_ said:

Ad hominem 

usually used by people who have nothing else of value to add to debate. 
 

Please keep this civil and avoid any personal insults. This isn’t the other forum so do better next time. I have not insulted you and so I expect you to do the same to me and others on this forum. You can disagree with me and others but please do not denigrate others just because they disagree with you. 

 

It was two simple statements of fact - no denigration involved in anything you quoted, nor any possibility of any.

1. It would have been easier had you been able to use the quote function, which for whatever reason you weren't.

2. I asked you "what "Iranian leaders" in Afghanistan" and you replied "Al Baghdadi of ISIS and Qasem Soleimani of Iran", so that does "show the limits of your grasp of reality and the facts pretty adequately."

[9S_]

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

1. It would have been easier had you been able to use the quote function, which for whatever reason you weren't.

What does it matter if I use quotes or not. It’s clearly your statement not mine. 

 

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

2. I asked you "what "Iranian leaders" in Afghanistan" and you replied "Al Baghdadi of ISIS and Qasem Soleimani of Iran", so that does "show the limits of your grasp of reality and the facts pretty adequately."

Clearly you should know I never said Iranian leaders in Afghanistan you said that. It should also be obvious who I was referring to and it should have been clear they are not in Afghanistan for which I never said Iranian leader in Afghanistan, you said that. 
 

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

statements of fact

Since we’re dealing with facts

It is a fact that Trump left office in January 2021 and Biden assumed office in January 2021. Remember these dates because they will become important later on. 

It is a fact that Joe Biden decided to renege on Trumps peace deal and withdraw troops (he didn’t respond to the the Talibans 5,000 attacks in mid-April and he changed the date). Here is the UN Report: https://www.un.org/press/en/2021/sc14596.doc.htm

It is a fact that Afghanistan fell under Joe Bidens watch. Former Obama officials, such as David Axelrod (source: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/16/david_axelrod_you_can_not_defend_whats_happening_in_afghanistan_this_has_been_a_disaster.html#! ) blame Joe Biden calling it a “TOTAL DISASTER”, former Bush and Trump officials also blame Biden. 

It is a fact that the British Parliament voted in contempt of Joe Biden, not Donald Trump, and NATO calls Joe Bidens withdrawal the “Biggest Debacle since NATOs inception” you can see it here:

It is also a fact that a majority of voters blame Joe Biden as seen in Rasmussen, USA Today, Dailywire polls 

Rasmussen Poll: https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/israel_the_middle_east/afghanistan_voters_blame_biden_not_trump_for_taliban_takeover

Now it is also a fact that democrat politicians also do not believe in Joe Biden in whatever he says: