Afghanistan

[Robert Roaldi]

How timely and appropriate!

Yes, let’s compare two past non-events with two real explosions that just killed 200 people, 13 Americans among them.

Fair enough, I suppose. Are this explosion and deaths any worse than the previous 20 years' worth (or longer if we go back to the pre-US era)? Why single out this atrocity.

By the estimates in the podcast I posted a link to the other day, there have been about 45,000 deaths in the Iraq forces, almost as many as US soldiers in Vietnam. And then there are the civilian deaths. There are probably lots of people pissed off about those.

This thread is now in danger of going back and forth on this issue, with outrage over the last couple of weeks demanding attention and others pointing to longer term issues. Lurching from mess to mess may not be a good way to enact foreign policy.

If the presence in Afghanistan was to prevent future terrorist threat, then these recent events are an indication that this was not particularly well executed, if things could break down so easily and so quickly.

[Robert Roaldi]

If you lost a family member on 9-11 like I did, you wouldn't be so sanguine about it not happening again.  We spent twenty years in Afghanistan to keep the terrorist's from doing it again.  So now, even before we pull out, that country is back with Taliban, and other terrorist groups like ISIS and Al Khaida, stronger and more well-armed then ever before with modern weapons we left.  Let's hope they'll be so busy killing each other, they don't have time to export their violence and 7th century concepts again to our country or others.  Frankly, I'm not too hopeful. 

I can't imagine what the speeches here are going to be like next month on the twentieth anniversary of 9-11 when it will be as nothing has changed.  What will the speakers have to say about that?  How will the listeners react? It's going to be very disheartening.

Well, I don't think he's being sanguine about people dying, don't overplay that because lots of innocent Iraqis died too and they had relatives. That won't get us anywhere.

As for suppressing a future terrorist threat, I would argue that the US didn't do a very good job, given how rapidly the place is deteriorating now. As often happens in US foreign policy, the horse they back turns out to be so corrupt that the local population doesn't respect it. That's probably not a good way to go about it. Might be worth trying something different next time.

Not many months ago, I remember you being fully in favour of pulling out when Trump was in charge. What did you think was going to happen?

[Alan Klein]

Fair enough, I suppose. Are this explosion and deaths any worse than the previous 20 years' worth (or longer if we go back to the pre-US era)? Why single out this atrocity.

By the estimates in the podcast I posted a link to the other day, there have been about 45,000 deaths in the Iraq forces, almost as many as US soldiers in Vietnam. And then there are the civilian deaths. There are probably lots of people pissed off about those.

This thread is now in danger of going back and forth on this issue, with outrage over the last couple of weeks demanding attention and others pointing to longer term issues. Lurching from mess to mess may not be a good way to enact foreign policy.

If the presence in Afghanistan was to prevent future terrorist threat, then these recent events are an indication that this was not particularly well executed, if things could break down so easily and so quickly.

The atrocities are bad from an American standpoint becuase so many Americans got killed when there have been none in over a year.  The numbers of dead Afghans are huge as well. I'm afraid the planes leaving are sitting ducks and I fear we're going to see worse assaults in the next few days.

I thought we should get out of there just as many other Americans also believed we were done there.  But now, in retrospect, leaving a few thousand troops may have been better to keep a lid on things.  I believe the US military recommended that.  To go back to what was there before 9-11 is heartbreaking after all the sacrifices made by America and so many other countries.  We also could use a base to project power in that area and protect us from bad guys there who want to hurt the Western world.  Without Afghanistan, there's a huge gap.  I feel we're in a modern version of the Crusades.   

[Alan Klein]

Well, I don't think he's being sanguine about people dying, don't overplay that because lots of innocent Iraqis died too and they had relatives. That won't get us anywhere.

As for suppressing a future terrorist threat, I would argue that the US didn't do a very good job, given how rapidly the place is deteriorating now. As often happens in US foreign policy, the horse they back turns out to be so corrupt that the local population doesn't respect it. That's probably not a good way to go about it. Might be worth trying something different next time.

Not many months ago, I remember you being fully in favour of pulling out when Trump was in charge. What did you think was going to happen?

I was wrong.  The US military was right when they said we should leave troops there.  Also, the way we got out, like shutting down Bagram Air base and removing planes and troops there, was the wrong strategy.  That's on Biden. I think he was rushing to get it done so he could get a photo-op on 9-11 next month showing what a great leader he is by having no troops in Afghanistan.  He miscalculated.  He should have reversed Trump's decision as he reversed other decisions of Trump's like the XL pipeline, the southern border, and the Paris climate agreement.  His military was telling him too.  Unfortunately, they weren't advising me and I thought things were better than they really were.  But Biden had secret assessments from his CIA that things were worse than we were being told.  For example, who knew the Taliban had Al Khaida in with them already?  My theory on getting out was to advise the Taliban that we'd be back if they again allowed terrorists to use the country's territory to attack the west again.  We can still do that.  If the Taliban is smart, they just may keep their noses clean.  How women are treated there isn't our business.  It's their culture and they have to change it.   Saudi Arabia isn't much different yet they're our friend.  Trump also screwed up by keeping the Afghan government out of the negotiations with the Taliban and treated them as a non-entity.   He was stupid too. 

[TechTalk]

P.S. but I do appreciate your switching to one-liners

When you're trying to communicate with someone, it's usually easier for them to understand if you do so on their level.

[Alan Klein]

The awful thing is Biden doesn't think he made a mistake.  He blames Trump and others for all bad things that happened. The fact there are scores killed already and the entire twenty-year Afghan war enterprise has gone down the drain has no impact on him. 

[TechTalk]

an attack here in our country.

How timely and appropriate!

Yes, let’s compare two past non-events with two real explosions that just killed 200 people, 13 Americans among them.

Please try to keep up with the conversation. I was responding to the future likelihood of "an attack here in our country" specifically. You're so eager to go on the attack to score political points, that you're letting your focus wander.

[Alan Klein]

Please try to keep up with the conversation. I was responding to the likelihood of "an attack here in our country" specifically. You're so eager to go on the attack to score political points, that you're letting your focus wander.

Al Khaida being in with the Taliban again does not bode well especially for European countries as they're closer.  They aren't protected by two oceans like America is.  I suspect they'll get hit first.  It's like the year 2000 again.  I predict the TSA will be checking bags more thoroughly again at the airport. 

[TechTalk]

Luckily, your failures are not lethal.

No they're not. Embrace of a fundamentalist antigovernment ideology can be however. Like yours for instance.

[TechTalk]

Your attempts to be funny are just as funny as Biden’s attempts to be President.

I was attempting to be serious... and Biden is the president.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... and Biden is the president.

You sure?

I don’t think even he is sure. I hear he is instructed what to say and do, no?

[PeterAit]

Food for thought.

[Manoli]

I don’t think even he is sure. I hear he is instructed what to say and do, no?

Wasn’t that the same for Reagan ?
And history has looked upon Reagan very favourably.

[Alan Klein]

Food for thought.

The Kurds had and have an army and a territory to protect themselves.  They negotiated with both Turkey and Syria and made deals with them after we left.  Life goes on with the Kurds.  We made no guarantees to the Kurds to defend them against Turkey a NATO country and long-time ally of ours. We Americans and the Kurds made common cause to fight and destroy a common enemy - ISIS in Syria.  After that, we both went our ways.

It's different with individual Afghans who supported us.  They have no way to protect themselves without us.  We made personal guarantees to them that should things go south, as they have, we would help them to emigrate so they wouldn't be killed.  We've failed in that promise to a large degree, which will be shameful, if the Taliban kills them.

On a related matter, didn't we learn anything about nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan to realize we should keep out of that business in Kurdistan and elsewhere.  It's why we're in this mess now in Afghanistan.  To have repeated that nation-building mistake with the Kurds would have been foolish.

[Alan Klein]

Wasn’t that the same for Reagan ?
And history has looked upon Reagan very favourably.

Biden has a lot of catching up to do to match Reagan help destroying the Soviet Union.  So far in the short seven months since his inauguration, Biden's created an immigration crisis on our southern border, made us dependent on Middle East oil again,  and lost Afghanistan to the 9/11 terrorists giving courage to the Chinese and other adversaries to stir up trouble for us in the Pacific and elsewhere.  Our allies in NATO and elsewhere are more furious at him with his incompetence than they ever were with Trump's nastiness.

[Chris Kern]

I hear [Biden] is instructed what to say and do, no?

Apparently not with regard to the policy regarding military withdrawal from Afghanistan.

In a decision that was Trumpian in its preference for instinct over expert advice, Biden, who throughout the Obama Administration reportedly wanted to end the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, decided to proceed with Trump's withdrawal policy.  He, like Trump, acted on strongly-held conviction as well as a political calculation that public opinion favored withdrawal.  (Obama reportedly had felt the same at first, but as he learned more about the policy options and their implications, his decided not to act on his initial instinct.)

It probably will be quite some time before enough information becomes public knowledge to know for certain, but it seems likely the people in the government who were to become responsible for implementing the withdrawal were aware, and warned Biden and the appropriate political appointees of his Administration, that there was likely to be a loss of confidence within the Afghan national government and army once the United States began a noncombatant evacuation operation, even if they failed to anticipate that the Afghan army would collapse as quickly as it did.  They also presumably figured there would be a hectic, difficult-to-manage scramble by civilians to leave the country once the U.S. military began its own withdrawal.

Biden, like Trump, made the policy decision.  Other appointive and career officials were responsible for its implementation.  I don't think anyone who wasn't privy to the latter process can know at this juncture whether there was a way to have carried out the implementation of the withdrawal that would have resulted in less chaos.  It seems to me that once the policy was set by the previous Administration and reiterated (with minor modifications) by this one, the options available to the military and diplomatic officials charged with carrying it out were rather limited.

[Alan Klein]

Apparently not with regard to the policy regarding military withdrawal from Afghanistan.

In a decision that was Trumpian in its preference for instinct over expert advice, Biden, who throughout the Obama Administration reportedly wanted to end the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, decided to proceed with Trump's withdrawal policy.  He, like Trump, acted on strongly-held conviction as well as a political calculation that public opinion favored withdrawal.  (Obama reportedly had felt the same at first, but as he learned more about the policy options and their implications, his decided not to act on his initial instinct.)

It probably will be quite some time before enough information becomes public knowledge to know for certain, but it seems likely the people in the government who were to become responsible for implementing the withdrawal were aware, and warned Biden and the appropriate political appointees of his Administration, that there was likely to be a loss of confidence within the Afghan national government and army once the United States began a noncombatant evacuation operation, even if they failed to anticipate that the Afghan army would collapse as quickly as it did.  They also presumably figured there would be a hectic, difficult-to-manage scramble by civilians to leave the country once the U.S. military began its own withdrawal.

Biden, like Trump, made the policy decision.  Other appointive and career officials were responsible for its implementation.  I don't think anyone who wasn't privy to the latter process can know at this juncture whether there was a way to have carried out the implementation of the withdrawal that would have resulted in less chaos.  It seems to me that once the policy was set by the previous Administration and reiterated (with minor modifications) by this one, the options available to the military and diplomatic officials charged with carrying it out were rather limited.

Blaming Trump when he was no longer president is not appropriate.  You don't know if Trump would have changed his mind. At a minimum, Trump claims he would have pulled out differently.  There's no way for anyone to know what would have happened if Trump was re-elected.   

Biden is responsible as he's president and commander-in-chief.  He did not have to complete Trump's pullout anymore than he continued with Trump's Mexico policy for migrants or the Paris Climate accord. Biden has said over and over, even while Afghanistan was collapsing to the Taliban and Al Khaida and ISIS, that he's not changing and is ending our involvement there.  However, it turns out, good or bad, he can't blame others.  He owns it.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... a fundamentalist antigovernment ideology... Like yours for instance.

Gee, according to you, I am just one post away from becoming an ISIS lieutenant 

[Manoli]

Biden … lost Afghanistan to the 9/11 terrorists giving courage to the Chinese and other adversaries to stir up trouble for us in the Pacific and elsewhere.  Our allies in NATO and elsewhere are more furious at him with his incompetence than they ever were with Trump's nastiness.

“ The Agreement was supported by China, Russia and Pakistan[3] and unanimously endorsed by the UN Security Council,[4] but did not involve the government of Afghanistan. “   [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doha_Agreement_(2020)]

In signing the surrender document, America gave China free reign with their ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ and an open invitation to the vast mineral reserves of Afghanistan.  I’m wracking my brain trying to remember who signed it. Biden could have stopped or renegotiated it - he didn’t.

A monumental foreign policy train wreck in a shameful period of US political incontinence.

How women are treated there isn't our business.  It's their culture and they have to change it.   

20 years on, women and children now inducted into western ways and education, many never having known , let alone been subjected to such a regressive, medieval and repressive culture, now in fear for their lives and that’s your response ?

[Manoli]

Olivia Troye, a former White House national security staffer during the Trump admin., sent this message as an email on behalf of the Republican Accountability Project:  [/so far unverified]

My heart breaks right now for the people of Afghanistan, and for our allies who are trapped in the country and surrounded by the Taliban. This was a disaster that never had to happen, and I hope they are evacuated quickly and safely.

I'm seeing Republicans claim that Trump would have handled the situation far better—and I know for a fact that's just not true. Until 2020, I was a national security staffer for the Trump administration, until I quit after seeing just how incompetent and cruel he was. Afghanistan was no exception.

I sat in cabinet meetings about getting Americans and our Afghan allies out of the country. In them, Stephen Miller would peddle his racist hysteria. He and his enablers across the government undermined anyone who worked on solving the issues in getting special immigrant visas (SIVs) for our Afghan allies by undermining the system at Homeland Security and the State Department.

I tracked this issue personally in my role at the White House. I met with many refugee advocate organizations who pleaded for help in getting U.S. allies through the process.

But we got nowhere because Trump and Miller had watchdogs in place at the Justice Department, Homeland Security, State and other agencies that made an already cumbersome SIV process even more challenging. The system wouldn’t budge, no matter how much we argued in National Security Council meetings. The Pentagon weighed in, saying we needed to get these allies through the process. Mattis and others sent memos trying to help. We all knew the urgency, but we were blocked at every turn.

Good people within the Trump Administration tried to counter Miller's obstruction, but their fear of retaliation was palpable. Numerous closed door meetings were held, strategizing how to navigate this issue.

Trump had four years to develop a plan. We could have used that time to lay the groundwork to evacuate our Afghan allies. They were the lifelines for many of us who spent time in Afghanistan.

They’d been waiting a long time, all the while under the threat of death at the hands of the Taliban. The process slowed to a trickle for reviews and “other priorities.” Ultimately, they came to a halt.

I have one thing to say to Trump's defenders who are making blanket statements and pushing false narratives about Afghanistan: please, just stop. Some of you were actively involved in making it harder to get our Afghan allies to safety. Your comments are uninformed and hurtful. And we see right through you.

I’m grateful for everyone now advocating the urgency of getting our allies out of Afghanistan ASAP and those who are doing everything they can to help. This is a matter of national security.

Most importantly, it’s the least we can do for these individuals. The world is watching.

Olivia Troye
Director, Republican Accountability Project"