Calls For Milley and Austin To Resign Immediately

[the other mike]

The US Soldiers in the area where the target or enemy happens to be are the ONES who provide Air support with THE EXACT COORDINATES for the enemy to get punished. So, NO, they don't say shit like "wtf are we doing here?" you dumb ass. They are Soldiers On A Mission!! INSTEAD, They Cheer and give each other high fives.
And they give those coordinates usually when they get embushed by the very savage scumbags you are defending if they happen to be in a siuation where they cannot take them out themselves. Maybe you should apply to become another "Jihad John", you would have found your mission in life.
Anyway, like we're supposed to believe the crap that flows out of that stupid bimbo's trap. She repeated the same garbage 6 times in 15 seconds time, probably to maximize the phony drama.
"the mother of all bombs"?!?!? that's not even the terminology the Pentagon uses. Besides to the guy on the receiving end, all of US bombs are the mothers of all bombs.
It is standard that to drop one or even few of 500 pounds bombs if they believe it's a cave network they are dealing with.

Dude.... one of my best friend's is a retired Marine sergeant who did 4 tours In Afghanistan including three by parachute.......I know all about what goes on over there dick face

 

[lantern2814]

All of these retired admirals and generals are hardcore Trumpists, and I bet many are admirers of the disgraced Michael Flynn.

These dudes are wingnut central. Fuck 'em, they can keep their mouth shut instead of trying to emulate Trump and destroy our democracy from within. Have fun at your next Trump rally boys.

Party over country. Maybe a traitorous piece of filth like you should keep your mouth shut. Enjoy those videos of men hanging from choppers supplied to the Taliban by Xiden. Enjoy those Americans hostages. Enjoy the fact that YOU voted for this and own it.

 

[San Souci]

The ones we have "serving us" today are too much of notorious Cowards, to remotely have so much as an ounce of honor in them, which would entice them to consider such route.
...They, instead "suicide" anybody who is not afraid to blow the whistle on the crimes, they commit in secret against those they "promised" to serve.

Actually ,they use the Gestapo FBI to ruin anyone who calls 'em out.

 

[beagle9]

Now $85 BILLION...

Was watching a segment of skynews Australia, and the military equipment debacle seemed to be answered in a rational way.

I think it said that any military equipment sold or given to the Afghan military was already downgraded or only had the technology value equivalent to the theater, otherwise it was only at a level of technology to be used in theater between the Afghan army who is against the Taliban militants or militia's.

It was said that the Americans dismantled some planes at the airport before they fell into the Talibans hands for possible future use.

So most of the equipment there was issued or sold to the Afghan army it suggested, and therefore we didn't just leave bases full of equipment of a highly sensitive value.

 

[beagle9]

Party over country. Maybe a traitorous piece of filth like you should keep your mouth shut. Enjoy those videos of men hanging from choppers supplied to the Taliban by Xiden. Enjoy those Americans hostages. Enjoy the fact that YOU voted for this and own it.

Said earlier that the man hanging from the copter was actually alive and we'll, and that he was actually hanging in a harness while waving as it flew by. I need a fact check though, it's the only way right ?

Not sure how true it is, but I heard my brother and law telling it, and then I saw the same on TV.

Yep he got caught up in the lie's.

 

[Mark Richard]

We helped create the Taliban in the 70s and 80s to fight the Soviets. They were trained by our CIA........ This is karma coming back to bite us.

They would have been created no matter what if we help them or not

 

[Mark Richard]

You're an idiot, though, so presenting your results to your target audience would not include me.

Facts are facts and only empirical data is a fact and it is not subjective

 

[the other mike]

They would have been created no matter what if we help them or not

If we'd allowed the Soviet Union to take Afghanistan there's no telling what would have happened after that.

Operation Cyclone - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[asaratis]

Was watching a segment of skynews Australia, and the military equipment debacle seemed to be answered in a rational way.

I think it said that any military equipment sold or given to the Afghan military was already downgraded or only had the technology value equivalent to the theater, otherwise it was only at a level of technology to be used in theater between the Afghan army who is against the Taliban militants or militia's.

It was said that the Americans dismantled some planes at the airport before they fell into the Talibans hands for possible future use.

So most of the equipment there was issued or sold to the Afghan army it suggested, and therefore we didn't just leave bases full of equipment of a highly sensitive value.

That may apply to what was left in Kabul. but I doubt any of the equipment abandoned at Bagram was demilitarized or made unusable.

 

[my2¢]

I'm all for Miley's resignation. Trump wanted our troops out of Afghanistan by election day and then by Christmas but dragged his heels. I'll give Trump the benefit of doubt and share a good part of the blame on Miley for not getting the job done. Then perhaps a good reason Trump may be known for firing people is his lack of judgement in selecting people for positions in the first place.

I'm neutral towards Austin at this point. I don't want him to just be a scapegoat for Biden's inaction.

 

[San Souci]

Was watching a segment of skynews Australia, and the military equipment debacle seemed to be answered in a rational way.

I think it said that any military equipment sold or given to the Afghan military was already downgraded or only had the technology value equivalent to the theater, otherwise it was only at a level of technology to be used in theater between the Afghan army who is against the Taliban militants or militia's.

It was said that the Americans dismantled some planes at the airport before they fell into the Talibans hands for possible future use.

So most of the equipment there was issued or sold to the Afghan army it suggested, and therefore we didn't just leave bases full of equipment of a highly sensitive value.

None of it was disabled. As usual the Democrats are lying.

 

[beagle9]

None of it was disabled. As usual the Democrats are lying.

None of what weapons were or were not disabled, otherwise was it the weapons that were issued to the Afghan Army or did we just leave bases in a hurry, where as the Taliban just waltz right in to take them ??? Do we issue out weapons in any foreign theater, that are of a highly sensitive value, otherwise that won't be used or removed by us while in theater or when exiting the theater ?? What in the heck did we do ??

 

[Stryder50]

We helped create the Taliban in the 70s and 80s to fight the Soviets. They were trained by our CIA........ This is karma coming back to bite us.

No "We" did not.
The USA had very little involvement in Afghanistan during the 1970s when it was a communist state and the "Taliban" did not exist as such back then, they would only take on that name and identity in the 1990s after they and other mujahedin/Islamic Holy Warriors spent the 1980s fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan.
Admittedly there was USA aid in that 1980s fighting, but it all had to go to the Pakistani military and ISI whom would distribute such to the mujahedin they chose. CIA contact was very limited and largely of limited effect, most of the operations being in the hands of the Pakis~ISI. In the political void after the Soviets withdrew, we see the formation of the Taliban, proxies of a fundamentalist faction within the ISI, appear and take control of Afghanistan.
I've documented such in a series of posts in this thread;

Biden 'On Vacation' As Afghanistan Govt Falls, His 'Saigon' Unfolds

At least in the Vietnam War the U.S. had the "deescalation excuse". That is North Vietnam was an ally of the Soviet Union so we didn't want to piss off the Soviets too much and risk a conflict with them. In the case of Afghanistan, the Taliban are a creation of the fundamentalist Islamic...

www.usmessageboard.com

Starting with post #101.

 

[Stryder50]

Major Excerpt;

There's a Problem in the Upper Reaches of Our Military​

Victor Davis Hanson Posted: Sep 02, 2021 12:01 AM
...
It is the beginning of a never-ending bad dream. Joe Biden and the Pentagon have managed to birth a new terrorist haven, destroy much of U.S. strategic deterrence, and alienate our allies and much of the country.

In the hours after the horrific deaths of 13 service members, we have been reassured by our military that our partnership with the Taliban to provide security for our flights was wise. We were told that the terrorist victors share similar goals to ours in a hasty American retreat from Kabul. We were reminded that Afghan refugees (unlike U.S. soldiers) will not be forced to be vaccinated on arrival. Such statements are either untrue or absurd.

On the very day of the attack that killed American troops, the sergeant major of the U.S. Army reminded us in a tweet that diversity is our strength, commemorating not the dead but Women's Equality Day. If so, then is the opposite of diversity -- unity -- our weakness? Will such wokeness ensure that we do not abandon the Bagram air base in the middle of the night without opposition?

The chief of staff at the Office of Naval Intelligence warned the ONI's active duty and retired service members that they must not criticize Biden, their commander in chief, over the Afghanistan fiasco. The office correctly cited prohibitions found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice barring any disrespect shown to senior government leadership.

Indeed, a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Marine Corps was relieved of his command for posting a video accurately blaming military and civilian leadership for the Afghanistan nightmare.

Yet until Jan. 20, retired top brass had constantly smeared their elected commander in chief with impunity.

Recently retired Gen. Michael Hayden retweeted a horrific suggestion that unvaccinated Trump supporters should be put on planes back to Afghanistan, where they presumably would be left to die. Hayden earlier had compared Trump's border facilities to Nazi death camps.

Other retired high-profile military officials variously called their president an emulator of Nazi tactics, a veritable Mussolini, a liar, and deserving of removal from office sooner than later. None of these retired four-stars faced the sort of repercussions that the Office of Naval Intelligence just warned about.

More than 50 former intelligence officials on the eve of the November election signed a letter suggesting that incriminating emails found on Hunter Biden's missing laptop might be "Russian disinformation." They used their stature for political purposes to convince the American people that the story was a lie.

Retired Gen. Joseph Dunford and retired Adm. Mike Mullen recently blasted retired brass who had questioned Biden's cognitive ability. OK. But they should have issued a similar warning earlier, when the violations of fellow retired officers were even more egregious in election year 2020.

Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, apologized for doing a photo op with Trump, erroneously buying into the narrative that Trump had ordered rioters cleared from Lafayette Square for the staged picture. Worse, he leaked to journalists that he was so angry with Trump that he "considered" resigning.

Think of the irony. If Milley considered a politicized resignation to rebuke Trump over the false charge, then surely he could consider a real resignation after overseeing the worst military disaster of the last half-century in Kabul.

Milley had promised to root out white supremacy from the ranks while recommending that his soldiers read Ibram X. Kendi's racialist diatribes.

Something is terribly wrong in the ranks of America's top commanders that reflects something wrong with the country.
...

There's a Problem in the Upper Reaches of Our Military

It is the beginning of a never-ending bad dream.

townhall.com

 

[Stryder50]

 

[the other mike]

No "We" did not.
The USA had very little involvement in Afghanistan during the 1970s when it was a communist state and the "Taliban" did not exist as such back then, they would only take on that name and identity in the 1990s after they and other mujahedin/Islamic Holy Warriors spent the 1980s fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan.
Admittedly there was USA aid in that 1980s fighting, but it all had to go to the Pakistani military and ISI whom would distribute such to the mujahedin they chose. CIA contact was very limited and largely of limited effect, most of the operations being in the hands of the Pakis~ISI. In the political void after the Soviets withdrew, we see the formation of the Taliban, proxies of a fundamentalist faction within the ISI, appear and take control of Afghanistan.
I've documented such in a series of posts in this thread;

Biden 'On Vacation' As Afghanistan Govt Falls, His 'Saigon' Unfolds

At least in the Vietnam War the U.S. had the "deescalation excuse". That is North Vietnam was an ally of the Soviet Union so we didn't want to piss off the Soviets too much and risk a conflict with them. In the case of Afghanistan, the Taliban are a creation of the fundamentalist Islamic...

www.usmessageboard.com

Starting with post #101.

Operation Cyclone.
Yes we did help create the Taliban and Osama bin Laden was a CIA asset who is probably still alive in Iran.

We know the traitorous Obama gang had the Seal team ambushed.

 

[Stryder50]

Operation Cyclone.
Yes we did help create the Taliban and Osama bin Laden was a CIA asset who is probably still alive in Iran.

We know the traitorous Obama gang had the Seal team ambushed.

You might read up a bit on your references and perhaps provide a link/URL to spare some of us from doing your "homework".

I'll cover Op. Cyclone in the next post(s), but for now, I'd like to point out that Dec. 1979 doesn't constitute the bulk of the "70s" and it's only after then, when the Soviets "invade" Afghanistan, that USA aid and involvement took on anything other than a token amount.

Also, as I'll show in following post(s), USA help in "create the Taliban and Osama bin Laden" was minor and indirect, and not an aim or goal of what we did back then. And, as I've already presented in other posts on many threads, there was an "unofficial" aspect here that provided a catalyst for further expansions~escalations.

The rest of your assertions require documentation for validity, otherwise you present as another semi-ignorant and ill-informed poster engaging in more CYA than being a source of useful information.

 

[Stryder50]

Select excerpts;
...
Operation Cyclone was the code name for the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) program to arm and finance the Afghan mujahideen in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989, prior to and during the military intervention by the USSR in support of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. The mujahideen were also supported by Britain's MI6, who conducted separate covert actions. The program leaned heavily towards supporting militant Islamic groups, including groups with jihadist ties, that were favored by the regime of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq in neighboring Pakistan, rather than other, less ideological Afghan resistance groups that had also been fighting the Soviet-oriented Democratic Republic of Afghanistan administration since before the Soviet intervention.[1]

Operation Cyclone was one of the longest and most expensive covert CIA operations ever undertaken.[2] Funding officially began with $695,000 in 1979,[3][4] was increased dramatically to $20–$30 million per year in 1980, and rose to $630 million per year in 1987,[1][5][6] described as the "biggest bequest to any Third World insurgency".[7] Funding continued (albeit reduced) after the 1989 Soviet withdrawal as the mujahideen continued to battle the forces of President Mohammad Najibullah's army during the Afghan Civil War (1989–1992)
....
NOTE: That huge funding increase was largely the result of efforts by:
... "Key proponents of the initial program were Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson; Michael G. Vickers, a young CIA paramilitary officer; and Gust Avrakotos, the CIA's regional head, who developed a close relationship with Wilson. ..."
...
... "Their strategy was to provide a broad mix of weapons, tactics, and logistics, along with training programs, to enhance the rebels' ability to fight a guerilla war against the Soviets. Initially, to avoid detection of U.S. involvement, the program supplied the rebels only with Soviet-made weaponry. This plan was enabled by the tacit support of Israel, which had captured large stockpiles of Soviet-made weaponry during the Yom Kippur War and agreed to sell them to the CIA clandestinely, as well as Egypt, which had recently modernized its army with weapons purchased from Western nations, funneling the older Soviet-made arms to the mujahideen.[30][31] ... "
...
... "The distribution of the weaponry relied heavily on the Pakistani President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who had a personal relationship to Congressman Wilson. His Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was an intermediary for funds distribution, passing of weapons, military training and financial support to Afghan resistance groups.[33] Along with funding from similar programs from Britain's MI6 and SAS, Saudi Arabia, and the People's Republic of China,[34] the ISI armed and trained over 100,000 insurgents between 1978 and 1992.[citation needed] They encouraged the volunteers from the Arab states to join the Afghan resistance in its struggle against the Soviet troops based in Afghanistan.[33] ... "
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So we see that it was not just the USA, but several other nations, some seeming unlikely "allies" involved here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
... "Reagan's program assisted in ending the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan,[51][52] with the Soviets unable to quell the insurgency. On 20 July 1987, the withdrawal of Soviet troops from the country was announced pursuant to the negotiations that led to the Geneva Accords of 1988,[53] with the last Soviets leaving on 15 February 1989. Soviet forces suffered over 14,000 killed and missing, and over 50,000 wounded.[citation needed] The withdrawal helped precipitate the dissolution of the Soviet Union itself.[5]" ...
~~~~~~~~~~~
... Some have alleged that bin Laden and al Qaeda were beneficiaries of CIA assistance. This is challenged by experts such as Coll—who notes that declassified CIA records and interviews with CIA officers do not support such claims[70]—and Peter Bergen, who argues: "It's worth mentioning here that there is simply no evidence for the common myth that bin Laden and his Afghan Arabs were supported by the CIA financially. Nor is there any evidence that CIA officials at any level met with bin Laden or anyone in his circle."[71] Bergen insists that U.S. funding went to the Afghan mujahideen, not the Arab volunteers who arrived to assist them.[72] ...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sometimes, seemingly short term focused agendas can have long-term results and impacts!

Operation Cyclone - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Stryder50]

For further reference and slightly different take, reflecting the complexities of such events and operations ...
...
What Really Happened In Operation Cyclone?
...
To say that the United States bears no responsibility is to get off on a technicality, but to say that the United States directly funded the Taliban is also widely inaccurate. Instead, the project known as Operation Cyclone created an environment where money and weapons were freely flowing, mostly into the hands of those whom foreign powers knew were working in their favor. And the United States wasn't alone in this. Pakistan arguably played the biggest part in Operation Cyclone while the United States and Saudi Arabia provided the cash. And at this point, the Taliban didn't even exist yet. All this was done towards defeating the spread of Soviet influence. Whether or not Operation Cyclone was instrumental towards this is debatable, but what is left behind is far from uncertain. Here's what really happened in Operation Cyclone.
...
The mujahideen were members of guerrilla groups that were rebelling against the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan's (PDPA) rule in the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA) and later the Soviet army in the late 1970s. Their name can be translated as "one who undertakes jihad," and while this struggle was against the Soviet-backed government, the mujahideen were "far from monolithic." Made up of various factions of leftist internationalists, Islamic universalists, and Afghan nationalists, some of which were more fundamentalist than others, the groups were comparable only by their anti-government stance, Mohammad Hassan Kakar writes in "Afghanistan." Otherwise, there was little uniting these various groups in their fight against the Soviet-backed DRA.
...
Initially, most of the mujahideen were native Afghans, but after the Soviet invasion, Operation Cyclone allowed for numerous foreign mujahideen to be brought in as well. But the United States was involved in funding the mujahideen well before the Soviet army actually invaded Afghanistan. According to The Conversation, by July 1979, the United States was already providing "advice and nonlethal supplies" to the mujahideen. After President Jimmy Carter was encouraged to respond more aggressively after the Soviet army invaded, the CIA started organizing deliveries of weapons to the mujahideen as well.

The mujahideen that ended up being primarily funded by Operation Cyclone included the faction led by Saudi-backed Abdul Rasul Sayyaf, as well as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and his militia.
....
Read More: What Really Happened In Operation Cyclone?

 

[Rambunctious]

There was a time in America where integrity was essential in getting a star on your shoulder...those days are long gone...now all you have to do is finger the right butthole and you are a general....