Biden's Failing Afghanistan Withdrawl

[NoNukes]

This is an editorial from the Washington Examiner, August 12, 2021.

By refusing to use overwhelming air power to blunt the Taliban's rise, Joe Biden is failing to protect American interests in Afghanistan and ultimately undermining national security.

https://www.washingtonexamin

http://

This is an editorial from the Washington Examiner, August 12, 2021.

By refusing to use overwhelming air power to blunt the Taliban's rise, Joe Biden is failing to protect American interests in Afghanistan and ultimately undermining national security.

Biden’s failing Afghanistan withdrawal - Washington Examiner

By refusing to use overwhelming air power to blunt the Taliban's rise, President Joe Biden is failing to protect American interests in Afghanistan and ultimately undermining national security. The Taliban clearly hold the current strategic initiative. That said, Afghan forces, especially special...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

After 20 years, 2,400 personnel dead, and 2 2 trillion spent, Biden was right to get out.

 

[kyzr]

Do you have any cites for the cost of stationing troops in europe?

Can't find now, its a few years old, its the number Trump used to get NATO deadbeats to pay up.

 

[bendog]

Can't find now, its a few years old, its the number Trump used to get NATO deadbeats to pay up.

Two separate things, really.

Do NATO allies pay $2.5 billion yearly for U.S. troops?

President Donald Trump criticized fellow NATO members during a summit on July 11, saying they had spent too little on de

www.politifact.com

Germany is paying less to house US troops because Trump moved them ... to Poland I think I recall.

But I don't really care. I'm just glad our "leaders" aren't sending young men into vastly outnumbered firefights in a god foresaken place that only illiterate muslim theocrats have a use for.

 

[bendog]

I don't see a lot of media interest in this.

US Veterans & Military Families | Costs of War

The Costs of War Project is a team of 35 scholars, legal experts, human rights practitioners, and physicians, which began its work in 2011. We use research and a public website to facilitate debate about the costs of the post-9/11 wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

watson.brown.edu

 

[kyzr]

Two separate things, really.

Do NATO allies pay $2.5 billion yearly for U.S. troops?

President Donald Trump criticized fellow NATO members during a summit on July 11, saying they had spent too little on de

www.politifact.com

Germany is paying less to house US troops because Trump moved them ... to Poland I think I recall.

But I don't really care. I'm just glad our "leaders" aren't sending young men into vastly outnumbered firefights in a god foresaken place that only illiterate muslim theocrats have a use for.

Two separate things, yes, but the two separate things are:
1. Xiden and Germany approved NS2 to buy Russian gas to fund Putin's military. Why the fuck should US taxpayers pay the cost to keep US troops in the EU?
Bring them all home and boost the US GDP instead of the EU GDP. It would save a ton of money annually.

2. The $2.5b is just 1/3 the cost of "incidentals", not the cost of the military equipment, the salaries, the food, housing, utilities, jet fuel, and the actual Budget the DOD has for the EU, which is cl9oser to $24b annually:
"...the $2.5 billion in NATO support came from what are called indirect costs -- things like rent and foreign taxes and customs duties. Such streams of support are important in evening out the books, but they are not reimbursements for outlays that the United States has made."

 

[protectionist]

Lol. There never was any threat to our national security from Afghanistan.

You are massively ignorant.

1. Al Qaeda
2. Pakistan's nuclear warheads'
3. when asked what keeps him awake at night, Obama answered with 1 word > "Pakistan".

 

[protectionist]

Washington Examiner is a tabloid.. So that's where you get your news.

INVALIDATION is hard-wired in liberals.,...and if you had any real complaint with the CONTENT of this editorial, you had every opportunity to voice that SPECIFIC disagreement.

Since you expressed no specific disagreement, I will assume you don't have one.

 

[gipper]

You are massively ignorant.

1. Al Qaeda
2. Pakistan's nuclear warheads'
3. when asked what keeps him awake at night, Obama answered with 1 word > "Pakistan".

Our murderous government has killed untold numbers of innocent people, maimed thousands more and dislocated millions these past 20 years, but you’re cool with it. You are an imperialist.

 

[protectionist]

The left? This is the very action Trump called for.

I disagree with Trump. US military cannot ignore the international jihad. Nuclear warheads in Pakistan today, can be nuclear bombs in shipping containers in US ports tomorrow.

Incidentally, the majority of US ports are foreign-owned.

 

[protectionist]

protectionist

The Gulf States hate Communism. That's why they fought the Communists in Afghanistan. The Taliban were war orphans and were not in existence before 1994. They are NOT a threat to the US .. Strictly internal politics.

FALSE! As the Washington Examiner article correctly noted >>

"Contrary to the Trump and Biden administrations' assertions, the Taliban remain an ally of al Qaeda. It is thus not simply the girls and women of Afghanistan who have much to fear from a Taliban return to power. A new Taliban regime would help revitalize al Qaeda's forever war on the West. It would do so in 2021 for the same reason it did in 2001. Namely, because the Taliban share al Qaeda's theologically vested belief that the United States is intrinsically evil and requiring of forcible submission to political Islam. In turn, it should be clear that a Taliban regime would pose a profound threat to American security."

 

[protectionist]

We don't have open borders.

Nordstream 2 is smart money for the Europeans.. Russia and the Stans can't eat their natural gas and its much cheaper for the Europeans.

If the Mexican border were to currently, not be called "open". it would only be becasue there no longer is a border there at all. Biden has eliminated it.

Back to the topic > Afghanistan.

 

[protectionist]

Here's my $.02....

Once you decide to withdraw it means you are DONE, you're leaving, you're washing your hands of the situation...as in NOT your problem anymore.

When you publicly declare you are withdrawing, and especially when you announce the date by which you will be gone, you are telling the enemy, "It's all yours - after this date you can do whatever you want...hell, you can start re-taking the country as long as you don't attack us as we leave."

There was never going to be a good way to withdraw - the Afghan people were not ready to stand up for themselves ... and possibly never would have been.

Tribalism, tradition, old vs new, loyalties to the Taliban inside the new govt / military....all things we could / can not control.

Our job (the military) was to kick their asses - we did that. We drove them into Pakistan - our 'ally', who gave them refuge every winter, and they returned every spring.

Then we were ordered to engage in 'nation-building'. The military is not meant for that.

With the politicians' resolve wavering, why we were there became more and more muddled.

We could not stay there forever...so be began to pull out. With the Taliban hanging back, licking their chops to fill the void, there was . is no great way to leave. Te only thing we should have planned for and executed better was getting all the Afghans who helped us, and their families, out when we started leaving.

This isn't mentioning the 2 main reason for US presence.
1. Stopping al Qaeda from having bomb-making schools & factories there.
2. having US troops close to the Pakistan border, and able to rush into Pakistan to seize the 100+ nuclear warheads, if they were threatened to fall into the hands of jihadists.

 

[struth]

Xiden has been on the wrong side of just above every foreign policy decision of the last fifty years

 

[protectionist]

http://

After 20 years, 2,400 personnel dead, and 2 2 trillion spent, Biden was right to get out.

Then what the reasons why we were there - as stated in Post # 52. OK to endanger US national security, facilitating jihadist aims of nuclear destruction of US cities ?

 

[Leo123]

Liz Cheney and a Democrat colluded to block Trump's withdrawal plans. We would have already been out.

 

[protectionist]

Our murderous government has killed untold numbers of innocent people, maimed thousands more and dislocated millions these past 20 years, but you’re cool with it. You are an imperialist.

FALSE! Our government has been fighting a defensive effort, against a foe, mightily determined to annihilate us. You are DUPED and lost.

 

[protectionist]

Liz Cheney and a Democrat colluded to block Trump's withdrawal plans. We would have already been out.

She finally did something right.

 

[Leo123]

Biden promised to end the "forever war" in Afghanistan but, meanwhile, Biden bombs Syria.
"the Biden administration has bombed Iran-backed militias in Iraq and Syria more times in the last three months than the Trump administration did in all of 2020."

Opinion | Biden Wants to Leave the Middle East, But He’s in a Vicious Bombing Cycle in Iraq

Caught between aggressive Tehran-backed militias and a skeptical Congress, the administration needs a better approach.

www.politico.com

So, looks like we're just exchanging one war for another war....

 

[pknopp]

I disagree with Trump. US military cannot ignore the international jihad. Nuclear warheads in Pakistan today, can be nuclear bombs in shipping containers in US ports tomorrow.

Incidentally, the majority of US ports are foreign-owned.

Quit screwing with them and they do likewise.

 

[protectionist]

Quit screwing with them and they do likewise.

Maybe you've never read the Koran. Or the 1400 year history of Muslim imperialism.