Trump depletes the troops in Afghanistan without a complete withdrawal of ALL troops, and Biden has to finish the withdrawal. Trump left only 2,500 troops.
The agreement was 'within 14 months' meaning trump could have finished the withdrawal, but TRUMP chose NOT to. Why?
Because the withdrawal was tied to the Taliban’s promise not to harbor terrorists, but since enforcement/verification was ultra-difficult and other stakeholders (like the Afghan government) weren’t part of the agreement, many of the “conditions” proved to be effectively symbolic or minimal on paper.
Then some lunatic terrorists blow up an area at the airport killing 13 service members, not honoring trumps agreement with the Taliban.
Shocking huh.
And you blame biden.
Then, trump send the NG into DC.
The NG is mostly defenseless.
They can pick up trash, but they can't arrest, they are there to assist the Local LEO.
They are left defenseless.
They are Shot by another Terrorist, that trump supposedly Vetted in April 2025.
Yet you BLAME biden.
What the Doha Agreement
The agreement is structured in several parts. Key commitments include:
U.S. / Coalition commitments Al Jazeera+2ICCT+2
- The United States (and its allies / coalition partners) commit to withdraw all their military forces, non-diplomatic civilian personnel, private security contractors, trainers/advisers, and supporting services personnel from Afghanistan within 14 months of signing the deal. Al Jazeera+1
- As a first step, within the first 135 days after the signing, U.S. forces are to be reduced to 8,600 troops, with proportional reductions for allies/coalition forces; also five military bases are to be vacated/closed in that first phase. Al Jazeera+1
- Once the Taliban meets its commitments, the U.S. and its partners will complete withdrawal of all remaining forces — including withdrawal from all remaining bases. Al Jazeera+1
- As a “confidence-building” measure, the agreement calls for a prisoner exchange: up to 5,000 Taliban prisonersand up to 1,000 prisoners held by Afghan (or allied) forces to be released by the starting date of intra-Afghan negotiations (initially scheduled for March 10, 2020). Al Jazeera+1
- The U.S. agreed to begin a review of sanctions and rewards lists on Taliban members, with the aim of removing sanctions by a specified date (if the conditions are met). DID PRESS AGENCY+1
Taliban commitments / guarantees Al Jazeera+2Wikisource+2
- The Taliban pledged to prevent any group or individual from using Afghan soil to threaten the security of the U.S. and its allies. That includes preventing recruitment, training, fundraising, harboring — and not providing passports/visas or documents to those who pose such threats. Al Jazeera+1
- The Taliban committed to refrain from threatening or attacking U.S. or coalition forces during the withdrawal period. Afghanistan Analysts Network - English+1
- The agreement called for the start of intra-Afghan negotiations between the Taliban and other Afghan parties (government and others) — originally slated to begin March 10, 2020 — with the aim of reaching a broader political settlement. Al Jazeera+1
- After the negotiations and once a “post-settlement Afghan Islamic government” is formed, the U.S. indicated willingness to build positive relations with that government, seek economic cooperation for reconstruction, and avoid intervening in internal Afghan affairs. ICCT+1
What was “binding” / immediate vs. what was conditional
- The U.S. withdrawal schedule (drawdown to 8,600 in 135 days; full withdrawal within 14 months) was a firm commitment by the U.S. side. Al Jazeera+2Wikisource+2
- The prisoner exchange clause and sanctions-review clause were also part of the formal agreement, i.e. explicit deliverables tied to the start of intra-Afghan negotiations. Al Jazeera+1
- The Taliban’s guarantee to block use of Afghan soil by terrorist groups and not to threaten U.S./Coalition forces — in principle binding. Al Jazeera+1
- Aspiration/conditional: the agreement anticipates a broader political settlement through intra-Afghan talks leading to a “post-settlement Afghan Islamic government,” and envisions future U.S.–Afghan cooperation. But the agreement does not guarantee any particular form of Afghan government, human-rights protections, governance arrangements, or a permanent ceasefire. ICCT+2The Washington Post+2
So in effect: some commitments were concrete and time-bound (troop withdrawals, prisoner exchange, Taliban counterterrorism assurances). Others — especially long-term political settlement and stability — were conditional and aspirational, dependent on subsequent negotiations.
Notable Limitations, Ambiguities, and What the Agreement
- The agreement was between the U.S. and the Taliban only — the Afghan government (the government of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan at the time) was not a signatory. That meant the deal lacked a foundational inclusion of the Afghan government in shaping future governance or security arrangements. European Parliament+2Congress.gov+2
- While the Taliban promised to prevent terrorist activity, the agreement did not include robust verification/enforcement mechanisms for counterterrorism — much was based on “good faith” commitments and later monitoring. rsilpak.org+2The Washington Post+2
- The agreement did not require the Taliban to commit to any specific protections regarding human rights (e.g. for women, minorities), democratic institutions, press freedom, or civil liberties. Those issues were entirely outside the scope of the 2020 accord.
- There was no guarantee of a nationwide ceasefire or end of violence — only a commitment that the Taliban would not use Afghan soil to target the U.S. or its allies. It did not commit to halting fighting with the Afghan government or ensure protection of civilians.
