The Question Biden Won’t Answer

Doc7505

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2016
15,661
27,573
2,430
The Question Biden Won’t Answer
Will the government of Afghanistan survive America's retreat?
Afghanistan Troop Withdrawal: Will Kabul Government Survive? | National Review
17 Apr 2021 ~~ By Matthew Continetti
It’s not just generals who are always prepared to fight the last war. President Biden’s April 14 announcement that U.S. forces will leave Afghanistan before the 20th anniversary of 9/11 has a long and complicated backstory. Biden said his decision will allow America to put this violent and ambiguous past behind it, to retire the frameworks that conditioned its foreign policy for a generation, and to focus its energies on the competition with China.
Perhaps so. The risk, however, is that Biden’s fixation on settling old scores has blinded him to contemporary realities, and has prevented him from answering the question that will determine the future of both Afghan and U.S. security: Will the democratically elected government of Afghanistan survive American withdrawal?
~Snip~
There is no evidence that the Taliban has ceased its attacks against Afghan security forces or that it has repudiated al-Qaeda. Indeed, the very “intelligence community” on which Biden places so much importance says the Taliban will escalate its war on Kabul as soon as the last American is out and that “the Afghan government will struggle to hold the Taliban at bay if the coalition withdraws support.”
~Snip~
He dismisses the potential adverse consequences of our departure while implicitly conceding that conditions in Afghanistan are about to become worse.
~Snip~
“I’m now the fourth United States president to preside over an American troop presence in Afghanistan: two Republicans, two Democrats,” Biden said. “I will not pass this responsibility on to a fifth.”
No, he won’t. What Biden will pass on instead is the responsibility for cleaning up his mess.

Comment:
The issue here for me is the hypocrisy of the media and the elites on this issue. Trump was characterized as ignorant and dangerous for trying to do this. Now the NPRs of the world are talking in much more measured tones about Biden. At least National Review is being consistent, even if you think they’re wrong.
The government of Afghanistan will not survive a total U.S. withdrawal.
“While we will not stay involved in Afghanistan militarily,” Biden said, “our diplomatic and humanitarian work will continue.”
Ask the South Vietnamese how that worked for them.
The question then becomes not to revoke the decision to leave. The question becomes what changes do we make, in the region and elsewhere, knowing the Taliban will at a minimum obtain a measure of representation in any new Afghan government.
I think it is naive to believe the Taliban doesn’t have the intent and the capability to return the country to the state of Islamic overlord rule that existed before 9/11. This will be a disaster for the Afghan people. On the other hand, in how many places in the world should we station military forces to act as a finger in the dike against catastrophe? Especially where there is little hope that the country can ever be stable. I used to think differently on this, but now I am equivocal.
Please note.... American forces have not left Germany or Japan and have remained there for more than 76 years.
 
The Question Biden Won’t Answer
Will the government of Afghanistan survive America's retreat?
Afghanistan Troop Withdrawal: Will Kabul Government Survive? | National Review
17 Apr 2021 ~~ By Matthew Continetti
It’s not just generals who are always prepared to fight the last war. President Biden’s April 14 announcement that U.S. forces will leave Afghanistan before the 20th anniversary of 9/11 has a long and complicated backstory. Biden said his decision will allow America to put this violent and ambiguous past behind it, to retire the frameworks that conditioned its foreign policy for a generation, and to focus its energies on the competition with China.
Perhaps so. The risk, however, is that Biden’s fixation on settling old scores has blinded him to contemporary realities, and has prevented him from answering the question that will determine the future of both Afghan and U.S. security: Will the democratically elected government of Afghanistan survive American withdrawal?
~Snip~
There is no evidence that the Taliban has ceased its attacks against Afghan security forces or that it has repudiated al-Qaeda. Indeed, the very “intelligence community” on which Biden places so much importance says the Taliban will escalate its war on Kabul as soon as the last American is out and that “the Afghan government will struggle to hold the Taliban at bay if the coalition withdraws support.”
~Snip~
He dismisses the potential adverse consequences of our departure while implicitly conceding that conditions in Afghanistan are about to become worse.
~Snip~
“I’m now the fourth United States president to preside over an American troop presence in Afghanistan: two Republicans, two Democrats,” Biden said. “I will not pass this responsibility on to a fifth.”
No, he won’t. What Biden will pass on instead is the responsibility for cleaning up his mess.

Comment:
The issue here for me is the hypocrisy of the media and the elites on this issue. Trump was characterized as ignorant and dangerous for trying to do this. Now the NPRs of the world are talking in much more measured tones about Biden. At least National Review is being consistent, even if you think they’re wrong.
The government of Afghanistan will not survive a total U.S. withdrawal.
“While we will not stay involved in Afghanistan militarily,” Biden said, “our diplomatic and humanitarian work will continue.”
Ask the South Vietnamese how that worked for them.
The question then becomes not to revoke the decision to leave. The question becomes what changes do we make, in the region and elsewhere, knowing the Taliban will at a minimum obtain a measure of representation in any new Afghan government.
I think it is naive to believe the Taliban doesn’t have the intent and the capability to return the country to the state of Islamic overlord rule that existed before 9/11. This will be a disaster for the Afghan people. On the other hand, in how many places in the world should we station military forces to act as a finger in the dike against catastrophe? Especially where there is little hope that the country can ever be stable. I used to think differently on this, but now I am equivocal.
Please note.... American forces have not left Germany or Japan and have remained there for more than 76 years.
Bush did it right initially, when he helped the local warlords to toss out the Taliban. He went horribly wrong when he attempted nation building. Had we played the warlords against each other, keeping at least 3 in our camp, Afghanistan would have had no problem keeping the Taliban out since the warlords were not foreign occupiers but the traditional system.
 
Is Afghanistan any more secure than they were ten years ago?
If we stay another ten years, will they finally be secure without our protection?

After 20 years, enough is enough
 
Republicans switch from praising Trump for wanting to disentangle the US from conflict and are instant war hawks again with Biden in place. I’m super dizzy following their reversals since Q lost the election.
 
The question Biden REALLY won't answer.

"Who are you talking about when you say you will get into trouble?"
 
The Question Biden Won’t Answer

Well, Doc, that's a pretty broad brush. I mean, Joe doesn't really answer anything, he just reads off of cue cards.

In most cases, Joe doesn't even know what he is reading or about to read until he SAYS it. :21:

And this would prove the old saying true.

Even a blind squirrel finds an occasional acorn.
 
Republicans switch from praising Trump for wanting to disentangle the US from conflict and are instant war hawks again with Biden in place. I’m super dizzy following their reversals since Q lost the election.

I think we should get the fuck out and let them do as they will, with the understanding that any aggression shown to the United States anywhere in the world will result in an unannounced response with a level of force that'll make Hiroshima look like a 4th of July sparkler...
 
Well, Doc, that's a pretty broad brush. I mean, Joe doesn't really answer anything, he just reads off of cue cards.

In most cases, Joe doesn't even know what he is reading or about to read until he SAYS it. :21:
Bah Ha Ha Ha Ha

That coming from a sycophant of the former president who only knew about 200 words.
 
It was the Trump admin that removed Troops to the current level of about 2500 and the remaining were going to be removed in a few months.

So Biden has the decision. Send in more Troops or remove the remaining troops? Of course evacuate the embassy because the Afghanistan government could not defend the capitol let alone their country.

The problem is Trump, NATO, and Taliban made a deal. Nobody consulted the Afghanistan government and they were not even part of the deal.

Imagine that and why it went South rather quickly

This was a Trump policy that ended in Biden's lap The 2500 troops left were to protect the embassy and American.

It al depends on the Taliban playing nice. Still if the Taliban was smart they just leave the Americans alone and don't try to poke that hornets nest. The agreement was to withdraw.
 

Forum List

Back
Top