- Joined
- Apr 24, 2020
- Messages
- 26,170
- Reaction score
- 28,896
- Location
- The Big Apple
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Boy, this steaming heap should come with a "Put on your hip waders now" warning.
Boy, this steaming heap should come with a "Put on your hip waders now" warning.He was trying to spread a lie that demonstrably made it less likely for Americans and our Allies to evacuate.
Biden doesn't give supporters much to work with, period, on this topic.Link?
Okay, so knowing that we still needed to remove thousands of personnel and military equipment, as well as tens of thousands of allies, do you think answering that the fall of the government was not only likely but imminent would have made the conditions for our withdrawalBiden doesn't give supporters much to work with, period, on this topic.
Here is the transcript.
Remarks by President Biden on the Drawdown of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan | The White House
East Room 2:09 P.M. EDTTHE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon. Earlier today, I was briefed by our senior military and national security leaders on the statuswww.whitehouse.gov
So was he lying, or an idiot? Or both?Okay, so knowing that we still needed to remove thousands of personnel and military equipment, as well as tens of thousands of allies, do you think answering that the fall of the government was not only likely but imminent would have made the conditions for our withdrawal
a) better, or
b) worse
So you think that announcing the imminent collapse of the Afghan government would have made for a more orderly withdrawal.So was he lying, or an idiot? Or both?
The preparation for and execution of the withdrawal should have been very different for an imminent collapse. Among other things, with an honest assessment, our citizens and allies would have started their exit quicker, with a more orderly exit than the chaos that resulted.
I'll take a stab at the question. It would have made evacuation and withdrawal much worse.Okay, so knowing that we still needed to remove thousands of personnel and military equipment, as well as tens of thousands of allies, do you think answering that the fall of the government was not only likely but imminent would have made the conditions for our withdrawal
a) better, or
b) worse
You win a washer and dryer!I'll take a stab at the question. It would have made evacuation and withdrawal much worse.
BINGO!!!The leak comes from where every leak comes from, the IC and State Department career staff who are tasked with monitoring Presidential communications with foreign leaders.
You got it wrong in the other thread, and again in this thread. Right wing media telling you to make connections that no reasonable person would make, once again.IMPEACH! Did I get that right?
So you support the President lying?So you think that announcing the imminent collapse of the Afghan government would have made for a more orderly withdrawal.
Somebody put this man in charge of everything right now.
how about 'would we have stayed' ?Let's say we knew for certain that the Taliban would defeat the Afghan government, should we have stayed in Afghanistan?
So you support the President lying?
I'd like our president to be honest, yes. If he in fact believed the collapse to be pending, he should have prepared for it.
It certainly would of prompted a lot of questions, like "whose boneheaded decision was it to reduce our troop level to 600 when collapse is imminent and we're a couple of months away from leaving?"Okay, so knowing that we still needed to remove thousands of personnel and military equipment, as well as tens of thousands of allies, do you think answering that the fall of the government was not only likely but imminent would have made the conditions for our withdrawal
a) better, or
b) worse
That's nice, but would announcing the imminent collapse of the Afghan government have made our withdrawal easier or more difficult?It certainly would of prompted a lot of questions, like "whose boneheaded decision was it to reduce our troop level to 600 when collapse is imminent and we're a couple of months away from leaving?"
That's not what Biden did. He didn't "advise" him. That's "advising" him?? He asked Ghani to essentially, maintain a happy face when Biden knew full well - or as much as he can know anything "full well" - that the Taliban was going to prevail. That's not ADVICE. Thanks!!We all knew it was bad and that the government would eventually fall. What we didn't know is that it would fall in six frigging days.
But again, what is the scandal, and what was the correct path forward? Let's say you're President and you're talking to Ghani. You both know the Afghan government is eventually going to fall to the Taliban. You advise him to....
So, really you are just complaining about what his decisions were.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-afghan-biden-exclusive-idAFKBN2FW1U0
"The men spoke for roughly 14 minutes on July 23. On August 15, Ghani fled the presidential palace, and the Taliban entered Kabul."
that "action we could not take back" was in fact the very thing that prevented the execution of a proper and controlled evacuation.
leaving Bagram also paved the way for the taliban to begin taking over Kabul.
taking that into consideration only seems to make this all look worse. he abandoned the Bagram Airfield leaving too few troops, coordinated a propaganda campaign that "all is well" in Afghanistan and in the US allowing the taliban to move in and control Kabul, which then spurred a panicked and defective evacuation.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/08/why-did-the-united-states-abandon-bagram-airfield/
from August 18.
"“If we were to keep both Bagram and the embassy going,” Milley said, that would require “a significant number of military forces,” so “you had to collapse one or the other.”
Milley also said the generals “estimated that the risk” of going out of Bagram or Karzai International “was about the same,” but he also acknowledged that President Biden did not leave enough troops for a scenario in which an evacuation was necessary to hold Bagram, protect the embassy, and protect Karzai International."
this fiasco eclipses Pres. Carter's Iran hostage rescue attempt.
Oh, I think he was still in denial. He gambled on the troop pullout, and as the worst case scenario began to occur, he decided to simply hope for the best rather than admit to himself and the world that he screwed up.That's nice, but would announcing the imminent collapse of the Afghan government have made our withdrawal easier or more difficult?
Had they came out and said "the Afghan Army is not going to hold up", what would have happened is that it would have fallen sooner, giving us even less time to get out.Sorry, there are multiple narratives being floated by the Biden administration... one that the Afghan army was doing great, and the other than the super friendly Taliban would protect the Airport for us so "shelter in place and wait for our call" which never came.
But tell me, do you think that Biden pushing the lie that the Afghan army was doing a good job helped or hindered the decision making process of Americans and our Allies determining whether to leave the country? He was trying to spread a lie that demonstrably made it less likely for Americans and our Allies to evacuate.
Goddam. What you are trying to defend here is Biden attempting to convince everyone that everything was fine, and then when the shit hit the fan blaming everyone who got stuck for believing his lies.
I did, I read the wrong Biden narrative into the article, but both of those false narratives are still true.
Had they came out and said "the Afghan Army is not going to hold up", what would have happened is that it would have fallen sooner, giving us even less time to get out.
This phone call, in this thread is about the phone call and what was going on there.
How do you force out people who don't want to go because they still feel safe and want to make money or take care of, accomplish whatever goals they still have keeping them there? Do you force them to leave? How?
I haven't seen any place that President Biden has said straight up that the Taliban "isn't that bad". Of course, we could absolutely compare what was said to Trump making the deals with the Taliban last year.
You refuse to answer the question because you know that announcing the imminent collapse of the government before we've even evacuated is the dumbest thing anybody has ever suggested. That's actually why you like the suggestion -- it's the "trolling by pretending to be as stupid as humanly possible" tactic that's all the rage on this board.Oh, I think he was still in denial. He gambled on the troop pullout, and as the worst case scenario began to occur, he decided to simply hope for the best rather than admit to himself and the world that he screwed up.
That's not what Biden did. He didn't "advise" him. That's "advising" him?? He asked Ghani to essentially, maintain a happy face when Biden knew full well - or as much as he can know anything "full well" - that the Taliban was going to prevail. That's not ADVICE. Thanks!!
The intelligence gave them 6 months after the withdrawal date. They didn't even get to the withdrawal date.Had they exited on schedule they wouldn't have had to say anything, but when they expect that he Taliban will over run Kabul in a month and civilians aren't heading for the exit, the responsible action by the President is not to tell people everything is fine.
You tell them the ****ing truth. People weren't leaving because they believed Biden's assurances... and apparently, based on this phone call, Biden knew those assurances were a lie.
How is this concept hard for you?
Other than telling everyone they could be trusted to secure the approaches to the Airport? Other than dedicating his security forces to an Embassy as if normal embassy functions would continue ... rather than burn everyone's applications and documentation (which is what they did with their time). And you can't even argue they burned the documents to protect people since the Biden admin gave the ****ing names to the Taliban anyway.
If you want to be seen as a sane middle ground type then you should stop polishing this turd for the Biden administration.
"The jury is still out. But the likelihood there's going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely." - July 8th, 2021Let's dig into this line from your article: "President Joe Biden wanted the now-departed Afghan president to create the 'perception' that his government was capable of holding off the Taliban - an indication he knew it was only a matter of time before the US ally fell to the Islamic group even while reassuring Americans at home that it would not happen."
What did Biden say about the Afghan government not falling to the Taliban? When did he make this reassurance? No personal attacks or deflections, please. I would like a specific answer to this.
"The jury is still out. But the likelihood there's going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely." - July 8th, 2021
" It is not inevitable.” - July 8th, 2021
Far cry from "Of course the Taliban will take over." What a ****in liar.
I think you'll defend the Biden administration no matter how obvious this botched evacuation really is. And the way you do it is interesting, to say the least. Staying in Afghanistan was NEVER the point. But you want to obfuscate this sorry evacuation effort by presenting some false narrative and claiming an absurd assumption. The US/allies departure was a horrible botch job and no way to exit a nation, by leaving Afghan allies in the hands of monsters and leaving western civilians there to boot, to try to escape torture and beheadings. And yet here you are, trying your best with some sleight of hand to dismiss it all. Thanks!!As I keep saying, on a long enough timeline every conservative reverts to a "Stay in Afghanistan forever" position.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?