• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why does the U.S. have to evacuate the embassy in Kabul.

Luce said:
It's kind of the thread topic.
Click to expand...

Thought the thread topic was the US embassy in Kabul... Ambassadors are a minor part of that... hell one could claim they are the most irrelevant part as they rarely do anything. Its the civil servants that do all the work and are the most important part of any embassy.

Does not change the fact, that the US is defeated in Afghanistan, and leaving an embassy there with personnel in the short term is a bad idea. The embassy would be out gunned, isolated and with no real back up. It would either be quickly overrun or/and all in the embassy would be killed or captured. Hence my Fort Sumter comment.
 
King 4 said:
BIDEN SHOULDN'T BE PRESIDENT. And therefore, TRUMP should have followed through with "Trump's plan" where we would have made a peaceful exit from there.
Click to expand...

So you think we should have withdrawn from Afghanistan even earlier with even less planning and preparation.
 
Dayton3 said:
Incorrect. Russia and China are going to be the ones that start the war with the United States. You yourself have explained why they would in the past.
Click to expand...

Russia and China would “start the war” in the same way Poland started WW2 according to the Nazis.
 
Dayton3 said:
I proposed a program of the U.S. deploying a minimum of 500 ABMs per year to defend the U.S. against missile attack.

@Quester insisted that such a program would cause the Chinese and Russians to attack the U.S. first.

But they won't attack with actual nuclear warheads impacting in the U.S. and inviting a thermonuclear exchange. They will launch an EMP attack on the U.S. I've projected that such an attack would kill about 90,000 in the U.S. give or take.
Click to expand...

And Congress would never authorize that ABM program because directly threatening MAD would put our enemies in a “use them or lose them situation” and provoke a nuclear war.

An EMP attack on the US would be pointless because it wouldn’t accomplish their goals: the elimination of the US nuclear/ABM threat, which would be EMP-protected. So yes, they would have to use nuclear warheads.

Regardless, an EMP attack on the US would provoke a nuclear response from the US government anyways, so they would be better off attriting as much of US nuclear capabilities as they could.

This is why armchair general c******hawks (because apparently that word is some kind of slur) shouldn’t be allowed to decide strategy.

BTW, your “projection” has no basis in reality. There’s more than 90,000 diabetics in America who need electricity to keep their insulin viable or they’ll die. There’s more than 90,000 in ICU’s who need electricity or they’ll die. And EMP attack would disrupt food distribution, water distribution, fuel distribution. You name it, if it requires civilian production of electricity to work, it’s not working. Tens of millions of people would die and that’s why the US government would respond to an EMP attack with nukes.
 
Last edited:
Luce said:
Sorry, still wincing at the horrible burn you took in post 93.
Click to expand...
“Undisputed & Irrefutable” gets my inner Sherlock up……
 
Dayton3 said:
I thought U.S. embassies were all legally U.S. federal territory and any attack upon them was considered an attack upon the U.S. mainland.

So why does the U.S. need to evacuate the Kabul embassy?
Click to expand...
Because the Biden plan to evacuate has failed...
 
Questerr said:
Because no one expected the ANA to fold without a fight.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant .. He's the president .. the most powerful man in the world, and he insisted that the Afghan army would be able to maintain the desired outcome...

Yeah .. Go Biden! Promising us that the Afghanistan withdrawal would not have any relation to the 1975 Saigon withdrawal.

Go Biden!!
 
jotathought said:
Irrelevant .. He's the president .. the most powerful man in the world, and he insisted that the Afghan army would be able to maintain the desired outcome...

Yeah .. Go Biden! Promising us that the Afghanistan withdrawal would not have any relation to the 1975 Saigon withdrawal.

Go Biden!!
Click to expand...

Are you saying the “most powerful man in the world” should have magical powers that would force Afghan soldiers to fight when they don’t want to?
 
Questerr said:
Are you saying the “most powerful man in the world” should have magical powers that would force Afghan soldiers to fight when they don’t want to?
Click to expand...
That's the strategy that Biden was counting on ... and it failed...
 
Questerr said:
Dayton3 has this insane idea of starting a nuclear war with Russia and China.
Click to expand...
Quester:

And Iran! He wants to nuke Persia too. But Israel is safe because they're good at killing Muslims, apparently. I've seen more nuanced and sane foreign policy advice in comic books.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.
 
King 4 said:
Because the SHT-LIBS in charge of the wihtdrawl don't know what the fck they are doing. And general Miley the Aggot & whatever the name of that Bloody-thirsty BLM-fanatic war hawk in charge of the pentagon were too busy promoting transexuals, homosexuals & how we all need to kneel before BLM instead of actually focusing on preparing our millitary.

THAT'S WHY WE HAD TO EVACUTE in fear & DISGRACE. Oh and so much for Biden withdrawing... it looks like he's sending in 6000 TROOPS into afghanistan now.

ARE YOU ALL AWAKE!?
Click to expand...
It's Gen. Milley. Miley is a famous singer.
 
Questerr said:
No one could have predicted that the ANA would throw down their arms en masse.
Click to expand...
The Taliban should be very predictable ... a group the Biden Administration thought would actually be nice and play by the rules.
 
Dayton3 said:
Yes. Some. We can pay for that partially out of the one trillion dollars in reparations we'll be paid by Russia, China, and Iran (each) after the end of the war.
Click to expand...

What war? And how will you make those other countries pay us anything?

But first, when are you going to answer this? Why do you keep avoiding it?

How would you feel if some other country pronounced they had the right to hold and inhabit property in the US without our consent? If you wouldnt accept that, why should any other country?
 
snakestretcher said:
I'm sure the US government shares your simplistic optimism. By the way, missile shields don't work if just one MIRV-equipped missile gets through, that's your Eastern Seaboard, vapourised.
Click to expand...

How? MIRVs cannot strike targets thousands of miles apart you know.
 
Dayton3 said:
World War Three. Threat of inflicting great damage upon them.
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about your baseless fantasy. Or--source the likelihood of this event starting it.

But again, you cant answer basic questions that support your statements.

How will we make them pay those reparations?

And for the 4th time:

How would you feel if some other country pronounced they had the right to hold and inhabit property in the US without our consent? If you wouldnt accept that, why should any other country?​

Can you support your statements or not?
 
Lursa said:
How would you feel if some other country pronounced they had the right to hold and inhabit property in the US without our consent? If you wouldnt accept that, why should any other country?​

Can you support your statements or not?
Click to expand...
Supersovereignty

satisfied?
 
Dayton3 said:
If we have interests to advance and protect that isn't and option.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting we keep an embassy in a country that does not recognize our diplomats? What obligations, under international law, does that country have to protect that "embassy"?
 
Dayton3 said:
Supersovereignty
Click to expand...

You made that up. And it does not answer the question:

How would you feel if some other country pronounced they had the right to hold and inhabit property in the US without our consent? If you wouldnt accept that, why should any other country?​

Dayton3 said:
satisfied?
Click to expand...

No why would I be? You propose a made up and unjustified idea. So? It doesnt exist...let's see you justify the idea? Otherwise, it's as dumb as this, another of your 'original' ideas:

Dayton3;1072323592 said:​
But if the previous sex partner dies that essentially resets the clock on the virginity of a person.​

And since you refuse to answer the hard questions, of course I'm not satisfied.
 
Nope. I'm out.



I thought about replying....but frankly, I've had enough frustration, today. I just don't have enough deoderant for this....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom