Update 14:48 EST: He is late
Update 15:00 EST: This is an address that should not be delayed. President Biden is already an hour and a half late.
Update 15:30 EST: He has started his address.
He has just finished his address. (15:52 EST)
No questions permitted.
What did I see.
I saw an old and confused man yelling and repeating himself while reading a teleprompter.
The disconnect between what he is saying and what is happening on the ground in Afghanistan right now is night and day.
President Biden is saying that the war is over.
How does he know?
As I said yesterday. You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you. And today's radical jihadists are definitely on a war path.
A prediction.
The media is going to praise the speech, but this does not change the reality on what is happening in the world today.
Losing a war has consequences, and the U.S. has just lost a war.
This is also a massive geopolitical defeat, that will have implications on American interests worldwide.
I wonder if President Biden appreciates what that means.
He talks about diplomacy and working with allies. To change U.S. strategy and policies that are more in line with today's world.
Fine words but it does not address what has just happened.
The U.S. and its allies have lost a war against some of the very same people who were in power in Afghanistan 20 years ago when Al Qaeda launched their attack on 9/11.
You cannot ignore that. You cannot close your briefing book and say it is time to move on.
There are many reasons why America is a super power. Some of it is real, and some of it is based on perceptions.
Right now global perceptions of the U.S. are changing, and this political and military defeat in Afghanistan is forcing many to do a rethink sooner rather than later.
The Taliban conquering Afghanistan have not made the world a safer place. And if history is any guide, it is going to take years for the U.S. to recover from this defeat.
24 comments:
dear editor:
some here pissed that he is speaking again. He may have good reason for not turning up when you expect him. Recall: he is not our driver and our leader. Not the first or last time that a president or higher official did not turn up when you wanted him to appear pronto. Just pretend it is a GOP person and you will relax in commentary.
Trump complained on a radio show that the media spent 'all night' Sunday covering the devastation wrought by Hurricane Ida instead of his 'great agreement' with the Taliban
Wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle
you do that indeed
Wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle
" he's not our driver and our leader"
Hahahahahahahaha!
He's completely missing the point of the situation. No one has demanded that the US stay in the AFG forever war. Nearly 90% of Americans want out.
Biden is spouting the "prison of 2 ideas". Where its draw down to complete zero vs. "keeping thousands of troops at war". There was another way to reduce AFG. That would have been keeping a garrison at Bagram or Kandahar from which we could monitor and/or engage the Taliban with a minimal force.
I'm not buying Biden's argument that it would have been impossible. We maintain dozens of bases all over the world. Japan, South Korea, Italy, Germany, UK, Spain, Turkey, etc. Not to make war, but to keep peace.
This war is not ended. Biden abandoned 200+ Americans after stating forcefully the US would remain until everyone is brought home. What Biden has done is to ensure a greater, more difficult war that some other president and a cleanup force will have to deal with.
WRONG,
AGAIN,
JOE,
R,
HELL NO
Sure, Russ, Afghanistan is just like Japan, South Korea.....
You, like most of the IC and Pentagon fail generals don't understand anything about Afghan, specifically Pashtun culture, history, and tribal codes. What you and other fantasists are advocating wasn't possible, which is why America had to go.
Great job Mr. Presdident, you have my support.
No one has ever accused Trump of being a "big thinker" on foreign policy or international affairs; the former president has struggled to explain why he's adopted the positions he's espoused; and his policies haven't always matched his rhetoric; but he's nevertheless been a leading voice for bringing troops home.
All of which made it a little weird to see Trump issue a written statement yesterday raising the prospect of going back into Afghanistan. After some routine whining about President Joe Biden — the Republican continues to condemn the way in which the U.S. withdrew from Afghanistan, though he hasn't said why — the former president added:
"... ALL EQUIPMENT should be demanded to be immediately returned to the United States, and that includes every penny of the $85 billion dollars in cost. If it is not handed back, we should either go in with unequivocal Military force and get it, or at least bomb the hell out of it."
Right off the bat, the idea that the Taliban has "$85 billion dollars" in equipment isn't true, as the former president really ought to know.
It's also important to emphasize that at issue is military equipment that the United States provided to Afghan security forces over the course of many years. Those who've suggested that we should've reclaimed or destroyed the equipment as we began our exit are effectively arguing that we should've disarmed Afghanistan's military for what was expected to be a protracted conflict.
There's also the inconvenient detail that the Taliban cannot actually use much of the equipment it's now obtained.
But putting all of that aside, what's perhaps most notable was Trump floating the idea of the United States going back into Afghanistan "with unequivocal military force" — as if that would go well.
And he deserves your support
You are a liar
You say it wasn't possible to keep marines in country to secure the evacuation, but that's exactly what happened after the situation became an embarrassment.
You can blame Joe for believing the assurances of the crooked intel agencies; triple-letters that Joe knows are more focused on influencing domestic politics than their actual jobs.
But really those CIA and DIA officials are the ones who should be job hunting next week. If they legitimately thought their flimsy puppet regime, whos only identifiable ideals were "women should be able to wear denim and the opium should flow freely", was going to hold out against the Pashtuns then I genuinely fear for our security with them at the helm.
Trump's presidency is summarized by how he treated the historically black colleges.
Do you know what he did?
4:39 PM (no name anon)
Thanks for the fake straw-man lesson in Pashtun cultural studies. Here's a little recent history - No US servicemen were killed in AFG for 18 months until the Biden surrender.
What you fail to understand in your sanctimonious remarks is that the tribes who populate the synthetic country of Afghanistan respect strength and power. Not weakness and surrender. That's sort of a historical trait there.
The naivete you've shown in your rote repeated, blind support of this corrupt poser, tells me you're nothing but a blinkered partisan. A know-nothing.
Why don't you man up, tag a nick to you comments and own them.
"...Afghanistan respect strength and power."
Sure do. Then they defeated that county and kicked it out because they hate foreigners telling them what to do more.
The silly idea that you think we can occupy this country at some level is naive.
Which is why we negotiated to leave; Biden stuck to his guns and got us out.
5:34 PM
Another false argument. I haven't said anything about occupying AFG. I recommended maintaining a garrison. By your definition, I guess we're "occupying" Japan, Italy and Germany.
(Pssst - we're not)
When we pulled or talked about pulling 3,000 troops out of South Korea due to the personnel demands of the Iraq War, the South Koreans protested.
When Trump wanted to pull troops out of Germany Merkel complained
Some occupation.
But if you cared a whit about US standing and our dignity as a nation, you wouldn't be a cheerleader for US defeat and a political slave to your idolized corrupt poser.
As usual no answer
We lost, the Taliban achieved their political objectives on the battlefield and in the negotiations. The primary objective being the end of any occupation.
How on earth do you keep any minimal force in the country? Especially at Bagram? That's the reality. None of us may like it, but it's not false or fake.
A minimal force in country was not said. Maintenance of a garrison was said.
lefties, commies and foreigners are out in droves.
Post a Comment