On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:02:25 -0700, "max headroom" wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>typed:
>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:
<snip>
>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.
>
>> Nope.
>
>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the treaty
>> deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.
>
>Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an emergency, it was
>an emergency of Biden's making.

The withdrawal and it's schedule were negotiated by September the year before. The
withdrawal itself began before Biden was elected. Most of the troops to be withdrawn were
already gone before Biden was even sworn in. The due date was May but Biden delayed that
until September in order to have more time to get more people and equipment out.

The Afghanistan debacle was of Trump's making. To start with, he ignored the
internationally recognized government and negotiated with terrorists who repeatedly broke
the terms of the agreement.

>> Plus that whole situation was set up by Trump. Not just the treadty
>> but also including the US troop withdrawals completed before 20 Jan
>> 2020, which left the main base tactically indefensible.
>
>And yet, after the treaty was signed, the only U.S. troops to be killed in
>action were the 13 killed at the Kabul airport.

Others were killed in other parts of the country. But that sad loss ensured the
evacuation of thousands from the country. There were far fewer casualties leaving
Afghanistan than there were evacuating Saigon.

>> Such as how your above statement hinges on how there were a ~dozen
>> casualties, but ignores how many were rescued in return:
>
>Thirteen U.S. personnel and ~170 others.

What others?

>How many were left behind?

How many got out?

>I don't recall Nixon or Ford or Goldwater or even Reagan ever commenting on Joe
>Biden's incompetence.

Yet the top line Republicans today plus two Presidents have sure talked about Trump's.

>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.
>
>Why was it conducted under fire? It could have been executed months earlier in
>an orderly manner from the Bagram airfield, an American stronghold.
>
>https://thehill.com/policy/defense/574283-top-generals-contradict-biden-say-they-advised-leaving-2500-troops-in/

That article details a pentagon recommendation for an occupation force to be left in
country long term pending negotiations between the Afghani government and the Taliban.
There is no mention of Bagram or alternate withdrawal plans. Fail.

>>>> For one thing, Nixon and Reagan fought against Russian domination.
>>>> Trump will embrace it.
>
>>> You're deluded.
>
>> Trump has already embraced Putin. And North Korea's Kim Jong Un too.
>
>It's the art of the deal, baby! Butter 'em up, knock 'em down.

Mr Chamberlain tried that in 1938. We know now that doesn't work. You can't deal with a
dictator itching to use the army at his back.

Putin thinks we're weak. It's important to show him we are not. That our allies are not.
That we're willing to go to bat even for non NATO nations. Biden's resistance also
signals to China to leave Taiwan alone. Selling nuclear submarines to Australia
reinforces that.

Trump would give Taiwan to Xi and Ukraine to Putin leaving us to wonder in a generation
how Russia came to dominate Europe and China came into possession of its neighbors.

Swill

On 7/13/2024 8:43 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
> You can't deal with a
> dictator itching to use the army at his back.

X-Complaints-To:abuse(at)newshosting.com

https://www.newshosting.com/terms-of-service.php

Acceptable use policy. You may not use our services or our system to
post or transmit any illegal material, including without limitation any
transmissions that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to
civil liability, or otherwise violate any local, state, national or
international law or regulation. In particular, the following is a
representative, non-exhaustive list of acts that are prohibited:

ACTS WHICH INVOLVE DECEPTIVE ONLINE MARKETING PRACTICES ||OR FRAUD;||
ACTS WHICH MAY MATERIALLY AFFECT THE QUALITY OF OTHER USERS' EXPERIENCE;
TRANSMITTING OR RECEIVING, UPLOADING, USING OR REUSING MATERIAL WHICH IS
ABUSIVE, INDECENT, DEFAMATORY, OBSCENE OR MENACING, OR A BREACH OF
CONFIDENCE, PRIVACY OR SIMILAR THIRD-PARTY RIGHTS;

||FURNISHING FALSE OR INCORRECT PERSONAL INFORMATION WHEN CREATING AN
ACCOUNT||

X-Complaints-To:abuse(at)newshosting.com

On 7/13/24 1:02 AM, max headroom wrote:
> In news:v6rkua$33f3e$2@dont-email.me, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
> typed:
>
>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:
>>> In news:8j219jpt65t7217mptgrd1psf1j28pm2pt@4ax.com, Governor Swill
>>> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:45:16 -0700, "max headroom"
>>>> <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>> In news:voov8jdvvn77mk724pmggsjdeqafk49p3p@4ax.com, Governor Swill
>>>>> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 22:45:24 -0700, "max headroom"
>>>>>> <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> In news:m7mu8jt327560hca71k534pfoq8433tq0a@4ax.com, Governor
>>>>>>> Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:44:30 -0700, "max headroom"
>>>>>>>> <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In news:q2pk8j19pjjrbvkf4r1d0qdmfim9k0qfvg@4ax.com, Governor
>>>>>>>>> Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 7 Jul 2024 00:33:39 -0000 (UTC), pothead
>>>>>>>>>> <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>> The key point here is that the MSM is NOT to be trusted.
>>>>>>>>>>> They have been exposed as being just another department of
>>>>>>>>>>> the DNC.
>
>>>>>>>>>> "For the first time in my long life, I'm gonna have to vote
>>>>>>>>>> for a Democrat." https://rvat.org/testimonial/david-3/
>
>>>>>>>>> Have they figured out who that's gonna be?
>
>>>>>>>>> Does it matter?
>
>>>>>>> Ahh, a true "yellow dog Democrat."
>
>>>>>> <shrug> Party is irrelevant. I was a Nixon/Reagan Republican.
>
>>>>> Was that the last time you *weren't* a yellow dog Democrat?
>
>>>>>> But Trump isn't a Republican. He's a RINO, just like you.
>
>>>>> Ahh, you assume much.
>
>>>> It's not an assumption. You support Donald Trump for President....
>
>>> As the only realistic alternative to the Biden disaster. I might
>>> even vote for him, although in my state it won't matter.
>
>>> Remember Hillary's ads regarding the 3 a.m. phone call? Do you want
>>> Joe Biden answering that 3 a.m. phone call? Is he capable of being
>>> Commander in Chief in an emergency?
>
>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.
>
>> Nope.
>
>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the treaty
>> deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.
>
> Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an emergency, it was
> an emergency of Biden's making.
>
>> Plus that whole situation was set up by Trump. Not just the treadty
>> but also including the US troop withdrawals completed before 20 Jan
>> 2020, which left the main base tactically indefensible.
>
> And yet, after the treaty was signed, the only U.S. troops to be killed in
> action were the 13 killed at the Kabul airport.
>
>> Plus:
>
>>>> Many views you've espoused here are very far to the right of even
>>>> the most devout Republican of Nixon's time.
>
>>> Such as?
>
>> Such as how your above statement hinges on how there were a ~dozen
>> casualties, but ignores how many were rescued in return:
>
> Thirteen U.S. personnel and ~170 others.

With over 122,000 airlifted out, so for the US personnel losses that
you're allegedly so concerned about, 122K/13 = 9,385 rescued per loss.

That's the key metric from this operation to compare against history.
The 1975 fall of Saigon (Operation Frequent Wind) rescued 7,000 with
two US casualties, so its 7K/2 = 3,500 rescued per loss = not as good:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Frequent_Wind>

> How many were left behind?

Far too many, as they should have been granted papers with which to
leave in 2020 but Trump's Administration kept changing the rules to make
it harder & harder ... a classical "Move the Goalposts" dishonesty.

> I don't recall Nixon or Ford or Goldwater or even Reagan ever commenting on Joe
> Biden's incompetence.

I don't recall any of them saying you were competent at all either.

>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.
>
> Why was it conducted under fire?

Because Trump didn't do it during his tenure, as he had promised since
2015, and by also refusing to support POTUS transition 11/20-1/21, the
next Administration was coming in blind: the 1 May 2021 deadline was
only ~100 days into their Administration's start date.

Plus because Trump set this up during his tenure by signing the Doha
agreement in Feb 2020 to set the deadline of being complete by May 2021.
Trump also ordered the US troop withdrawals to below 2000 which resulted
in DoD having to abandon the Kandahar airbase in 5/21 & Bagram in 7/21,
which made the final departure from the commercial airport be high risk.

> It could have been executed months earlier in
> an orderly manner from the Bagram airfield, an American stronghold.

"Could have", sure ... had the Trump Administration (A) actually had
been doing any actual planning; & (B) had cooperated during transition.
Since there was no plan written by 1/21/21, all of the logistical
planning had to be started & developed from scratch, which takes time.

> https://thehill.com/policy/defense/574283-top-generals-contradict-biden-say-they-advised-leaving-2500-troops-in/

Yes, DoD wanted to stay, but that was a violation of the Doha Agreement.
As such, the Taliban had every right after 5/1/24 to attack US troops.

But DoD doesn't set policy - the civilian leadership has that role &
responsibility. As such, DoD was given their orders to get out: because
no operational planning had been done, the as-executed plan slipped
schedule from the wishful thinking of 1 May to being 31 August.

>>>> For one thing, Nixon and Reagan fought against Russian domination.
>>>> Trump will embrace it.
>
>>> You're deluded.
>>
>> Trump has already embraced Putin. And North Korea's Kim Jong Un too.
>
> It's the art of the deal, baby! Butter 'em up, knock 'em down.

The only thing that got buttered up ... was Trump.

-hh

On 7/13/24 10:43 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:02:25 -0700, "max headroom" wrote:
>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>typed:
>>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:
> <snip>
>>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.
>>
>>> Nope.
>>
>>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the treaty
>>> deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.
>>
>> Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an emergency, it was
>> an emergency of Biden's making.
>
> The withdrawal and it's schedule were negotiated by September the year before. The
> withdrawal itself began before Biden was elected. Most of the troops to be withdrawn were
> already gone before Biden was even sworn in. The due date was May but Biden delayed that
> until September in order to have more time to get more people and equipment out.
>
> The Afghanistan debacle was of Trump's making. To start with, he ignored the
> internationally recognized government and negotiated with terrorists who repeatedly broke
> the terms of the agreement.
>
>>> Plus that whole situation was set up by Trump. Not just the treadty
>>> but also including the US troop withdrawals completed before 20 Jan
>>> 2020, which left the main base tactically indefensible.
>>
>> And yet, after the treaty was signed, the only U.S. troops to be killed in
>> action were the 13 killed at the Kabul airport.
>
> Others were killed in other parts of the country. But that sad loss ensured the
> evacuation of thousands from the country. There were far fewer casualties leaving
> Afghanistan than there were evacuating Saigon.
>
>>> Such as how your above statement hinges on how there were a ~dozen
>>> casualties, but ignores how many were rescued in return:
>>
>> Thirteen U.S. personnel and ~170 others.
>
> What others?
>
>> How many were left behind?
>
> How many got out?
>
>> I don't recall Nixon or Ford or Goldwater or even Reagan ever commenting on Joe
>> Biden's incompetence.
>
> Yet the top line Republicans today plus two Presidents have sure talked about Trump's.
>
>>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.
>>
>> Why was it conducted under fire? It could have been executed months earlier in
>> an orderly manner from the Bagram airfield, an American stronghold.
>>
>> https://thehill.com/policy/defense/574283-top-generals-contradict-biden-say-they-advised-leaving-2500-troops-in/
>
> That article details a pentagon recommendation for an occupation force to be left in
> country long term pending negotiations between the Afghani government and the Taliban.
> There is no mention of Bagram or alternate withdrawal plans. Fail.

Plus something I forgot to mention in my post of a minute ago was that
the Doha Agreement excluded the Afghanistan Government participation.

-hh

>
>>>>> For one thing, Nixon and Reagan fought against Russian domination.
>>>>> Trump will embrace it.
>>
>>>> You're deluded.
>>
>>> Trump has already embraced Putin. And North Korea's Kim Jong Un too.
>>
>> It's the art of the deal, baby! Butter 'em up, knock 'em down.
>
> Mr Chamberlain tried that in 1938. We know now that doesn't work. You can't deal with a
> dictator itching to use the army at his back.
>
> Putin thinks we're weak. It's important to show him we are not. That our allies are not.
> That we're willing to go to bat even for non NATO nations. Biden's resistance also
> signals to China to leave Taiwan alone. Selling nuclear submarines to Australia
> reinforces that.
>
> Trump would give Taiwan to Xi and Ukraine to Putin leaving us to wonder in a generation
> how Russia came to dominate Europe and China came into possession of its neighbors.
>
> Swill

On 7/13/2024 11:14 AM, -hh wrote:
>
>>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.
>>
>> Why was it conducted under fire?
>
> Because Trump didn't do it during his tenure, as he had promised since
> 2015, and by also refusing to support POTUS transition 11/20-1/21, the
> next Administration was coming in blind:  the 1 May 2021 deadline was
> only ~100 days into their Administration's start date.

No administration comes in "blind" that is utter BULLSHITE!

This nation is being run by the Senior Executive Service/deep state.

Ergo Uniparty and its windshield wiper gyrations are just shell games
for the common folk, the uneducated ones.

> Plus because Trump set this up during his tenure by signing the Doha
> agreement in Feb 2020 to set the deadline of being complete by May 2021.

Good, then they had more than enough time to make an orderly exit.

> Trump also ordered the US troop withdrawals to below 2000 which resulted
> in DoD having to abandon the Kandahar airbase in 5/21 & Bagram in 7/21,
> which made the final departure from the commercial airport be high risk.

Lies - Biden could have bolstered security on the ground or even called
in suppression air strikes, but he chose instead to sacrifice American
lives, you treasonous vermin!

On 7/13/24 1:27 PM, C_V wrote:
> On 7/13/2024 11:14 AM, -hh wrote:
>>
>>>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>>>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>>>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.
>>>
>>> Why was it conducted under fire?
>>
>> Because Trump didn't do it during his tenure, as he had promised since
>> 2015, and by also refusing to support POTUS transition 11/20-1/21, the
>> next Administration was coming in blind:  the 1 May 2021 deadline was
>> only ~100 days into their Administration's start date.
>
> No administration comes in "blind" that is utter BULLSHITE!

"Trump blocks Biden’s incoming staff in unprecedented ways

Trump’s stonewalling of the incoming administration is leaving even some
in his own party concerned."

<https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/17/trump-blocking-biden-transition-436807>

"Unlike previous presidential transitions, which normally take place
during the roughly 10-week period between the election in the first week
of November and the inauguration on January 20, Biden's presidential
transition was shortened somewhat because the General Services
Administration under the outgoing Trump administration did not recognize
Biden as the "apparent winner" until November 23."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_transition_of_Joe_Biden>

Gosh, you're quite out-of-touch with what's been widely reported on.

> This nation is being run by the Senior Executive Service/deep state.
>
> Ergo Uniparty and its windshield wiper gyrations are just shell games
> for the common folk, the uneducated ones.

But if that were true, then Biden's election was all planned out, and
there wouldn't have been any transition problems as per the above.

As such, you'd better be able to substantiate your "uniparty" claims.

>
>> Plus because Trump set this up during his tenure by signing the Doha
>> agreement in Feb 2020 to set the deadline of being complete by May 2021.
>
> Good, then they had more than enough time to make an orderly exit.

Except that Trump . Did . Not . Actually . Make . Any . Such . Plan.

Just like the impending "drive off a cliff" of the income tax rate
increase you're going to be starting to pay in 19 months, it was planned
that way by the Trump Administration to be a very short term "win!" that
added $2T to the deficit and which is going to continue to screw over
the middle class for the next decade...because our tax cut expires after
2025, whereas the corporate cuts are forever.

Naturally, the usual mouth-breathers will blame whoever's POTUS in 2026
for their tax increases, not that it was Republicans in December 2017.

>> Trump also ordered the US troop withdrawals to below 2000 which
>> resulted in DoD having to abandon the Kandahar airbase in 5/21 &
>> Bagram in 7/21, which made the final departure from the commercial
>> airport be high risk.
>
> Lies - Biden could have bolstered security on the ground or even called
> in suppression air strikes, but he chose instead to sacrifice American
> lives, you treasonous vermin!

Where these "air strikes" would have been where?
Into the civilian crowds?

Don't forget that there was a strike that was made at the time which
turned out to have been an IFF mistake.

But sure, go ahead and blather about treasonous nonsense, when your
comments reveal to everyone just how blessedly clueless you are about
the nature of asymmetric warfare, Rules of Engagement, etc.

-hh

On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 10:22:09 -0600, C_V <c_v@invalid.net> wrote:

>On 7/13/2024 8:43 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
>> You can't deal with a
>> dictator itching to use the army at his back.
>
>X-Complaints-To:abuse(at)newshosting.com

"Southern Russian Heat Wave Knocks Out Power for Over 500K People"
<https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/07/09/southern-russian-heat-wave-knocks-out-power-for-over-500k-people-a85661>

Swill

On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 13:16:21 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

>Plus something I forgot to mention in my post of a minute ago was that
>the Doha Agreement excluded the Afghanistan Government participation.

In short, Trump negotiated with a terrorist organization that helped Al Queda bring down
the towers, in order to turn an entire country over to them.

Swill

On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 13:14:15 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

>On 7/13/24 1:02 AM, max headroom wrote:
>> In news:v6rkua$33f3e$2@dont-email.me, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
>> typed:
>>
>>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:
>>>> In news:8j219jpt65t7217mptgrd1psf1j28pm2pt@4ax.com, Governor Swill
>>>> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:45:16 -0700, "max headroom"
>>>>> <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In news:voov8jdvvn77mk724pmggsjdeqafk49p3p@4ax.com, Governor Swill
>>>>>> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 22:45:24 -0700, "max headroom"
>>>>>>> <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In news:m7mu8jt327560hca71k534pfoq8433tq0a@4ax.com, Governor
>>>>>>>> Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:44:30 -0700, "max headroom"
>>>>>>>>> <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In news:q2pk8j19pjjrbvkf4r1d0qdmfim9k0qfvg@4ax.com, Governor
>>>>>>>>>> Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 7 Jul 2024 00:33:39 -0000 (UTC), pothead
>>>>>>>>>>> <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The key point here is that the MSM is NOT to be trusted.
>>>>>>>>>>>> They have been exposed as being just another department of
>>>>>>>>>>>> the DNC.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "For the first time in my long life, I'm gonna have to vote
>>>>>>>>>>> for a Democrat." https://rvat.org/testimonial/david-3/
>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have they figured out who that's gonna be?
>>
>>>>>>>>>> Does it matter?
>>
>>>>>>>> Ahh, a true "yellow dog Democrat."
>>
>>>>>>> <shrug> Party is irrelevant. I was a Nixon/Reagan Republican.
>>
>>>>>> Was that the last time you *weren't* a yellow dog Democrat?
>>
>>>>>>> But Trump isn't a Republican. He's a RINO, just like you.
>>
>>>>>> Ahh, you assume much.
>>
>>>>> It's not an assumption. You support Donald Trump for President....
>>
>>>> As the only realistic alternative to the Biden disaster. I might
>>>> even vote for him, although in my state it won't matter.
>>
>>>> Remember Hillary's ads regarding the 3 a.m. phone call? Do you want
>>>> Joe Biden answering that 3 a.m. phone call? Is he capable of being
>>>> Commander in Chief in an emergency?
>>
>>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.
>>
>>> Nope.
>>
>>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the treaty
>>> deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.
>>
>> Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an emergency, it was
>> an emergency of Biden's making.
>>
>>> Plus that whole situation was set up by Trump. Not just the treadty
>>> but also including the US troop withdrawals completed before 20 Jan
>>> 2020, which left the main base tactically indefensible.
>>
>> And yet, after the treaty was signed, the only U.S. troops to be killed in
>> action were the 13 killed at the Kabul airport.
>>
>>> Plus:
>>
>>>>> Many views you've espoused here are very far to the right of even
>>>>> the most devout Republican of Nixon's time.
>>
>>>> Such as?
>>
>>> Such as how your above statement hinges on how there were a ~dozen
>>> casualties, but ignores how many were rescued in return:
>>
>> Thirteen U.S. personnel and ~170 others.
>
>With over 122,000 airlifted out, so for the US personnel losses that
>you're allegedly so concerned about, 122K/13 = 9,385 rescued per loss.
>
>That's the key metric from this operation to compare against history.
>The 1975 fall of Saigon (Operation Frequent Wind) rescued 7,000 with
>two US casualties, so its 7K/2 = 3,500 rescued per loss = not as good:
>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Frequent_Wind>
>
>> How many were left behind?
>
>Far too many, as they should have been granted papers with which to
>leave in 2020 but Trump's Administration kept changing the rules to make
>it harder & harder ... a classical "Move the Goalposts" dishonesty.
>
>
>> I don't recall Nixon or Ford or Goldwater or even Reagan ever commenting on Joe
>> Biden's incompetence.
>
>I don't recall any of them saying you were competent at all either.
>
>
>>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.
>>
>> Why was it conducted under fire?
>
>Because Trump didn't do it during his tenure, as he had promised since
>2015, and by also refusing to support POTUS transition 11/20-1/21, the
>next Administration was coming in blind: the 1 May 2021 deadline was
>only ~100 days into their Administration's start date.
>
>Plus because Trump set this up during his tenure by signing the Doha
>agreement in Feb 2020 to set the deadline of being complete by May 2021.
>Trump also ordered the US troop withdrawals to below 2000 which resulted
>in DoD having to abandon the Kandahar airbase in 5/21 & Bagram in 7/21,
>which made the final departure from the commercial airport be high risk.
>
>
>> It could have been executed months earlier in
>> an orderly manner from the Bagram airfield, an American stronghold.
>
>"Could have", sure ... had the Trump Administration (A) actually had
>been doing any actual planning; & (B) had cooperated during transition.
>Since there was no plan written by 1/21/21, all of the logistical
>planning had to be started & developed from scratch, which takes time.
>
>
>> https://thehill.com/policy/defense/574283-top-generals-contradict-biden-say-they-advised-leaving-2500-troops-in/
>
>Yes, DoD wanted to stay, but that was a violation of the Doha Agreement.
>As such, the Taliban had every right after 5/1/24 to attack US troops.
>
>But DoD doesn't set policy - the civilian leadership has that role &
>responsibility. As such, DoD was given their orders to get out: because
>no operational planning had been done, the as-executed plan slipped
>schedule from the wishful thinking of 1 May to being 31 August.
>
>
>>>>> For one thing, Nixon and Reagan fought against Russian domination.
>>>>> Trump will embrace it.
>>
>>>> You're deluded.
> >>
>>> Trump has already embraced Putin. And North Korea's Kim Jong Un too.
>>
>> It's the art of the deal, baby! Butter 'em up, knock 'em down.
>
>The only thing that got buttered up ... was Trump.

In short, the Afghanistan debacle was Trump's fault.

Swill

Jack Carlson wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 12 Jul 2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> posted some
> news:lfedorF1breU1@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 10:35:54 -0600, C_V <c_v@invalid.net> wrote in
>><v6rm1a$331ne$28@dont-email.me>:
>>
>>> agency chill
>>
>> I have half a mind to nymshift to "Agent Chill".
>>
>> And this has fsck-all to do with Linux. Why do you political
>> spammers continue to use this froup?
>
> Because it's important that you mixed-deck neophites playing with an
> inferior operating system ...

Sorry bub, but I use Linux, not Windoze.

> ...be properly informed, so you can vote for your
> usual Eric Cartman leadership.

--
Never commit yourself! Let someone else commit you.

On 7/14/2024 5:17 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Jack Carlson wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 12 Jul 2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> posted some
>> news:lfedorF1breU1@mid.individual.net:
>>
>>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 10:35:54 -0600, C_V <c_v@invalid.net> wrote in
>>> <v6rm1a$331ne$28@dont-email.me>:
>>>
>>>> agency chill
>>>
>>> I have half a mind to nymshift to "Agent Chill".
>>>
>>> And this has fsck-all to do with Linux. Why do you political
>>> spammers continue to use this froup?
>>
>> Because it's important that you mixed-deck neophites playing with an
>> inferior operating system ...
>
> Sorry bub, but I use Linux, not Windoze.

Our sympathies.

The planet runs on Windows, Linux not so much. Linux used to be the
free OS of choice for manufacturing and communications, it's being
supplanted by other more robust and secure kernels. Perhaps you missed
the recent admissions of AT&T, T-Mobile and CDK where Linux based
environments were exploited.

In news:jd359jhnmcn9obn694t4e2br3bs3gegpgn@4ax.com, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:

> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:02:25 -0700, "max headroom" wrote:
>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>typed:
>>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:

> <snip>

>>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.

>>> Nope.

>>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the
>>> treaty deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.

>> Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an
>> emergency, it was an emergency of Biden's making.

> The withdrawal and it's schedule were negotiated by September the
> year before. The withdrawal itself began before Biden was elected.
> Most of the troops to be withdrawn were already gone before Biden was
> even sworn in. The due date was May but Biden delayed that until
> September in order to have more time to get more people and equipment
> out.

So Biden felt no hesitance toward ignoring the schedule.

> The Afghanistan debacle was of Trump's making. To start with, he
> ignored the internationally recognized government and negotiated with
> terrorists who repeatedly broke the terms of the agreement.

So the agreement was null and void.

>>> Plus that whole situation was set up by Trump. Not just the treadty
>>> but also including the US troop withdrawals completed before 20 Jan
>>> 2020, which left the main base tactically indefensible.

>> And yet, after the treaty was signed, the only U.S. troops to be
>> killed in action were the 13 killed at the Kabul airport.

> Others were killed in other parts of the country....

Nope.

> ... But that sad loss ensured the evacuation of thousands from the
> country....

How did being the victims of a suicide bomber ensure anything other than jihadi
celebrations?

> ... There were far fewer casualties leaving Afghanistan than there were
> evacuating Saigon.

The evacuation of Saigon wasn't scheduled months in advance.

>>> Such as how your above statement hinges on how there were a ~dozen
>>> casualties, but ignores how many were rescued in return:

>> Thirteen U.S. personnel and ~170 others.

> What others?

Afghan civilians.

>> How many were left behind?

> How many got out?

How many fell from the wings of departing jets? That's the image the world
remembers of the American exit from Afghanistan.

>> I don't recall Nixon or Ford or Goldwater or even Reagan ever
>> commenting on Joe Biden's incompetence.

> Yet the top line Republicans today plus two Presidents have sure
> talked about Trump's.

And the top line Democrats today plus a president have sure talked about
Biden's..

>>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.

>> Why was it conducted under fire? It could have been executed months
>> earlier in an orderly manner from the Bagram airfield, an American
>> stronghold.

>> https://thehill.com/policy/defense/574283-top-generals-contradict-biden-say-they-advised-leaving-2500-troops-in/

> That article details a pentagon recommendation for an occupation
> force to be left in country long term pending negotiations between
> the Afghani government and the Taliban....

The article details Biden's top generals telling the U.S. Senate that Biden lied
when he said that he followed their advice to evacuate Afghanistan.

> ... There is no mention of Bagram or alternate withdrawal plans. Fail.

"Fail" is a good word choice to describe Biden as Commander-in-chief. Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark A. Milley, described Biden's
withdrawal plan as a "strategic failure."

>>>>> For one thing, Nixon and Reagan fought against Russian domination.
>>>>> Trump will embrace it.

>>>> You're deluded.

>>> Trump has already embraced Putin. And North Korea's Kim Jong Un
>>> too.

>> It's the art of the deal, baby! Butter 'em up, knock 'em down.

> Mr Chamberlain tried that in 1938. We know now that doesn't work.
> You can't deal with a dictator itching to use the army at his back.

Yet Putin invaded no one and Kim curtailed missile tests while Trump was prez.

> Putin thinks we're weak.....

No, Putin and Xi and Kim think Biden is weak.

> ... It's important to show him we are not. That our allies are not. That
> we're willing to go to bat even for non NATO nations. Biden's resistance also
> signals to China to leave Taiwan alone. Selling nuclear submarines to
> Australia reinforces that.

Those are nuclear-powered subs, not nuclear armed.

> Trump would give Taiwan to Xi and Ukraine to Putin leaving us to
> wonder in a generation how Russia came to dominate Europe and China
> came into possession of its neighbors.

You're deluded.

Robert Gowan wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 7/14/2024 5:17 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Jack Carlson wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On 12 Jul 2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> posted some
>>> news:lfedorF1breU1@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 10:35:54 -0600, C_V <c_v@invalid.net> wrote in
>>>> <v6rm1a$331ne$28@dont-email.me>:
>>>>
>>>>> agency chill
>>>>
>>>> I have half a mind to nymshift to "Agent Chill".
>>>>
>>>> And this has fsck-all to do with Linux. Why do you political
>>>> spammers continue to use this froup?
>>>
>>> Because it's important that you mixed-deck neophites playing with an
>>> inferior operating system ...
>>
>> Sorry bub, but I use Linux, not Windoze.
>
> Our sympathies.
>
> The planet runs on Windows, Linux not so much.

:-D

https://www.enterpriseappstoday.com/stats/linux-statistics.html

47% of Professional developers prefer Linux operating systems. (Statista)

Its capabilities account for 39.2% of websites whose operating systems are
known. (W3Techs)

85% of smartphones are powered by Linux (Hayden James).
Android, built on the Linux kernel, dominates the global smartphone market
with a staggering 70% market share.

By 2027, the global Linux market will reach $15.64 trillion. (Fortune
Business Insights).

Linux is the operating system of all the world's fastest supercomputers.
(Blackdown)

96.3% of The top 1,000,000 web servers use Linux. (ZDNet)

The cloud computing landscape heavily relies on Linux, with over 90% of
public cloud workloads being Linux-based.

Despite its desktop market share, Linux accounts for approximately 36.7% of
all operating systems on desktop computers.

> Linux used to be the
> free OS of choice for manufacturing and communications, it's being
> supplanted by other more robust and secure kernels. Perhaps you missed
> the recent admissions of AT&T, T-Mobile and CDK where Linux based
> environments were exploited.

So what? It's not like Windows Servers are squeaky clean. I would first
question the patching programs of these companies. I can't tell you how many
time I've gotten notices from big organizations about my data being
compromised.

In any case, save your sympathy for the poor Windows users posting
issues to Microsoft, only to get almost nothing but non-answers from
Microsoft "MVPs" :-D.

In the meantime, I've been luvvin' Linux for a couple decades.

--
Work consists of whatever a body is obliged to do.
Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do.
-- Mark Twain

On 7/15/2024 9:29 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> https://www.enterpriseappstoday.com/stats/linux-statistics.html
>
>
> Despite its desktop market share, Linux accounts for approximately 36.7% of
> all operating systems on desktop computers.

heh! Such a stat could only have been concocted by a Linux idiot.

Why don't you ask him to support that wild-ass claim.

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 09:29:46 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:

>Robert Gowan wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 7/14/2024 5:17 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> Jack Carlson wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>
>>>> On 12 Jul 2024, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> posted some
>>>> news:lfedorF1breU1@mid.individual.net:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 10:35:54 -0600, C_V <c_v@invalid.net> wrote in
>>>>> <v6rm1a$331ne$28@dont-email.me>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> agency chill
>>>>>
>>>>> I have half a mind to nymshift to "Agent Chill".
>>>>>
>>>>> And this has fsck-all to do with Linux. Why do you political
>>>>> spammers continue to use this froup?
>>>>
>>>> Because it's important that you mixed-deck neophites playing with an
>>>> inferior operating system ...
>>>
>>> Sorry bub, but I use Linux, not Windoze.
>>
>> Our sympathies.
>>
>> The planet runs on Windows, Linux not so much.
>
>:-D
>
> https://www.enterpriseappstoday.com/stats/linux-statistics.html
>
> 47% of Professional developers prefer Linux operating systems. (Statista)
>
> Its capabilities account for 39.2% of websites whose operating systems are
> known. (W3Techs)
>
> 85% of smartphones are powered by Linux (Hayden James).
> Android, built on the Linux kernel, dominates the global smartphone market
> with a staggering 70% market share.
>
> By 2027, the global Linux market will reach $15.64 trillion. (Fortune
> Business Insights).
>
> Linux is the operating system of all the world's fastest supercomputers.
> (Blackdown)
>
> 96.3% of The top 1,000,000 web servers use Linux. (ZDNet)
>
> The cloud computing landscape heavily relies on Linux, with over 90% of
> public cloud workloads being Linux-based.
>
> Despite its desktop market share, Linux accounts for approximately 36.7% of
> all operating systems on desktop computers.
>
>> Linux used to be the
>> free OS of choice for manufacturing and communications, it's being
>> supplanted by other more robust and secure kernels. Perhaps you missed
>> the recent admissions of AT&T, T-Mobile and CDK where Linux based
>> environments were exploited.
>
>So what? It's not like Windows Servers are squeaky clean. I would first
>question the patching programs of these companies. I can't tell you how many
>time I've gotten notices from big organizations about my data being
>compromised.
>
>In any case, save your sympathy for the poor Windows users posting
>issues to Microsoft, only to get almost nothing but non-answers from
>Microsoft "MVPs" :-D.
>
>In the meantime, I've been luvvin' Linux for a couple decades.

Linux has everything but the consumer/business desktop market.

Swill

If you have a medical emergency, stop reading, log off, and dial 911!

> 47% of Professional developers prefer Linux operating systems. (Statista)

We prefer open source systems. Other than that, it's like preferring
a screwdriver to a box-end wrench. If your task is rendering graphics
or audio, a Mac is a good choice... so long as *I* don't have to buy
it or use it for anything else.

To a computer scientist, they're all the same (if you put a sack over
their heads). They're to the same purpose, anyway.

I dunno what we did before we had the Google Cloud Platform (GCP).
Students show up with all sorts of machines in every state of
disrepair. They get a GCP account with their fees and I give them a
video to configure it. Thus, we all start on the same sheet of
music... or that's the theory, anyway.

On 12 Jul 2024, "max headroom" <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> posted some
news:v6t1po$3euvk$2@dont-email.me:

> In news:v6rkua$33f3e$2@dont-email.me, -hh
> <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> typed:
>
>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:
>>> In news:8j219jpt65t7217mptgrd1psf1j28pm2pt@4ax.com, Governor Swill
>>> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:45:16 -0700, "max headroom"
>>>> <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>> In news:voov8jdvvn77mk724pmggsjdeqafk49p3p@4ax.com, Governor Swill
>>>>> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 22:45:24 -0700, "max headroom"
>>>>>> <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> In news:m7mu8jt327560hca71k534pfoq8433tq0a@4ax.com, Governor
>>>>>>> Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:44:30 -0700, "max headroom"
>>>>>>>> <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In news:q2pk8j19pjjrbvkf4r1d0qdmfim9k0qfvg@4ax.com, Governor
>>>>>>>>> Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 7 Jul 2024 00:33:39 -0000 (UTC), pothead
>>>>>>>>>> <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>> The key point here is that the MSM is NOT to be trusted.
>>>>>>>>>>> They have been exposed as being just another department of
>>>>>>>>>>> the DNC.
>
>>>>>>>>>> "For the first time in my long life, I'm gonna have to vote
>>>>>>>>>> for a Democrat." https://rvat.org/testimonial/david-3/
>
>>>>>>>>> Have they figured out who that's gonna be?
>
>>>>>>>>> Does it matter?
>
>>>>>>> Ahh, a true "yellow dog Democrat."
>
>>>>>> <shrug> Party is irrelevant. I was a Nixon/Reagan Republican.
>
>>>>> Was that the last time you *weren't* a yellow dog Democrat?
>
>>>>>> But Trump isn't a Republican. He's a RINO, just like you.
>
>>>>> Ahh, you assume much.
>
>>>> It's not an assumption. You support Donald Trump for President....
>
>>> As the only realistic alternative to the Biden disaster. I might
>>> even vote for him, although in my state it won't matter.
>
>>> Remember Hillary's ads regarding the 3 a.m. phone call? Do you want
>>> Joe Biden answering that 3 a.m. phone call? Is he capable of being
>>> Commander in Chief in an emergency?
>
>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.
>
>> Nope.
>
>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the
>> treaty deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.
>
> Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an
> emergency, it was an emergency of Biden's making.
>
>> Plus that whole situation was set up by Trump. Not just the treadty
>> but also including the US troop withdrawals completed before 20 Jan
>> 2020, which left the main base tactically indefensible.
>
> And yet, after the treaty was signed, the only U.S. troops to be
> killed in action were the 13 killed at the Kabul airport.
>
>> Plus:
>
>>>> Many views you've espoused here are very far to the right of even
>>>> the most devout Republican of Nixon's time.
>
>>> Such as?
>
>> Such as how your above statement hinges on how there were a ~dozen
>> casualties, but ignores how many were rescued in return:
>
> Thirteen U.S. personnel and ~170 others.
>
> How many were left behind?
>
> I don't recall Nixon or Ford or Goldwater or even Reagan ever
> commenting on Joe Biden's incompetence.
>
>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.
>
> Why was it conducted under fire? It could have been executed months
> earlier in an orderly manner from the Bagram airfield, an American
> stronghold.
>
> https://thehill.com/policy/defense/574283-top-generals-contradict-biden
> -say-they-advised-leaving-2500-troops-in/
>
>>>> For one thing, Nixon and Reagan fought against Russian domination.
>>>> Trump will embrace it.
>
>>> You're deluded.
>
>> Trump has already embraced Putin. And North Korea's Kim Jong Un too.
>
> It's the art of the deal, baby! Butter 'em up, knock 'em down.

That is so true.

On 7/15/24 1:20 AM, max headroom wrote:
> In news:jd359jhnmcn9obn694t4e2br3bs3gegpgn@4ax.com, Governor Swill
> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>
>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:02:25 -0700, "max headroom" wrote:
>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>typed:
>>>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>
>>>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.
>
>>>> Nope.
>
>>>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the
>>>> treaty deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.
>
>>> Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an
>>> emergency, it was an emergency of Biden's making.
>
>> The withdrawal and it's schedule were negotiated by September the
>> year before. The withdrawal itself began before Biden was elected.
>> Most of the troops to be withdrawn were already gone before Biden was
>> even sworn in. The due date was May but Biden delayed that until
>> September in order to have more time to get more people and equipment
>> out.
>
> So Biden felt no hesitance toward ignoring the schedule.

Except that it wasn't. That's why in the end the final date was moved
up to 8/31, rather than the announced 9/11 date. The Taliban were
worried - and rightfully so (see DoD recommendation to stay) that the US
wouldn't actually depart as they had promised, which is why there was
increasing tension after 5/1, which motivated the suicide bombing.

>> The Afghanistan debacle was of Trump's making. To start with, he
>> ignored the internationally recognized government and negotiated with
>> terrorists who repeatedly broke the terms of the agreement.
>
> So the agreement was null and void.

Two separate issues there, bud: Trump made the Doha Agreement without
the internationally recognized government of the country, which was
clearly wrong. Once that agreement had been made, there were various
claims about who broke what but these were never legally resolved, and
because the clock was ticking, effectively became moot. For the most
part, pointing out the Taliban violations (which were actually more of
them not having full control over their militia) was what bought the USA
the deadline extension from May (when we weren't ready, due to no plan
written before 2021) until August, but as can be seen with the suicide
bombing, not everyone agreed with giving the US that time accommodation.

>>>> Plus that whole situation was set up by Trump. Not just the treadty
>>>> but also including the US troop withdrawals completed before 20 Jan
>>>> 2020, which left the main base tactically indefensible.
>
>>> And yet, after the treaty was signed, the only U.S. troops to be
>>> killed in action were the 13 killed at the Kabul airport.
>
>> Others were killed in other parts of the country....
>
> Nope.

Correct: the only US military active duty casualties in 2021 were from
the August bombing. However, there were non-US casualties. Here's one
summary listing, but note that the "who" varies (both sides), plus many
are quite ambiguous as to who the perpetrator was:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_2021_Afghanistan_attacks>

Two of note:

Kabul school bombing (May 2021): killed 85, mostly young school girls
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Kabul_school_bombing>

Kabul airport attack (Aug 2021) where there was also at least 182
civilian deaths in addition to the 13 US servicemen:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Kabul_airport_attack>

Plus let's not forget the the USA's drone retribution strike which
targeted & hit the wrong people, killing ten (10) more civilians:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_2021_Kabul_drone_strike>

>
>> ... But that sad loss ensured the evacuation of thousands from the
>> country....
>
> How did being the victims of a suicide bomber ensure anything other than jihadi
> celebrations?

It enabled those thousands of civilians to successfully escape
repression and likely death at the hands of the Taliban regime.

>> ... There were far fewer casualties leaving Afghanistan than there were
>> evacuating Saigon.
>
> The evacuation of Saigon wasn't scheduled months in advance.

Try actually reading the history. Specifically, the prior evacuations
which occurred in the weeks prior to the embassy helicopter airlift:
in addition to Operation Frequent Wind, there was also at least
Operation Babylift and Operation New Life:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Frequent_Wind>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Babylift>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_New_Life>

Also insightful to show timelines:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Saigon#American_administration_plans_for_final_evacuation>

>>>> Such as how your above statement hinges on how there were a ~dozen
>>>> casualties, but ignores how many were rescued in return:
>
>>> Thirteen U.S. personnel and ~170 others.
>
>> What others?
>
> Afghan civilians.

Which suddenly you now care about. How convenient.

>>> How many were left behind?
>
>> How many got out?
>
> How many fell from the wings of departing jets? That's the image the world
> remembers of the American exit from Afghanistan.

Superficially so, as subsequent reports are estimating that ~30,000
Afghanistani's who didn't successfully escape (or die trying) have since
been systematically hunted down & murdered by the Taliban regime.

FYI, simply look back to the history of the Berlin Wall for parallels of
people willing to take huge risk (& die trying) to escape repression.

>>> I don't recall Nixon or Ford or Goldwater or even Reagan ever
>>> commenting on Joe Biden's incompetence.
>
>> Yet the top line Republicans today plus two Presidents have sure
>> talked about Trump's.
>
> And the top line Democrats today plus a president have sure talked about
> Biden's..

Of course, the real question is what part of "talk" is actually true. /s

>>>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>>>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>>>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.
>
>>> Why was it conducted under fire? It could have been executed months
>>> earlier in an orderly manner from the Bagram airfield, an American
>>> stronghold.
>
>>> https://thehill.com/policy/defense/574283-top-generals-contradict-biden-say-they-advised-leaving-2500-troops-in/
>
>> That article details a pentagon recommendation for an occupation
>> force to be left in country long term pending negotiations between
>> the Afghani government and the Taliban....
>
> The article details Biden's top generals telling the U.S. Senate that Biden lied
> when he said that he followed their advice to evacuate Afghanistan.

Official recommendations have a documentation trail: where is it?

I don't doubt that some may have verbally offered alternatives (and
groused about it later) but in the end, a Commander receives all of
those inputs, considers & weighs them in context, & then issues orders.

>> ... There is no mention of Bagram or alternate withdrawal plans. Fail.
>
> "Fail" is a good word choice to describe Biden as Commander-in-chief. Chairman
> of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark A. Milley, described Biden's
> withdrawal plan as a "strategic failure."

Afghanistan was already a strategic failure long before Biden or even
Trump were elected as POTUS. If you actually know your history its
historical genesis goes back to ~October 2002.

By 2021, terrorist attacks were ramping up. Had we stayed, we were at
risk of casualty rates rising up to be comparable to 2011-14, with also
the risk of a catastrophic base overrun because the remaining forces
were below minimum sustainable for base security: Milley's being a
hypocrite because that occurred on his watch in 2020 under Trump.

>>>>>> For one thing, Nixon and Reagan fought against Russian domination.
>>>>>> Trump will embrace it.
>
>>>>> You're deluded.
>
>>>> Trump has already embraced Putin. And North Korea's Kim Jong Un
>>>> too.
>
>>> It's the art of the deal, baby! Butter 'em up, knock 'em down.
>
>> Mr Chamberlain tried that in 1938. We know now that doesn't work.
>> You can't deal with a dictator itching to use the army at his back.
>
> Yet Putin invaded no one and Kim curtailed missile tests while Trump was prez.

On 7/16/2024 6:21 AM, -hh wrote:
> Ukraine is a critical test of US resolve and if we fail here, China
> *will* take Taiwan.

You fucking war-monger shill - you're still playing the "domino theory"
game long after the USSR was dispatched.

Your deep state bullshit endless war mentality is going DOWN!

On 7/15/2024 11:16 PM, ferd wrote:
>>> Trump has already embraced Putin. And North Korea's Kim Jong Un too.
>> It's the art of the deal, baby! Butter 'em up, knock 'em down.
> That is so true.

That damned peace-monger!

In news:v75ok1$18dic$1@dont-email.me, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
typed:

> On 7/15/24 1:20 AM, max headroom wrote:
>> In news:jd359jhnmcn9obn694t4e2br3bs3gegpgn@4ax.com, Governor Swill
>> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:02:25 -0700, "max headroom" wrote:
>>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>typed:
>>>>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:

>>> <snip>

>>>>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>>>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.

>>>>> Nope.

>>>>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the
>>>>> treaty deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.

>>>> Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an
>>>> emergency, it was an emergency of Biden's making.

>>> The withdrawal and it's schedule were negotiated by September the
>>> year before. The withdrawal itself began before Biden was elected.
>>> Most of the troops to be withdrawn were already gone before Biden was
>>> even sworn in. The due date was May but Biden delayed that until
>>> September in order to have more time to get more people and equipment out.

>> So Biden felt no hesitance toward ignoring the schedule.

> Except that it wasn't. That's why in the end the final date was moved
> up to 8/31, rather than the announced 9/11 date. The Taliban were
> worried - and rightfully so (see DoD recommendation to stay) that the
> US wouldn't actually depart as they had promised, which is why there
> was increasing tension after 5/1, which motivated the suicide bombing.

Except you're wrong. The suicide bombing occurred -during- the evacuation from
the Kabul airport.; the Taliban was providing security after capturing the city
12 days earlier; the bomber was an ISIS member.

>>> The Afghanistan debacle was of Trump's making. To start with, he
>>> ignored the internationally recognized government and negotiated
>>> with terrorists who repeatedly broke the terms of the agreement.

>> So the agreement was null and void.

> Two separate issues there, bud: Trump made the Doha Agreement without
> the internationally recognized government of the country, which was
> clearly wrong. Once that agreement had been made, there were various
> claims about who broke what but these were never legally resolved, and
> because the clock was ticking, effectively became moot. For the most
> part, pointing out the Taliban violations (which were actually more of
> them not having full control over their militia) was what bought the
> USA the deadline extension from May (when we weren't ready, due to no
> plan written before 2021) until August, but as can be seen with the
> suicide bombing, not everyone agreed with giving the US that time
> accommodation.

The DoD has plans for every contingency, from an invasion by Bolivia to an
invasion of Russia. The idea that they were caught with their pants down is
ludicrous.

>>>>> Plus that whole situation was set up by Trump. Not just the
>>>>> treadty but also including the US troop withdrawals completed
>>>>> before 20 Jan 2020, which left the main base tactically
>>>>> indefensible.

>>>> And yet, after the treaty was signed, the only U.S. troops to be
>>>> killed in action were the 13 killed at the Kabul airport.

>>> Others were killed in other parts of the country....

>> Nope.

> Correct: the only US military active duty casualties in 2021 were from the
> August bombing. However, there were non-US casualties. Here's one summary
> listing, but note that the "who" varies (both sides), plus many are quite
> ambiguous as to who the perpetrator was:

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_2021_Afghanistan_attacks

> Two of note:

> Kabul school bombing (May 2021): killed 85, mostly young school girls
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Kabul_school_bombing

> Kabul airport attack (Aug 2021) where there was also at least 182
> civilian deaths in addition to the 13 US servicemen:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Kabul_airport_attack

No, the 182 -include- the thirteen American service members.

> Plus let's not forget the the USA's drone retribution strike which
> targeted & hit the wrong people, killing ten (10) more civilians:

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_2021_Kabul_drone_strike

Biden should be happy that the Supremes confirmed the President's immunity for
official acts

>>> ... But that sad loss ensured the evacuation of thousands from the
>>> country....

>> How did being the victims of a suicide bomber ensure anything other
>> than jihadi celebrations?

> It enabled those thousands of civilians to successfully escape
> repression and likely death at the hands of the Taliban regime.

Again, HOW did being the victims of a suicide bomber ensure anything other than
jihadi celebrations?

>>> ... There were far fewer casualties leaving Afghanistan than there
>>> were evacuating Saigon.

>> The evacuation of Saigon wasn't scheduled months in advance.

> Try actually reading the history. Specifically, the prior evacuations
> which occurred in the weeks prior to the embassy helicopter airlift:
> in addition to Operation Frequent Wind, there was also at least
> Operation Babylift and Operation New Life:

> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Frequent_Wind>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Babylift>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_New_Life

> Also insightful to show timelines:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Saigon#American_administration_plans_for_final_evacuation

>>>>> Such as how your above statement hinges on how there were a ~dozen
>>>>> casualties, but ignores how many were rescued in return:

>>>> Thirteen U.S. personnel and ~170 others.

>>> What others?

>> Afghan civilians.

> Which suddenly you now care about. How convenient.

Upon what basis do you write that?

>>>> How many were left behind?

>>> How many got out?

>> How many fell from the wings of departing jets? That's the image the
>> world remembers of the American exit from Afghanistan.

> Superficially so, as subsequent reports are estimating that ~30,000
> Afghanistani's who didn't successfully escape (or die trying) have
> since been systematically hunted down & murdered by the Taliban
> regime.

Hardly a successful evacuation.

> FYI, simply look back to the history of the Berlin Wall for parallels
> of people willing to take huge risk (& die trying) to escape repression.

Apples and oranges

>>>> I don't recall Nixon or Ford or Goldwater or even Reagan ever
>>>> commenting on Joe Biden's incompetence.

>>> Yet the top line Republicans today plus two Presidents have sure
>>> talked about Trump's.

>> And the top line Democrats today plus a president have sure talked
>> about Biden's..

> Of course, the real question is what part of "talk" is actually true.
> /s

We can see Biden's with our own eyes.

>>>>> **I defy you** to name any other similar US military operation
>>>>> conducted under fire which had a better ratio of (civilians
>>>>> rescued):(troops lost) than this one.

>>>> Why was it conducted under fire? It could have been executed months
>>>> earlier in an orderly manner from the Bagram airfield, an American
>>>> stronghold.

>>>> https://thehill.com/policy/defense/574283-top-generals-contradict-biden-say-they-advised-leaving-2500-troops-in/

>>> That article details a pentagon recommendation for an occupation
>>> force to be left in country long term pending negotiations between
>>> the Afghani government and the Taliban....

>> The article details Biden's top generals telling the U.S. Senate
>> that Biden lied when he said that he followed their advice to
>> evacuate Afghanistan.

> Official recommendations have a documentation trail: where is it?

> I don't doubt that some may have verbally offered alternatives (and
> groused about it later) but in the end, a Commander receives all of
> those inputs, considers & weighs them in context, & then issues
> orders.

How often do senior brass tell the Senate that their Commander lied?

>>> ... There is no mention of Bagram or alternate withdrawal plans. Fail.

>> "Fail" is a good word choice to describe Biden as
>> Commander-in-chief. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General
>> Mark A. Milley, described Biden's withdrawal plan as a "strategic
>> failure."

Death to PutinJongUn.

On 7/16/24 1:09 PM, C_V wrote:
> On 7/16/2024 6:21 AM, -hh wrote:
>> Ukraine is a critical test of US resolve and if we fail here, China
>> *will* take Taiwan.
>
> You fucking war-monger shill - you're still playing the "domino theory"
> game long after the USSR was dispatched.

The USSR was deconstructed, but that action doesn't forestall its
components from reconstituting themselves. The then-freed Warsaw Pact
states have generally have done better economically the more that they
embraced Western style democracies - - case in point, look at how
Poland's economy has now caught up with and matched Japan's.

For Russia itself, despite a ton of Western Aid, it has become a
criminal state of oligarchs, which presently has a stated policy of
trying to restore itself back to the borders of the USSR; this is the
genesis of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

> Your deep state bullshit endless war mentality is going DOWN!

"Deep State bullshit"? LOL!
You're parroting Russian propaganda talking points.

A decade ago, the doctrinal insight changed within the US, to recognize
what's now known as "perpetual competition" between powers. This more
accurately reflects how there are many activities short of literal war
which are maneuvering for increased power/influence, etc.

One can see evidence of this stated explicitly in Open Literate back to
at least 2017, as per the below:

<https://www.cnas.org/publications/commentary/defining-dods-role-in-gray-zone-competition>

There's evidence of this in effect in other nations' activities.
A specific example is China's "Belt & Road" program, which similarly
goes back a decade or more...here's evidence that its at least 2013:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative>

-hh

"max headroom" <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote in message
news:v77j38$1mn6a$3@dont-email.me...
> In news:v75ok1$18dic$1@dont-email.me, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
> typed:
>
>> On 7/15/24 1:20 AM, max headroom wrote:
>>> In news:jd359jhnmcn9obn694t4e2br3bs3gegpgn@4ax.com, Governor Swill
>>> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:02:25 -0700, "max headroom" wrote:
>>>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>typed:
>>>>>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:
>
>>>> <snip>
>
>>>>>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>>>>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.
>
>>>>>> Nope.
>
>>>>>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the
>>>>>> treaty deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.
>
>>>>> Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an
>>>>> emergency, it was an emergency of Biden's making.
>
>>>> The withdrawal and it's schedule were negotiated by September the
>>>> year before. The withdrawal itself began before Biden was elected.
>>>> Most of the troops to be withdrawn were already gone before Biden was
>>>> even sworn in. The due date was May but Biden delayed that until
>>>> September in order to have more time to get more people and equipment
>>>> out.
>
>>> So Biden felt no hesitance toward ignoring the schedule.
>
>> Except that it wasn't. That's why in the end the final date was moved
>> up to 8/31, rather than the announced 9/11 date. The Taliban were
>> worried - and rightfully so (see DoD recommendation to stay) that the
>> US wouldn't actually depart as they had promised, which is why there
>> was increasing tension after 5/1, which motivated the suicide bombing.
>
> Except you're wrong. The suicide bombing occurred -during- the evacuation
> from
> the Kabul airport.; the Taliban was providing security after capturing the
> city
> 12 days earlier; the bomber was an ISIS member.

And of course, we have to ask why they had to resort to a commercial
airport....

Because Joe, CLOSED the secured airport being used by American forces..
forcing them to resort to public airports that weren't secure.

On 2024-07-17, Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>
> "max headroom" <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote in message
> news:v77j38$1mn6a$3@dont-email.me...
>> In news:v75ok1$18dic$1@dont-email.me, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
>> typed:
>>
>>> On 7/15/24 1:20 AM, max headroom wrote:
>>>> In news:jd359jhnmcn9obn694t4e2br3bs3gegpgn@4ax.com, Governor Swill
>>>> <governor.swill@gmail.com> typed:
>>>>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:02:25 -0700, "max headroom" wrote:
>>>>>> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>typed:
>>>>>>> On 7/11/24 10:08 PM, max headroom wrote:
>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>
>>>>>>>> His withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan speaks volumes
>>>>>>>> still... and that wasn't an emergency.
>>
>>>>>>> Nope.
>>
>>>>>>> It was an emergency, because it was already August, whereas the
>>>>>>> treaty deadline for the USA to have gotten completely out was May.
>>
>>>>>> Biden had been Commander in Chief since January. If it was an
>>>>>> emergency, it was an emergency of Biden's making.
>>
>>>>> The withdrawal and it's schedule were negotiated by September the
>>>>> year before. The withdrawal itself began before Biden was elected.
>>>>> Most of the troops to be withdrawn were already gone before Biden was
>>>>> even sworn in. The due date was May but Biden delayed that until
>>>>> September in order to have more time to get more people and equipment
>>>>> out.
>>
>>>> So Biden felt no hesitance toward ignoring the schedule.
>>
>>> Except that it wasn't. That's why in the end the final date was moved
>>> up to 8/31, rather than the announced 9/11 date. The Taliban were
>>> worried - and rightfully so (see DoD recommendation to stay) that the
>>> US wouldn't actually depart as they had promised, which is why there
>>> was increasing tension after 5/1, which motivated the suicide bombing.
>>
>> Except you're wrong. The suicide bombing occurred -during- the evacuation
>> from
>> the Kabul airport.; the Taliban was providing security after capturing the
>> city
>> 12 days earlier; the bomber was an ISIS member.
>
> And of course, we have to ask why they had to resort to a commercial
> airport....
>
> Because Joe, CLOSED the secured airport being used by American forces..
> forcing them to resort to public airports that weren't secure.
>

Even the radical left wing media like MSDNC won't go near this one because they are hoping the
people have forgotten about it.

We haven't.

And Joe Biden's debate lie about being the only POTUS in history to have no troops dying under his
watch just resurrected it and rubbed sand in a lot of people's wounds.

I'll bet the idiots at MSDNC freaked out when Joe made that statement.
Not because he lied but because it is dragging up a topic they do not want to report on.

--
pothead
Joe Biden is the absolute WORST President Of the U.S. ever.
Nobody else is even close. Including Jimmy Carter.
Vote for ANYBODY but Joe Biden in 2024.