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 Most of the troops to be withdrawn were already gone before Biden was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."

> 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.

No hypocrisy involved. Biden's withdrawal plan was his and his alone.

>>>>>>> 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.

> Because they didn't have to, because Trump was giving them what they
> wanted without having to fight....

Oh? Trump gave Putin Ukraine? Trump gave Kim South Korea?

> .... Recall how Trump suspended arms shipments to Ukraine under the _claim_
> of corruption which has never been found.

Now *you're* deluded. Ukrainian corruption is legendary. Zelenskyy struggles
against it still.

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

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

> Its not Biden who's weak: its Americans overall who are greedily
> sucking away on their propaganda machine, causing self-division.

It wasn't "Americans overall" who predicted a limited Western response to a
Russian "minor incursion" into Ukraine, it was Joe Biden.

>>> ... 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.

> Nah, he's right: Ukraine is a critical test of US resolve and if we
> fail here, China *will* take Taiwan. ...

You're deluded if you think Trump wouldn't resist.