Tuco

So, what you believe the deal included expelling (or, what, handing over) any AQ in the country. It didn't. There is a shit ton of grey area in the "to use the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States and its allies" portion. In the last year, has al Queda attacked or threatened an attack on the US from Afghani positions? If your criteria to adherence was whether an AQ remained in the country, it was broken on the first day and every day since. There was no time line for the removal of AQ, and no clear designation of whether a person could simply state he was no longer AQ and that would suffice. But, what is clear is that the UN was designated as the arbiter as whether the deal was broken. Right? So, show me where the UN is saying the Taliban broke the deal. What they do acknowledge is that the Taliban was working towards reigning in AQ in the country, even if it could be reversed easily. And to be clear, if you want to read the betrayal of our allies in Afghanistan, read those four pages again. It is straight up "America First" idiocy from beginning to end. Trump didn't require amnesty for our allies. He didn't require human rights protections, including provisions for women and minority rights. The whole fucking thing was written with a campaign in mind, and Trump being able to say he found peace in a way that protected American security, and worried about absolutely nothing else.

Oh, and sure, let's ask the UN. And then we can use more current quotes, in context, and link the sources. From April '21: UN Docs The UN is not saying the Taliban has violated the treaty.

So, just to keep track of the trajectory of the goal posts, that's not the same thing you were saying previously. Agree?

Matt Gaetz is willing to give the youth of Afghanistan a chance.

So, he would have pulled out the equipment before the troops? (Actually, he might have.) Seriously, do you think Biden was involved the logistics of retreat? Do you think Trump would have been? Fucking delusional man.

I would take an Afghanistan that resembled Iran in a heartbeat. The pre-911 Taliban was way the fuck worse than Iran. I don't really give a shit if Afghanistan is democratic, but Iran actually has some functioning democratic structures, even if they can be effectively vetoed by the religious council. At this point, it's hard to see that vision for Afghanistan as anything but a best case scenario.

Yes, consider this. On September 10, 2001, the Taliban and the Northern Alliance were engaged in an active civil war that was essentially at a stand-still, with the NA holding regions in the North and the Taliban holding the rest of the country. On September 10, 2021, after the US has spent, what, 2 trillion dollars and lost 3000 servicemen, the Taliban will likely hold the entire country, albeit with resistance in some regions. That simple statement is likely too simple, making it look worse than it should. But it's still pretty fucked up.

Biden's treatment of the Kurdish issue is something worth keeping an eye one. Early on the Iraqi occupation, Biden traveled to Iraqi Kurdistan. He advocated the psuedo-breakup of the Iraq into Kurd, Sunni, and Shiite regions, which is very much in line with Kurdish goals. Maybe at this point, there really isn't much that would be practical to help the Kurds. But I could see it being one of the foreign policy issues that Biden would take a personal interest in to the point of challenging the State recommendations on. Ukraine would be another, but there are so many political landmines around that, he would likely be wary of getting too involved.

I am less concerned with Taliban leadership "keeping their word" than I am with them being able to control various factions, particularly local control. I believe the really brutal shit will be at the local level, where some of the grievances are personal and some of the beliefs are more medieval. I do believe the Taliban leadership has some aspirations to avoid sinking back into the 90s level of diplomatic isolation, which will not be possible if they start executing women for going to school. But the local fucks aren't necessarily going to be driven by that. (That also partially answers the question on why it matters where some of those executions took place. )

The "Muslim World" doesn't have citizenship anymore than the Christian world. As far as the MidEast looking at each other communally, prior to 911 the Taliban was a pariah throughout the world, including with Muslim countries. Everybody hated them. Iran hated them for executing a couple of their diplomats. It's one of the reasons that nobody made a squeak when started bombing them. Bush's big concern was where he could fly search and rescue missions out of, should any of the planes get shot down. To everybody's surprise, Uzbekistan said sure, you can fly S&R from our airfields. Everybody hated the Taliban-led Afghanistan. That doesn't mean a lot of the Muslim countries where thrilled with the US colonizing the country. (And, yeah, when you start talking about "nation building" in a way that aligns with American values and is friendly to western business...and has semi-permanent military installations, it's going to be seen as colonizing.) I'm sure there was some investment and plenty of charity from Muslim countries and individuals, but I am also sure there were folks who didn't really want to see the US be successful. As we are withdrawing, there are calls for Muslim-led peacekeeping forces. I have no idea if that will go anywhere. It's not like Pashtuns are going to be anymore thrilled with an Arab soldier policing his street, than he was with an American one. Sharing a common religion only takes you so far, and they undoubtedly have major differences in how they interpret and practice Islam. I remember reading about one of the Uzbek military leaders -Dostum -who was a vodka drinking nutcase. (Just looked up Dostum to confirm the name. Apparently he was the vice president until recently. The dude is a character. Sure, probably a war criminal, but still an interesting guy to drink with.)

What am I mad about? Assholes ignoring the science with Covid, mostly. Doesn't really have much to do with this. But, rather than worrying about what I am mad at, you could take a critical look of what is being said and why. It's not 100% about the how. And if it was, anyone with more than 3 brain cells knows that Biden didn't chart out the how; government career professional at State and in the military did. As far as the Biden admin being hammered, pretty much here and and Facebook the reaction has been a shoulder shrug. The public is done with Afghanistan. The undecideds don't watch the news anyway.

They are calling out the repercussions of the action. It's easy to pretend there is some way the decision to leave wouldn't have repercussions, but it's bullshit. This is Senator Sasse's comment: They lead with the repercussions, and then pivot to the decision itself. They "deliberately decided to lose." The "doctrine of weakness." And this shitstain pretends he is some sort of Constitutional originalist who cries out for a return to small government policy. Bullshit.

Do you think Joe Biden, personally, planned the how? Yeah, he's President, and he's going to take the heat for the how, but do you really think there is anything he could have said to address it.

The Taliban pledged support of it two years prior. These assholes still need some level of support from the general population, and they don't get that stating they are going to oppose construction projects which will provide a long term revenue stream. (Shit is still going to get blowed up by someone. ) Feb2018

It matters what you are addressing. The waste of money and American lives - Fuck Bush and Cheney, and also Obama and John Kerry. Decide the percentages for yourself. The fact that the Taliban has taken over Afghanistan - Fuck President Ghani.

What frequently gets lost in these discussions is that we are way too focused on the US element of it. There was an article today that talked about how the Taliban had retaken Kabul "20 years after US troops had driven them off." That is fucking nonsense. US troops didn't invade Afghanistan. US troops didn't drive the Taliban out of Kabul. Does anyone remember the Northern Alliance? They did the heavy lifting. We supplied them and bombed the shit out of their adversaries, but we had a relatively trivial ground force at the time, fewer than 300 troops on the ground, per Bob Woodward's Bush at War. Why is that important? Because if you are going to talk about the success of the Taliban you should probably asked what they hell happened to their main opposition, the opposition which prevented them controlling all of the country even prior to 9/11, prior to the US giving them anything. Well, perhaps instead of worrying about which US President to blame, we should discuss the Afghani President and how he fucked up support from the Northern Alliance factions. From an WaPo article a couple of weeks ago. Full article in the spoiler. TL, DR: In 2014, the Presidential race was between Ghani (Pashtun) and Abdullah (supported by the North). Ghani won a tight race. He then started undermining his opponents, including firing a popular governor in the North, replacing him with a Southerner. In the attempt to consolidate his control of a US-propped up government, he inadvertently undermined and alienated the significant factions who were otherwise inclined to oppose the Taliban. Now he is the President of jack shit. So, when assigning blame, let's just all agree to say "fuck President Ghani" before worrying about Trump or Biden. And if there is a lesson there for America, it's that power over the government is pointless if the country goes to shit.

I'm not exactly sure what the intent of this post is. If it is some rebuttal of me saying the Dems are without morons or moronic positions, it appears to be misplaced. I've been involved in party politics and certainly recognize there are morons on my side. The Democratic Party needs to improve, both at the national and state level. But, with that in mind, reflexive both-siderism is just stupid and lazy. Recognition of Democratic flaws is not a defense of both-siderism. Rather, It is the obscuration of any flaws, Republican or Democratic, with some fucked nihilism that just states that it doesn't matter who is in charge on the issue. The fact is it does fucking matter, not because of the parties but because of the policies and philosophies they espouse. If someone wants to be critical of Democratic polices, cool, let's have that discussion. But when a reflexive defense of Republican fuckery is 'well, yeah, what above the Dems...I don't know what they did, but I'm sure it's bad", it completely neuters the attempt to hold our politicians accountable for their persistent failures.

Are you so lazy you’re crowdsourcing your both-siderism? You recognize that Republicans are dogshit on the issue, and your first thought is to inquire what the Dems can be criticized for? You tell us, how are the Dem controlled leg fucking it up? What’s the email chain news saying?

Rush Limbaugh had a tail. The medical name is pilonidal cyst, but you know that thing would wag a little whenever he heard about kids getting shot.

Putin's Russia is corrupt, anti-gay, anti-Muslim, white, and has coopted the Church to advance the State. Putin kills journalists and imprisons protesters. Putin is the Republican ideal. Remember the Russian mercs the US killed in Syria in 2018? They were part of the Wagner Group, which is basically a white supremacist militia with military contracts. WW3 isn't between nations, it's between Facebook groups...a series of civil unrest. Social media has been a great tool for finding common ground with people in other countries. But, inevitably, it will weaken the loyalty to the country and strengthen loyalty to sociopolitical comrades wherever they may be.

That seems like a solid pick for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.

If “critical race theory” has proven one thing, it’s that the wording was never the issue with “black lives matters.” It’s not a issue of marketing or finding the right slogan. Many Americans are going to push back on the idea that racism needs to addressed. Period. There is no magical way to explain it to them.

That's too bad. He could really use the practice.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say this guy isn't very strong at math.