Afghan War ending, foretold by The Onion 10 years Ago [DT thread ruined by politics]

[BabaYaga 15625]

5 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

FOX News, Facebook, and his favorite alt right websites will try to keep BabaYaga's outrage going for a few more months, but it will eventually peter out, making room for the next big grievance. Probably what to do with all these damn Afghan immigrants that Biden had the audacity to bring into our country.

The MSM is probably a little pissed about the 200+ western journalists still stuck in country and getting no support.  

At least Canada knows how to bypass the middleman and try and get something done.

 

[wildcat09 29579]

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

It is cute how everyone tried to move the goalposts to encompass the entire Afghanistan theatre when the thread was and is clearly is about the utter and complete fuck up that is Biden's end game.  

Who do you think created our puppet government that laid down in a week?

[sidis 10017]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

Who do you think created our puppet government that laid down in a week?

and who do you think directly betrayed that puppet government by not even involving them in the negotiations for the american exit?

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

11 minutes ago, sidis said:

not interestingly, baby yaga never responded to my post regarding the specifics of the conditions that trump and the taliban (and the taliban only, no afghani governmental representatives present) agreed to at camp david that he was so intent on using as the basis for breaking the agreement.  the same agreement in which trump freed 5,000 taliban fighter prisoners for 1,000 afghan prisoners.

he's brunching with friends at J.Theodore in frisco, calm down.

[sidis 10017]

17 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

You mean before I had dinner at Capital Grille in Plano with friends last night?  Such a twat

to quote the great orator @Jersey Man10..."weird flex but okay."

[BabaYaga 15625]

4 minutes ago, sidis said:

not interestingly, baby yaga never responded to my post regarding the specifics of the conditions that trump and the taliban (and the taliban only, no afghani governmental representatives present) agreed to at camp david that he was so intent on using as the basis for breaking the agreement.  the same agreement in which trump freed 5,000 taliban fighter prisoners for 1,000 afghan prisoners.

I replied to your post earlier.  Again, for the third time now....Trump set forth a conditions-based withdrawal with a timeline that could shift based on those conditions. After negotiations with the Taliban, who promised to stop attacking the Afghan government, we started to implement that. The Taliban began violating that agreement. When Biden took over, he did not embrace the Trump policy of conditions-testing, but kept to the timeline even advanced it blindly.

Either way, Biden had EIGHT months to analyze the situation, keep the date, move the date, do anything.  Instead, against the strong recommendations of his council or other leaders, moved blindly forward so he could hit his bullshit symbolic 9/11 date for withdrawal.  

 

 

[BabaYaga 15625]

9 minutes ago, sidis said:

and who do you think directly betrayed that puppet government by not even involving them in the negotiations for the american exit?

Who do you think had eight months and every intel resource at his disposal to make the call to remedy the situation?

[Captainant 28539]

21 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

You mean before I had dinner at Capital Grille in Plano with friends last night?  Such a twat

lmao is this the new "boat was out of wifi"?

[sidis 10017]

Just now, BabaYaga said:

I replied to your post earlier.  Again, for the third time now....Trump set forth a conditions-based withdrawal with a timeline that could shift based on those conditions. After negotiations with the Taliban, who promised to stop attacking the Afghan government,

again, i am asking you to cite your source for this as a condition as it is the centerpiece to your entire argument.  where is the taliban promising to not attack the afghan government ever stated as part of the conditions to the agreement?

if the only conditions agreed to in the agreement between trump and the taliban were that they would not attack americans exiting the country and that they would not host al qaeda in the country, how have they violated the conditions of the agreement?

[Hmbre97 6337]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

I replied to your post earlier.  Again, for the third time now....Trump set forth a conditions-based withdrawal with a timeline that could shift based on those conditions. After negotiations with the Taliban, who promised to stop attacking the Afghan government, we started to implement that. The Taliban began violating that agreement. When Biden took over, he did not embrace the Trump policy of conditions-testing, but kept to the timeline even advanced it blindly.

Either way, Biden had EIGHT months to analyze the situation, keep the date, move the date, do anything.  Instead, against the strong recommendations of his council or other leaders, moved blindly forward so he could hit his bullshit symbolic 9/11 date for withdrawal.  

 

 

And again, you still aren't giving any specifics about what conditions were set and which ones they were violating. And how Biden moving the date from May 2021 to Sept 2021 = advancing it blindly. 

[Longhornlove 5209]

13 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

He's right though: the withdrawal is on "Corn Pop." He approved a really shitty plan. It's going to be messy for a couple of weeks.

But, as it's looking now, not a single American will be killed on their way out the door, and we'll be out of that godforsaken country that no one has wanted to be in--or cared about--for at least 10 years (during which time American soldiers were actually dying).

FOX News, Facebook, and his favorite alt right websites will try to keep BabaYaga's outrage going for a few more months, but it will eventually peter out, making room for the next big grievance. Probably what to do with all these damn Afghan immigrants that Biden had the audacity to bring into our country.

I'm glad you have faith in the Taliban to believe this but I think this is highly unlikely. This is a powder keg that I'm guessing won't end well for anyone. Many of these Immigrants that helped us should have been brought in the US months ago and many organizations have been pushing this to the current administration to no avail so please stop with the future malcontent BS. I agree that we should be out of Afghanistan but this exit is nothing short of an epic disaster that makes America look like fools when in reality it is the Biden Administration that is the architects of this buffoonery. Biden only needs a mirror to to point blame at for this.

[Tuco 5093]

14 minutes ago, Nueces River Rat said:

How long have we heard a democracy movement was alive and growing stronger in Iran?   Maybe 25 years or so now?   The last time I checked, they are still the Islamic "Republic" of Iran.   It might be a large section of Iran's population hates the current and most recent regimes.   And a population who could very well win a civil war or uprising if they really tried and had international,  I mean the backing  of the USA.   But the fall of the Ayatollahs who run that ship is no where to be seen.       This is where the Islamic Emirate or Afghanistan is going.  

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.  

 

['stache 22143]

11 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Afghanistan Meant Nothing. A Veteran Reflects on 20 Wasted Years | by Laura Jedeed | Aug, 2021 | Medium

What a devastatingly stupid waste of money.

Quote

I am Team Get The Fuck Out Of Afghanistan which, as a friend pointed out to me today, has always been Team Taliban. It’s Team Taliban or Team Stay Forever.

There is no third team.

Yup. The fact that politicians can't seem to speak about this without blaming someone else (and yes while there's some "both sides" to it, as usual, the right are the overwhelming majority of perpetrators) just proves yet again to me that we are a failed democracy (or republic for you idiots who always have to parse words). There should be universal acknowledgement that we fucked up, that we need to leave, and that the exit is going to suck shit. There is no other alternative. It was the wrong thing to do then, it's the right thing to do now, and we should accept each and every Afghani who wants the fuck out after what we did to their country. These should be things that unify our people. So should defeating a pandemic with the medical tools we've been given, but here we are, a failed country on the brink of extinction. I don't think it's hyperbole anymore for me to think that the USA as we know it is heading the way of Rome. It's not sustainable.

Edited August 18, 2021 by 'stache

[InkaUtexas 26891]

41 minutes ago, UDontKnow said:

Bullshit. Modi was democratically elected twice and has significantly cleaned up corruption in India. India was a laughingstock on the international scene until Modi came to power and now they are chairing the UNSC (even if it is only for two years). Modi has significantly reduced the risk of terrorism by striking diplomatic deals with the likes of Saudi Arabia and Iran. Not only that India has been able to maintain healthy relations with the US and Russia simultaneously. 

If you want to run with that logic, America under Trump was no democracy either. Don't blindly believe what you read in western news outlets.

Talk to actual Indians before putting out your misinformed opinion. Champ. 

And unlike our usual allies, India really participates in peace keeping missions. Worked with them in Haiti and fuck yeah. Plus they have damn good food. 

I hear you man. They are a professional military. There is a some good videos of them operating in West Africa. 

[Bateshorn 9991]

37 minutes ago, UDontKnow said:

Bullshit. Modi was democratically elected twice and has significantly cleaned up corruption in India. India was a laughingstock on the international scene until Modi came to power and now they are chairing the UNSC (even if it is only for two years). Modi has significantly reduced the risk of terrorism by striking diplomatic deals with the likes of Saudi Arabia and Iran. Not only that India has been able to maintain healthy relations with the US and Russia simultaneously. 

If you want to run with that logic, America under Trump was no democracy either. Don't blindly believe what you read in western news outlets.

Talk to actual Indians before putting out your misinformed opinion. Champ. 

You want to Stan for the BJP, go nuts.  Nobody who has a remotely cleared eyed view of Modi thinks the country is moving in a Democratic direction, especially when the government actively turns a blind eye to religious violence in its own nation. 
 

You don’t occupy Kashmir, end it’s autonomy, then annex it into the country against the will of its majority population because you are a beacon of freedom and self determination. 
 

You also don’t make millions of your own citizen stateless because you are a city on the hill.

Yeah, some American’s read more than the sports section.

I do agree that American democracy is pretty unhealthy rn (and if you are black, has always been). So you can put quotes around us to.

[UDontKnow 10572]

10 hours ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Don’t let this distract you from the vegetable who sat on his hands and ignored intel while the Taliban mowed over the country unopposed.

But you forgot the previous vegetable who emboldened the Taliban by promising them a complete military withdrawal and wanted them at the Presidential retreat at Camp David. 

 

[BabaYaga 15625]

7 minutes ago, sidis said:

again, i am asking you to cite your source for this as a condition as it is the centerpiece to your entire argument.  where is the taliban promising to not attack the afghan government ever stated as part of the conditions to the agreement?

if the only conditions agreed to in the agreement between trump and the taliban were that they would not attack americans exiting the country and that they would not host al qaeda in the country, how have they violated the conditions of the agreement?

Have you not read the DOHA agreement?  I'm guessing not since you cited prisoner swaps which were a central tenet of the deal.  That was in March of last year BTW.  It was penned in February.  Hardly a last second exchange.  As a part of DOHA, certain cities were not to be attacked.  As well, a key provision was that the US and Western allies:

“reiterated that they will not recognize any government in Afghanistan that is imposed through the use of military force.”

The Taliban did not cease, and continued to seize territory by force, clearly a breach in the terms of the deal.  

As for conditions based - there are numerous citations.  Just find one.  Here is one at the top of the search - CNS news?  Now sure who they are, but anyway

Conditions based

There are citations going back to 2017 that any extrication - this would be THE central feature of the deal.  Biden through all that out the window

Quote

Senior military officers and lawmakers have for years stressed the importance of the departure of U.S. forces from Afghanistan being tied to conditions on the ground.

“We would need to do it on conditions,” then-Defense Secretary Ashton Carter told the Senate Armed Service Committee (SASC) in March 2015. “In any military campaign we have to be conditions-based, absolutely, firmly.”

“We are now conditions-based, not time-based,” U.S. Army Gen. John Nicholson, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said in November 2017.

 

[lmao 178]

10 hours ago, elfenix said:

 

 

[aggie08 21800]

9 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

I'm glad you have faith in the Taliban to believe this but I think this is highly unlikely. This is a powder keg that I'm guessing won't end well for anyone. Many of these Immigrants that helped us should have been brought in the US months ago and many organizations have been pushing this to the current administration to no avail so please stop with the future malcontent BS. I agree that we should be out of Afghanistan but this exit is nothing short of an epic disaster that makes America look like fools when in reality it is the Biden Administration that is the architects of this buffoonery. Biden only needs a mirror to to point blame at for this.

I don't disagree with any of this. Except that I don't think that the Taliban will risk postponing our exit by specifically targeting Americans. Hopefully, none get caught up in any crossfire that does occur.

We are and will continue to get key Afghans out (why there wasn't a comprehensive plan already in place for this is absolutely a failure). But, including families, we're probably talking 100k+ Afghans who have supported us. I don't know what the answer is for relocating that many people, and there probably isn't one.

[BabaYaga 15625]

15 minutes ago, 'stache said:

There should be universal acknowledgement that we fucked up, that we need to leave, and that the exit is going to suck shit

Nobody is arguing going into the country was a bad idea.  Nobody is arguing the fact that we have to leave.  But we did fuck up the end game and we see clear steps that were completely dismissed that could have make it much, much smoother; avoiding the loss of billions in hardware falling into enemy hands and stranding thousands of American and Afghani sympathizers in country with no fucking plan to get them out.  Maybe start there and work backward.  How's that for a wild idea.  

[We’reTexas 1477]

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Have you not read the DOHA agreement?  I'm guessing not since you cited prisoner swaps which were a central tenet of the deal.  That was in March of last year BTW.  It was penned in February.  Hardly a last second exchange.  As a part of DOHA, certain cities were not to be attacked.  As well, a key provision was that the US and Western allies:

“reiterated that they will not recognize any government in Afghanistan that is imposed through the use of military force.”

The Taliban did not cease, and continued to seize territory by force, clearly a breach in the terms of the deal.  

As for conditions based - there are numerous citations.  Just find one.  Here is one at the top of the search - CNS news?  Now sure who they are, but anyway

Conditions based

There are citations going back to 2017 that any extrication - this would be THE central feature of the deal.  Biden through all that out the window

 

CNS News lol got a chuckle out of seeing a Hunter Biden headline for the first time in a while. 

[Longhornlove 5209]

1 minute ago, aggie08 said:

I don't disagree with any of this. Except that I don't think that the Taliban will risk postponing our exit by specifically targeting Americans. Hopefully, none get caught up in any crossfire that does occur.

We are and will continue to get key Afghans out (why there wasn't a comprehensive plan already in place for this is absolutely a failure). But, including families, we're probably talking 100k+ Afghans who have supported us. I don't know what the answer is for relocating that many people, and there probably isn't one.

I have no idea how we relocate that many people but I'm sure the government does. They have been relocating more than that each month from our southern border but can't figure out how to help people who helped us in Afghanistan? Over a 20 year period no less. They could have figured out how to do this instead of trying to impeach a president who was no longer in office.

[BabaYaga 15625]

2 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

I don't disagree with any of this. Except that I don't think that the Taliban will risk postponing our exit by specifically targeting Americans. Hopefully, none get caught up in any crossfire that does occur.

We are and will continue to get key Afghans out (why there wasn't a comprehensive plan already in place for this is absolutely a failure). But, including families, we're probably talking 100k+ Afghans who have supported us. I don't know what the answer is for relocating that many people, and there probably isn't one.

The "Taliban" are just a mixture of hundreds of tribes.  Central control is tenuous at best, and when chaos sets in, Americans getting killed by young, wild fighters is a very real threat.  Well trained, Western soldiers do it all the time in the "heat of battle".  

And you're close on the number, it's around 80K - but you can prioritize those with sensitive training & skills who were read in on American warfighter training and tactics.  We saw in Mexico was the former special forces trained Zeta cartel members can do 

[BabaYaga 15625]

4 minutes ago, We’reTexas said:

CNS News lol got a chuckle out of seeing a Hunter Biden headline for the first time in a while. 

There it is

[aggie08 21800]

1 minute ago, Longhornlove said:

I have no idea how we relocate that many people but I'm sure the government does. They have been relocating more than that each month from our southern border but can't figure out how to help people who helped us in Afghanistan? Over a 20 year period no less. They could have figured out how to do this instead of trying to impeach a president who was no longer in office.

Ah, well the objectivity was nice while it lasted.

[Longhornlove 5209]

6 minutes ago, We’reTexas said:

CNS News lol got a chuckle out of seeing a Hunter Biden headline for the first time in a while. 

How about WSJ, Is that good enough for you?

[MNLonghornFUKM 8984]

But you forgot the previous vegetable who emboldened the Taliban by promising them a complete military withdrawal and wanted them at the Presidential retreat at Camp David. 
 

TDS. Honest question- do you think the taliban advances like a wildfire under trumps withdrawal plan without receiving missiles from the sky? Or do they go unopposed like they just did.


I think If trump was still president, the withdrawal is coordinated. Equipment, vehicles, non military personnel out first. Any sign of the taliban going back on their word is met with an aerial assault. Taliban knows they have nothing to stop that. Once they smelled blood in the water that the ANA and Biden administration weren’t going to do jack shit…we just laid down

[wildcat09 29579]

14 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Have you not read the DOHA agreement?  I'm guessing not since you cited prisoner swaps which were a central tenet of the deal.  That was in March of last year BTW.  It was penned in February.  Hardly a last second exchange.  As a part of DOHA, certain cities were not to be attacked.  As well, a key provision was that the US and Western allies:

“reiterated that they will not recognize any government in Afghanistan that is imposed through the use of military force.”

The Taliban did not cease, and continued to seize territory by force, clearly a breach in the terms of the deal.  

As for conditions based - there are numerous citations.  Just find one.  Here is one at the top of the search - CNS news?  Now sure who they are, but anyway

Conditions based

There are citations going back to 2017 that any extrication - this would be THE central feature of the deal.  Biden through all that out the window

 

It's pretty clear you haven't read it. It doesn't take long, here's a link. You might be shocked to find that it doesn't actually say what you keep saying it says.

[sidis 10017]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

Have you not read the DOHA agreement?  I'm guessing not since you cited prisoner swaps which were a central tenet of the deal.  That was in March of last year BTW.  It was penned in February.  Hardly a last second exchange.  As a part of DOHA, certain cities were not to be attacked.  As well, a key provision was that the US and Western allies:

“reiterated that they will not recognize any government in Afghanistan that is imposed through the use of military force.”

The Taliban did not cease, and continued to seize territory by force, clearly a breach in the terms of the deal.  

As for conditions based - there are numerous citations.  Just find one.  Here is one at the top of the search - CNS news?  Now sure who they are, but anyway

Conditions based

There are citations going back to 2017 that any extrication - this would be THE central feature of the deal.  Biden through all that out the window

 

my god, i mean, i genuinely do not know how many times i can repeat the same fucking thing and you just ignore it but you have an incredible ability to just ignore your way around the problem.  yes, i have read the doha agreement...multiple times.  i'm not sure what you are talking about when you insinuate that my discussing the prisoner swap which was part of the agreement means i haven't read the agreement.  here is a link to the agreement:

https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-For-Bringing-Peace-to-Afghanistan-02.29.20.pdf

in it, these are the conditions that the taliban agreed to:

Quote

PART TWO

In conjunction with the announcement of this agreement, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is
not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban will take the following steps
to prevent any group or individual, including al-Qa’ida, from using the soil of Afghanistan to threaten
the security of the United States and its allies:

1. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and
is known as the Taliban will not allow any of its members, other individuals or groups, including
al-Qa’ida, to use the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States and its
allies.

2. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and
is known as the Taliban will send a clear message that those who pose a threat to the security
of the United States and its allies have no place in Afghanistan, and will instruct members of
the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and
is known as the Taliban not to cooperate with groups or individuals threatening the security of
the United States and its allies.

3. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and
is known as the Taliban will prevent any group or individual in Afghanistan from threatening
the security of the United States and its allies, and will prevent them from recruiting, training,
and fundraising and will not host them in accordance with the commitments in this agreement.

4. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and
is known as the Taliban is committed to deal with those seeking asylum or residence in
Afghanistan according to international migration law and the commitments of this agreement,
so that such persons do not pose a threat to the security of the United States and its allies.

5. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and
is known as the Taliban will not provide visas, passports, travel permits, or other legal
documents to those who pose a threat to the security of the United States and its allies to enter
Afghanistan.

 

this is effectively a tacit understanding expressed in the agreement that the taliban would immediately begin ruling afghanistan again once we left.  and nowhere in there does it state anything resembling your contention.  at all.  so just stop.  because you're an idiot and you are out of your depth.

as stache said above, the minute we decided we no longer wanted to permanently occupy afghanistan, the taliban resumed as the ruling mechanism in the country.  if anyone was not willing to accept that, they had to accept that the united states was never leaving afghanistan as the effective ruling mechanism.  70%+ of americans wanted out.  you cannot get out without the return of the taliban.  full stop.

trump's state dept actually recognized this and that's why they pursued the doha agreement.  there has not been a clear violation of that agreement to date...people are just surprised at how quickly afghanistan laid down and resumed taliban rule.  and both state departments that have been in place since february of 2020 have goatfucked the process of removing people without a doubt.

but you are arguing that the taliban violated some condition of the agreement that isn't actually part of the agreement and moreover, the mere existence of the agreement itself was a tacit understanding that what happened was inevitable.  you apparently think that we should re-engage and go back to fighting the taliban because you like the political optics of biden "failing."  but if that was genuinely your concern, you would have to accept americans proxy ruling afghanistan into perpetuity.  because whether it is today, tomorrow, a year from now, a decade from now, or a century from now...what happened was going to happen no matter what.  bandaid ripped off.  now the work begins on ensuring the taliban continue to adhere to the agreement while we extract all americans and as many non-afghanis, and vulnerable afganis as we can.

[Bateshorn 9991]

3 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

TDS. Honest question- do you think the taliban advances like a wildfire under trumps withdrawal plan without receiving missiles from the sky? Or do they go unopposed like they just did.


I think If trump was still president, the withdrawal is coordinated. Equipment, vehicles, non military personnel out first. Any sign of the taliban going back on their word is met with an aerial assault. Taliban knows they have nothing to stop that. Once they smelled blood in the water that the ANA and Biden administration weren’t going to do jack shit…we just laid down

Like the withdrawal in Syrah?  Of course not. We cut and run as well.  
 

 

[Tuco 5093]

5 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

TDS. Honest question- do you think the taliban advances like a wildfire under trumps withdrawal plan without receiving missiles from the sky? Or do they go unopposed like they just did.


I think If trump was still president, the withdrawal is coordinated. Equipment, vehicles, non military personnel out first. Any sign of the taliban going back on their word is met with an aerial assault. Taliban knows they have nothing to stop that. Once they smelled blood in the water that the ANA and Biden administration weren’t going to do jack shit…we just laid down

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. 

Edited August 18, 2021 by Tuco

[BabaYaga 15625]

3 minutes ago, Longhornlove said:

I have no idea how we relocate that many people but I'm sure the government does. They have been relocating more than that each month from our southern border but can't figure out how to help people who helped us in Afghanistan? Over a 20 year period no less. They could have figured out how to do this instead of trying to impeach a president who was no longer in office.

Here's another wild idea.  You have eight months.  Not a ton of time, but more than enough if you act decisively.  Quietly and efficiently start identifying and collecting those certain ANA assets and their families that need to be extricated in the event things go south.  We call that "contingency planning"

Make zero overtures that there will be a withdrawal until certain assets and technology are secured.  THEN, we facilitate as calm and controlled exit as possible.  Civilians are going to freak out.  That will happen.  I'm talking about the thousands of western citizens, NGOs, reporters, and key ANA leaders and translators.  We have the lists.  We did the whole thing ass backwards and made this public spectacle, then went WELL FUCK, how do we get these people out?
 

[Longhornlove 5209]

Just now, aggie08 said:

Ah, well the objectivity was nice while it lasted.

What about the waves of immigrants being relocated through our country isn't objective or relevant to relocating hundreds of thousands of immigrants from Afghanistan? You asked the question. The only difference is they are trapped by the Taliban thousands of miles away vs, walking across a river. Granted some significant logistical problems getting here but the actual relocation of said Afghans into our country shouldn't be an issue considering the experience of the current administration in this matter.

 

[wildcat09 29579]

7 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

TDS. Honest question- do you think the taliban advances like a wildfire under trumps withdrawal plan without receiving missiles from the sky? Or do they go unopposed like they just did.


I think If trump was still president, the withdrawal is coordinated. Equipment, vehicles, non military personnel out first. Any sign of the taliban going back on their word is met with an aerial assault. Taliban knows they have nothing to stop that. Once they smelled blood in the water that the ANA and Biden administration weren’t going to do jack shit…we just laid down

Like it was in Syria?

[wildcat09 29579]

MN might be the dumbest poster on Surly these days. He's making a few of the normal competitors for that title look brilliant by comparison.

[aggie08 21800]

2 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

I think If trump was still president, the withdrawal is coordinated.

Jesus fucking christ. How are you able to put "Trump" and "coordinated" in the same sentence with a straight face? He would have just gone along with whatever plan the generals presented (probably one not too dissimilar to the one currently in execution), then bitched at them from the toilet when things went sideways.

If he had a great plan, why do you think he set the exit date into his would-be second term? A clean and decisive withdrawal from Afghanistan would have been great for a re-election bid...

[WhatTheBuck 28930]

1 hour ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

Yep. Similarly, I often have to remind myself when looking back through history that these people were just as intelligent as we are and maybe more so because survival of the fittest still meant something back then. We only have as much knowledge as we have because generations before us built upon the knowledge of generations before them and passed it down to us. We fill our brains with knowledge about physics and science that they didn't have from a young age and that sometimes makes us feel more intelligent. However, they filled their brains with Latin and classical literature and history to a much greater extent than we do today. 

 

1 hour ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

Yep. Similarly, I often have to remind myself when looking back through history that these people were just as intelligent as we are and maybe more so because survival of the fittest still meant something back then. We only have as much knowledge as we have because generations before us built upon the knowledge of generations before them and passed it down to us. We fill our brains with knowledge about physics and science that they didn't have from a young age and that sometimes makes us feel more intelligent. However, they filled their brains with Latin and classical literature and history to a much greater extent than we do today. 

Have you ever read Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali? Her story is really interesting. She was born dirt poor in rural Somalia. But she was taught by her grandmother all about the animals and their migration patterns, the seasons, how to stay safe from predators, how to use plants for medicine, etc. They lived off the land. Her story is both inspirational and tragic because she was subjected to the barbaric custom of female genital mutilation. (A custom that predates Islam and has been practiced by Christian communities as well.) But the knowledge base of people living in that way and in that time and place far exceeds our own. We wouldn’t last long trying to live that way without someone to teach us.

But one of the most interesting things is that, living in a tribal society, she was taught from a young age to memorize her last 100 paternal ancestors. Whenever you met another member of your tribe, you’d both recite your ancestors until you found a common relative. I think that’s amazing. I have a book on the genealogy of my dad’s side of the family and I know who my first ancestor was who came to America. (An orphan who came from Switzerland to live with Amish relatives in northeast Ohio.) But that doesn’t even go back a dozen generations. My mom couldn’t name her great grandfather. Knowledge comes in different forms and there are intelligent people everywhere regardless of culture or technological advancement.

Edit: No idea how the double quote happened.

Edited August 18, 2021 by WhatTheBuck

[WhatTheBuck 28930]

23 minutes ago, UDontKnow said:

But you forgot the previous vegetable who emboldened the Taliban by promising them a complete military withdrawal and wanted them at the Presidential retreat at Camp David. 

During the week of 9/11. Don’t forget that. 

[BabaYaga 15625]

3 minutes ago, sidis said:

this is effectively a tacit understanding expressed in the agreement that the taliban would immediately begin ruling afghanistan again once we left. 

Once we left.  Read it again.  Once.  We.  Left.  

Not before.  Not during.  It was effectively a cease fire.  This isn't complicated.  The Taliban broke that cease fire.   

5 minutes ago, sidis said:

as stache said above, the minute we decided we no longer wanted to permanently occupy afghanistan, the taliban resumed as the ruling mechanism in the country

Which is the whole fucking point.  JFC.  We made public overtures, augured in on a symbolic date, relied on faulty intel to justify it, then when shit hit the fan, were effectively painted into a corner because we refused to pivot or make changes as we saw things dissolving before our eyes.  

 

7 minutes ago, sidis said:

you apparently think that we should re-engage and go back to fighting the taliban

Bullshit.  Leaving is the correct thing to do.  Stranding thousands of western civilians and abandoning billions in US hardware and sensitive com devices is fucking not.  Identifying the ways and means to prioritize western civilians stranded seems pretty fucking obvious.  As is having a contingency if/when the intel reports of the ineffectiveness of the ANA comes to bear - as it did.  

[sidis 10017]

15 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

TDS. Honest question- do you think the taliban advances like a wildfire under trumps withdrawal plan without receiving missiles from the sky? Or do they go unopposed like they just did.


I think If trump was still president, the withdrawal is coordinated. Equipment, vehicles, non military personnel out first. Any sign of the taliban going back on their word is met with an aerial assault. Taliban knows they have nothing to stop that. Once they smelled blood in the water that the ANA and Biden administration weren’t going to do jack shit…we just laid down

i genuinely wonder what it is like to go through the world this fucking ignorant.

seriously.  read the mother fucking doha agreement.  here is a link: https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-For-Bringing-Peace-to-Afghanistan-02.29.20.pdf

it is a clear acknowledgment that trump and his negotiating team (like anyone with ANY fucking knowledge of afghanistan would have) fully expected the taliban to resume control of afghanistan once the united state withdrew.  this is precisely why they were dealing with them and not the afghani government in negotiating the united states' exit from the country.

how did the taliban go back on their "word" from the agreement?

[UDontKnow 10572]

47 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

You want to Stan for the BJP, go nuts.  Nobody who has a remotely cleared eyed view of Modi thinks the country is moving in a Democratic direction, especially when the government actively turns a blind eye to religious violence in its own nation. 
 

You don’t occupy Kashmir, end it’s autonomy, then annex it into the country against the will of its majority population because you are a beacon of freedom and self determination. 
 

You also don’t make millions of your own citizen stateless because you are a city on the hill.

Yeah, some American’s read more than the sports section.

I do agree that American democracy is pretty unhealthy rn (and if you are black, has always been). So you can put quotes around us to.

You're absolutely wrong again. Read the works of C. Christine Fair at Georgetown University before you continue to embarrass yourself (https://gufaculty360.georgetown.edu/s/contact/00336000014Re4cAAC/christine-fair). Maybe you'll actually start understanding something if it comes from an American perspective and she is a white woman, so her work might be more of your taste.

And religious violence has been a theme of India way back before India became a modern nation (fun fact the Indian empire used to include what is now Afghanistan and there was order in the land at that time). You talk about ignoring religious violence but you probably could not tell me what the instigating event of the 2002 Gujarat riots was---something that actually started in a different part of the country and involved over 50 Hindu deaths. Still don't know what it is? Here is your answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godhra_train_burning. As someone with direct ancestry from Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh and with family that fought against Pakistan in 1965 and 1971, it is laughable what gets reported in western media regarding India. Your argument for religious violence is the the exact same concept as race massacres in America, so save your breath. No one with a brain is buying it.

In America, Native Americans and Hispanics were present before America became a nation and African Americans---well they were actually just Africans---were brought over as slaves. None of these minority groups are responsible for large scale communal violence. Sadly, it has been white Americans who have been perpetrating violence against minorities for centuries.

Maybe study the complete history of India before finally formulating your opinion. Islam was a foreign religion that invaded India almost a millennium ago and in the only large nation predominantly inhabited by Hindus since at least 2500 years before Jesus Christ allegedly took birth. Those same Muslims have been allowed to conduct genocidal activities on Hindus in their own native homeland, but you dare lecture me about "religious violence." So in essence, you're completely fine with a religious/ethnic minority that is allowed to terrorize the majority of a nation's population. Got it. By your logic, Hindus should sit idly by and continue to be victimized by Islamic terrorism perpetrated domestically and internationally. Got it again.

Look up the genocide of Hindu pandits in Kashmir, when it started, and for how long it has been going on and then get back to me. Look up the original UN resolution after the India-Pakistan War of 1948 and then get back to me. I bet you conveniently forgot, just like Pakistan, Muslims, and the rest of the damn world that Pakistan was deemed to be a hostile invading force and was supposed to withdraw and fully demilitarize from Kashmir before allowing the the Kashmiri plebiscite to hold free and fair elections to determine their future. Well guess who has yet to withdraw in 2021 and cries about Kashmir to the UN every opportunity it gets? If you were running things, you would gladly cede the whole of Kashmir to Pakistan while blindly trusting Pakistan to keep its word about well--anything. Have you forgotten that it was Pakistan and the ISI harboring Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad which is Pakistan's version of West Point?

Show me where Modi is directly profiting from Kashmir. Like the rest of the West, you truly fail to understand the Kashmir situation. By taking away control from local corrupt politicians, India has a chance to actually provide security to the region via establishment of economic opportunities thereby giving Kashmiris opportunity for education and jobs. Otherwise you get a population of ignorant and uneducated people with no livelihood, who are more likely to be brainwashed by religious extremism threatening the security of the rest of the nation (and quite frankly the world) because they have nothing better to do but be radicalized by fake promises of glory in heaven. And I readily admit that it is a painful process for all Kashmiris, but at the same time, the status quo prior to Modi's intervention was untenable and would ultimately beget the "religious violence" that you allegedly abhor.

But according to you, Modi is the problem for India and in South Asia. Sounds to me that the actual stan is you--advocating for a Congress Party that functions on familial dynasty politics and has been lining its pockets while actual Indians suffered in silence the time of Nehru. The same Nehru that allowed India to be bitch slapped by the likes of Pakistan and China in its primitive stages. 

It might take India another millennium before it can hold a candle to America as a democracy, but it is on the right path under Modi even with Western detractors like you.

Edited August 18, 2021 by UDontKnow

[elfenix 34751]

Imagine thinking you can use quotes from 2017 as proof of what was contained in a deal in 2020.

[UDontKnow 10572]

34 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

TDS. Honest question- do you think the taliban advances like a wildfire under trumps withdrawal plan without receiving missiles from the sky? Or do they go unopposed like they just did.


I think If trump was still president, the withdrawal is coordinated. Equipment, vehicles, non military personnel out first. Any sign of the taliban going back on their word is met with an aerial assault. Taliban knows they have nothing to stop that. Once they smelled blood in the water that the ANA and Biden administration weren’t going to do jack shit…we just laid down

See the bolded. Kinda hard to take you seriously with those words juxtaposed next to each other.

I am not defending the Biden's administration handling of the withdrawal, but to ignore the fact that the Taliban were preparing for the potential of an offensive once America's government changed hands is disingenuous.

It seems like you are in the camp that favored potentially escalating the conflict in Afghanistan in the event the Taliban did not honor whatever agreement was hashed out between them and the Trump administration. Why, what for, and to what end? Must America continue to pay with their military lives and taxpayer money?

To me it feels like the Taliban pulled the wool over Trump's head once he decided to engage them. The rest of the world knew what a fool Trump was when he decided to rub elbows with Kim Jong-un and Trump gave them the opportunity they needed to move forward with their objectives. Trump promised it would happen in May and once that didn't happen, the Taliban had their green light. You can see my previous CR post where I thought the withdrawal should have started Day 1 under the Biden administration, but clearly there were other things going in DC and America in January which may have precluded it from becoming the top priority.

Maybe the withdrawal could have been more coordinated under Trump, but we'll never know that because he's a one-term president and the nation is better for it. 

Edited August 18, 2021 by UDontKnow

[Bateshorn 9991]

Sounds like I touched a nerve. You go on with your bad self.  Everyone loves a good Aggie-esque rant. 

If you’re Hindu, BJP has been great.  If your anyone else, well….

 

 

[mchookem 16768]

i mean let's be honest... America has 'looked like fools' for several years now.

you could say we've been exceptionally foolish lol

Edited August 18, 2021 by mchookem

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4999]

5 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

 

Have you ever read Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali? Her story is really interesting. She was born dirt poor in rural Somalia. But she was taught by her grandmother all about the animals and their migration patterns, the seasons, how to stay safe from predators, how to use plants for medicine, etc. They lived off the land. Her story is both inspirational and tragic because she was subjected to the barbaric custom of female genital mutilation. (A custom that predates Islam and has been practiced by Christian communities as well.) But the knowledge base of people living in that way and in that time and place far exceeds our own. We wouldn’t last long trying to live that way without someone to teach us.

But one of the most interesting things is that, living in a tribal society, she was taught from a young age to memorize her last 100 paternal ancestors. Whenever you met another member of your tribe, you’d both recite your ancestors until you found a common relative. I think that’s amazing. I have a book on the genealogy of my dad’s side of the family and I know who my first ancestor was who came to America. (An orphan who came from Switzerland to live with Amish relatives in northeast Ohio.) But that doesn’t even go back a dozen generations. My mom couldn’t name her great grandfather. Knowledge comes in different forms and there are intelligent people everywhere regardless of culture or technological advancement. 

Have not, and honestly probably won't. Not because it doesn't sound like it's worth reading, but because I have three kids under the age of five, work 48 hours per week, and have other interests that most folks here would probably find mundane, like the history of a garment commonly worn on the American frontier called the hunting shirt. Basically it was an overshirt worn over proper clothes (or even as just a jacket based on some of the first hand accounts I have read) that was open in the front with fringe one edges and held together with a belt instead of buttons so that it overlapped in the front, kind of like a bath robe. This allowed folks to use the overlap areas as sort of pockets to store stuff like a snack or tobacco. It was worn extensively by the long hunters in Colonial America and was even adopted as a uniform during parts of the American Revolution. Unfortunately, there are only like four known extant examples of this garment, so piecing together details of how it was typically constructed and how common it was is still a bit of a mystery and involves a lot of bad speculation. There is some scholarship about it, but most of it focuses on the revolutionary period and immediately before and after. However, first hand accounts recall its usage up until the decade before the Civil War or so when sewing machines became ubiquitous enough that more proper clothes could be easily afforded. I am primarily interested in what version of it might have been worn in Mexican and Revolutionary Texas. The Colonial American version shows a garment with capes on the shoulders, however images I have found in archives and such on the internet also show versions without capes and a more tailored cut that might be more similar to the frock coats worn at the time. For example, there is a portrait of Stephen F Austin supposedly painted during his 1833 trip to Mexico City that shows him wearing one that is cut more like a coat than a shirt and without capes. There is even a statue of him at the capital based on this painting. However, there are at least four different versions of that painting (one is actually an engraving) that show the same portrait and scene, but with distinct differences. One has a reference that says it comes from 1824 instead of 1833, which would be pretty significant in the history of textiles. Sorry for the rabbit trail, but that is the sort of stuff that fills my brain when I am not doing R&D at work.

[bad_teammate 13524]

what would have been the point of drone-striking the Taliban as we withdrew? To feel tough? 

[wildcat09 29579]

@BabaYaga, quote the actual parts of the DOHA agreement (a link to which has been provided three different fucking times on this page) that you think the Taliban violated or shut the fuck up. 

[UDontKnow 10572]

13 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Sounds like I touched a nerve. You go on with your bad self.  Everyone loves a good Aggie-esque rant. 

If you’re Hindu, BJP has been great.  If your anyone else, well….

 

 

Actually your response is the epitome of aggy since you willingly declined to respond to any points I made in my previous post and simply dismissed my post as a rant. You didn't touch a nerve with me. How could you possibly do that considering that your assertion is based on cherry picking events that fit your prejudicial narrative? However, your ignorance is on full display for questioning the state of another democracy based on "religious violence" when essentially the same concept (racial violence) runs rampant in America. That's called Western elitism.

Talk to educated Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, etc. from India or those who have direct ties to India and you will hear a completely different version of what you read in Western media. Most Indians are actually focused on economic growth and prosperity rather than sectarian violence (although they would appreciate the right to practice their religion in peace without attempts to convert them to Islam and Christianity, especially their daughters).

This will be my last post on the subject. It only came about because someone posted upthread about the Taliban being a threat to the national security of India which unfortunately is a legitimate concern for both India and the rest of the world.

[Bateshorn 9991]

If you are looking for me to defend US race relations, you’ve come to the wrong place.