Afghanistan

Starting to get a better sense of how the Taliban was able to take over the country without any resistance from an Afghan army that Biden said last week "have 300,000 troops and are as well-equipped as any army in the world." 

https://youtu.be/ehSdXgI7NOU

Ledbetterman10 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

So Biden follows through Tumps plan to pull out and now he gets blasted for it?  I'm sure Trump would have been killed for this too.  

Everyone as American tax payers should be angry that we spent 20 years there and didn't make a friggin dent.

Even worse, we've basically paid for the Taliban's military bases, armored cars, weapons, etc. that have bee left behind. I can't imagine how much money it takes to construct a military base, but those constructed for the so-called Afghan military are now the property of the Taliban. 

Your government knows where these bases are…the us airforce could and should be vaporizing them…same as all NATO countries vacated embassies…

Merkin Baller said:

Blaming Biden for this mess is fucking pathetic. 

Well he did say just last week, when asked if a Taliban takeover was imminent, that it wouldn't happen because the Afghan army "has 300,000 troops and are as well-equipped as any army in the world." Well it did happen, without any resistance. And he also said that the withdrawal would be nothing like Saigon at the end of Vietnam, but it very much has been (maybe worse); an emergency evacuation of the U.S. embassy. Chaos at the airport, including Afghan's clinging to a airplane as it takes off. 

As far as the entire clusterfuck of this war goes, the Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations all share in some blame, as do both political parties. But execution of the withdrawal, that's on the current administration. Frankly, for those of you that love Biden, it's not really something to be concerned with, or to be overly defensive of him for. This war has been 20 years of bad decisions by everyone else, what's wrong with a couple more bad decisions at the end by him?

mcgruff10 said:

I think the jury is still out on if the Kabul evacuation will look like the fall of Saigon.  We still have time to turn this around and get people out.  

That’s fair. But the optics are comparable so far. 

mcgruff10 said:

Not funny but funny. 

hahahaha

Ledbetterman10 said:

The Juggler said:

Seems like there was little to no bloodshed. What was the casualty situation in Saigon?

Politically for Biden---he was stupid for making those comments last week and optics of such a quick reclamation by the Taliban do not look good at all. But the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted this to be over asap so I don't think it will have lasting damage. It's not like people immediately think about Gerald Ford when someone mentions the end of Vietnam. 

Two U.S. Marines in Saigon....killed by a rocket. Five deaths at the Kabul airport. 

The no-bloodshed thing is another thing that makes it comparable. The Taliban (or back then, the North Vietnamese) marching in, basically saying "leave or there will be bloodshed," and the U.S. scrambling to leave. 

Yeah...I guess. No US casualties this time around helps. The image of the plane taking off the those people chasing after was certainly heartbreaking though.

But again...politically, I don't get a sense that people blame Gerald Ford for Vietnam though. When I think of Vietnam I think of Nixon and LBJ primarily. People were more than fed up with that war by that point. I think this is similar in that respect. 


I was reading earlier they hope to have close to 30,000 evacuated by the end of the month? If that goes smoothly, could help change the current perception. 

The Juggler said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

The Juggler said:

Seems like there was little to no bloodshed. What was the casualty situation in Saigon?

Politically for Biden---he was stupid for making those comments last week and optics of such a quick reclamation by the Taliban do not look good at all. But the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted this to be over asap so I don't think it will have lasting damage. It's not like people immediately think about Gerald Ford when someone mentions the end of Vietnam. 

Two U.S. Marines in Saigon....killed by a rocket. Five deaths at the Kabul airport. 

The no-bloodshed thing is another thing that makes it comparable. The Taliban (or back then, the North Vietnamese) marching in, basically saying "leave or there will be bloodshed," and the U.S. scrambling to leave. 

Yeah...I guess. No US casualties this time around helps. The image of the plane taking off the those people chasing after was certainly heartbreaking though.

But again...politically, I don't get a sense that people blame Gerald Ford for Vietnam though. When I think of Vietnam I think of Nixon and LBJ primarily. People were more than fed up with that war by that point. I think this is similar in that respect. 


I was reading earlier they hope to have close to 30,000 evacuated by the end of the month? If that goes smoothly, could help change the current perception. 

Oh yeah when the smoke clears, all the blame for the war as a whole will fall on Bush and Cheney. 

Critics Warn Withdrawal From Afghanistan Paints Entirely Accurate Picture Of U.S. Government (theonion.com)