72
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
72 points (90.0% liked)
politics
19144 readers
1862 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Your link is EXACTLY what I've been saying!
"The Trump administration in February 2020 negotiated a withdrawal agreement with the Taliban that excluded the Afghan government, freed 5,000 imprisoned Taliban soldiers and set a date certain of May 1, 2021, for the final withdrawal."
Trump made the agreement and set the date.
Biden issued the actual orders.
"Biden delayed the May 1 withdrawal date that he inherited. But ultimately his administration pushed ahead with a plan to withdraw by Aug. 31, despite obvious signs that the Taliban wasn’t complying with the agreement and had a stated goal to create an “Islamic government” in Afghanistan after the U.S. left, even if it meant it had to “continue our war to achieve our goal.”"
He inherited the commitment, and the timeline, the actual order of events, the actual military decisions, the choice to ignore the offer of help from the Governor of Guam, that's ALL on the commander in chief, which, at the time, was Biden.
I think it’s pretty evident that you don’t understand how any of this works. It’s probably best to end this here before I start getting comments removed.
I'm telling you exactly how it works, Trump committed to it, factually proven, with links. Biden executed it, factually proven, with links.
The failure was in the execution, as I've already noted.
Did Trump set Biden up for failure?
100% yes.
Could Biden have done things differently so as to avoid the clusterfuck?
100% yes.
Biden CHOSE to start drawing down troops while civilians and equipment were still there. That is all on Biden.
From June, 2021:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/04/politics/afghanistan-siv-bipartisan-letter/index.html
"It takes an average of 800+ days, and we plan to withdraw in less than 100 days," they noted. US Central Command said this week that the US withdrawal from the country was 30% to 44% complete."
Biden CHOSE to ignore the Governor of Guam when they offered assistance evacuating the civilians who helped us.
https://www.thenation.com/article/world/guam-was-ready-to-help-relocate-afghans-biden-ghosted/
"Among those willing to help was Governor Lourdes Leon Guerrero of Guam, a US territory in the Western Pacific. On June 12, she sent a letter to Biden. “Guam has stood ready to serve as a safe and secure route for this type of humanitarian effort throughout our history,” she wrote. “And today, it is no different. I assure you that my administration is prepared to assist” should Biden call on Guam to provide safe haven to refugees. She was echoing a plan advocates had been calling for since the spring: the “Guam option,” which would work around immigration bureaucracy by having the military airlift refugees to the island while they waited for their US visas or for another country to take them in. But the White House ghosted Leon Guerrero, too. After sending the June letter, the governor received “no formal written response,” according to a spokesperson."
Trump had NOTHING to do with either of those events because he had already been out of office for MONTHS when they happened.
You don't believe me? Believe, I dunno, the STATE DEPARTMENT?
https://abcnews.go.com/International/reporters-notebook-afghanistan-withdrawl-State-Department-biden-trump/story?id=100553006
"While the White House previously said that Biden directed government agencies to prepare for "all contingencies," the State Department inquiry found disorganization in the highest level of government, saying it was "unclear who in the department had the lead" on evacuation efforts.
The review also claims that senior officials failed to make critical decisions about which at-risk Afghan nationals would be airlifted before Afghanistan fell into turmoil."
Cited, quoted, proven.
k.
please check dms/reports