President Joe Biden is quickly proving that he is not only a threat to the safety of Americans, but he is also a threat to people throughout the world.
According to a bombshell report, Biden refused to listen to the advice of his top military officials and decided to move ahead with the disastrous US pullout in Afghanistan.
Biden allegedly overruled his generals who advised that he should keep 2,500 servicemen on the ground in Afghanistan to help with negotiations between Afghanistan and the Taliban. Instead, Biden decided to conduct a complete withdraw which led to a quick Taliban takeover who now control many US assets including weaponry, helicopters and other vehicles.
The Wall Street Journal reports:
In contrast to the numerous Trump policies he reversed, he opted to carry out Mr. Trump’s deal with the Taliban instead of trying to renegotiate it. In so doing, he overruled his top military commanders: Gen. Frank McKenzie, the commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East; Gen. Austin Scott Miller, who led NATO forces in Afghanistan; and Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Citing the risks of removing American forces to Afghan security and the U.S. Embassy, they recommended that the U.S. keep 2,500 troops in Afghanistan while stepping up diplomacy to try to cement a peace agreement.
On Monday, the ongoing disaster in Afghanistan took a turn for the worse after U.S. troops shot and killed two armed men at Kabul’s Karzai International Airport as the evacuation took a screeching halt.
“U.S. troops shot and killed two armed men at Kabul’s international airport, according to a U.S. official. The armed men, who numbered at least two, approached U.S. troops deployed to the airport to provide security and assist Americans and other individuals in a safe departure from Afghanistan, the official said. Few details were available about how things transpired between the U.S. troops and the armed men, who weren’t identified,” The Wall Street Journal reported.
“The US military has suspended air operations at the Kabul airport while troops try to clear the airfield of Afghans who flooded the tarmac, per [CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr]. Biden’s national security advisers have made clear this a.m. they don’t consider the airport secure right now,” CNN’s Kaitlan Collins reported on Monday morning.
The Daily Wire reports on the crumbling situation in Afghanistan:
The Taliban took control of Bagram Air Base on Sunday, a former American airbase that the U.S turned over to the Afghanistan government last month.
The Taliban have reportedly released thousands of prisoners that were held at Bagram, including members of al Qaeda, the terror group that carried out the 9-11 attacks and prompted the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. Bagram was under control of the U.S. military for roughly two decades before leaving it in control of the Afghan military in July as the U.S. pulled out of Afghanistan.
“The Taliban claims it overran Bagram Air Base and freed prisoners. Many high-value detainees were located there, including members of Al Qaeda. This will reverberate for years to come,” said Bill Roggio, Long War Journal editor, and terror analyst.
…
Along with its embassy personnel and diplomatic officials, the United States is also working to extract American citizens in Afghanistan and thousands of refugee visa holders. The Department of Defense is preparing to house up to 30,000 Afghan refugees at military bases in the U.S.
…
Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-AK) office told New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman that his office is receiving calls from United States citizens trapped behind Taliban checkpoints, even as the U.S. State Department is demanding the Taliban allow foreign nationals to leave the country.
Cotton’s office opened its phone lines to citizens in Kabul who need help, according to a tweet the Senator sent out earlier Sunday, asking anyone in need to make contact. Haberman tweeted Sunday night that Cotton’s office received calls from “multiple U.S. citizens” requiring help.
About the Author
Wonder if the military is going to get fed up with him an his incompetent Administration?
Sadly, if they abide by the Constitution, as their oath requires, thanks to the fools, idiots and morons who made Joe Biden their commander-in-chief, they are stuck with him, which is why our troops now need all the prayers this nation can say for them, and then some!
In my 70+ years on the globe, I have seen some real *****-up stuff come out of the idiots, morons, mouth breathers, bottom feeders, lunatics and their ilk who populate Washington, D.C., the center of unreality of the universe where truth and justice do not exist, as our politicians, but this fiasco the Biden administration has created in Afghanistnam really takes the cake, and is a clear indication of just how far down the scale of national decline this nation has managed to climb in that time.
As Sallust said, at the end, only a few preferred liberty, as for the rest, all they wished for was a kind master, and the ninety or a hundred million people all over the world who put Joe Biden in power thought they had one in him, because he told them he was going to save the soul of America, and the fools believed him, and this is the result.
And with regard to who knew what and when did they know it, let’s go back to 2014, when Hussein Obama was in the white house and Joe Biden was his hard-charging vice president for world affairs to a Reuters article entitled “Exclusive: U.S. force in Afghanistan may be cut to less than 10,000 troops” by Missy Ryan and Arshad Mohammed on 22 April 2014, where we had at that time, as follows, whether Joe Biden remembers it mor not, to wit:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan may drop well below 10,000 – the minimum demanded by the U.S. military to train Afghan forces – as the longest war in American history winds down, Obama administration officials briefed on the matter say.
end quotes
Now, when they say, “Obama officials,” is that a loop goofy Joe Biden would have been included in, or left out of?
Getting back to the story:
Since Afghanistan’s general election on April 5, White House, State Department and Pentagon officials have resumed discussions on how many American troops should remain after the current U.S.-led coalition ends its mission this year.
The decision to consider a small force, possibly less than 5,000 U.S. troops, reflects a belief among White House officials that Afghan security forces have evolved into a robust enough force to contain a still-potent Taliban-led insurgency.
end quotes
And stop right there, people, and let us examine that statement again, as follows: White House officials believe that Afghan security forces have evolved into a robust enough force to contain a still-potent Taliban-led insurgency.
That’s 2014, seven years ago, and that belief would have been Obama’s himself.
So did goofy old Joe share that opinion back then?
More to the point, did that belief by the Obama administration in 2014 that Afghan security forces had evolved into a robust enough force to contain a still-potent Taliban-led insurgency color Joe’s views today when he pulled, or tried to pull, anyway, our troops out of Afghanistnam?
Getting back to Reuters:
That belief, the officials say, is based partly on Afghanistan’s surprisingly smooth election, which has won international praise for its high turnout, estimated at 60 percent of 12 million eligible votes, and the failure of Taliban militants to stage high-profile attacks that day.
The Obama administration has been looking at options for a possible residual U.S. force for months.
“The discussion is very much alive,” said one U.S. official who asked not to be identified.
“They’re looking for additional options under 10,000” troops.
There are now about 33,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, down from 100,000 in 2011, when troop numbers peaked a decade into a conflict originally intended to deny al Qaeda sanctuary in Afghanistan after the September 11, 2001, attacks.
QUESTIONS ABOUT AFGHAN FORCES
With British and other foreign troops scheduled to depart in lock step with U.S. soldiers, the size of any residual U.S. force could add fuel to a debate in Washington over whether Taliban-led violence will intensify amid the vacuum left by Western forces, as some U.S. military officials expect.
Military leaders, including American General Joe Dunford, who heads U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, has identified 10,000 soldiers as the minimum needed to help train and advise Afghan forces fighting the insurgency, arguing a smaller force would struggle to protect itself.
end quotes
And there is another key point, people – how do you pull your people out of a war zone if you can’t get them all out at once?
Who is going to end up being sacrificed as the rear guard or holding force while everyone else skedaddles?
Getting back to the news:
During a March visit to Washington, Dunford told lawmakers that without foreign soldiers supporting them, Afghan forces would begin to deteriorate “fairly quickly” in 2015.
end quotes
Ah!
So did anyone listen to him?
In 2021, it sounds very much as if he was the only one back then who had a clue.
Getting back to it once again:
The Afghan air force, still several years away from being self-sufficient, will require even more assistance, he said.
A smaller U.S. force could have other unintended consequences, possibly discouraging already skeptical lawmakers from fully funding U.S. commitments to help fund Afghan forces.
At their current size, Afghan forces will cost at least $5 billion in 2015, a sum far beyond the reach of the Afghan government.
The United States has been widely expected to be the largest outside funder for those forces.
The Taliban and other militants have been weakened by more than 12 years of Afghan and NATO assaults, but they still can obtain supplies and plan attacks from Afghanistan’s remote mountain regions and tribal areas of neighboring Pakistan.
Some analysts are wary of reducing the U.S. presence to less than 10,000 troops.
“If the White House opts to keep a lower number of troops, it will put more pressure on the Afghan forces and run the risk of squandering their recent progress against the Taliban,” said Lisa Curtis, a former CIA analyst and State Department official now with the conservative Heritage Foundation, a think tank in Washington.
Debate over the size of a residual U.S. force follows the failure of the U.S. and Afghan governments to finalize a Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) to authorize a U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014, the deadline for U.S. and NATO troops to conclude their fight against the Taliban.
“The longer we go without a BSA, the more challenging it will be to plan and execute any U.S. mission,” said Laura Lucas Magnuson, a White House spokeswoman.
“Furthermore, the longer we go without a BSA, the more likely it will be that any post-2014 U.S. mission will be smaller in scale and ambition.”
Results of the recent presidential election may not be known for weeks, or months if runoffs take place.
But leading candidates have said they will sign the agreement, which has been on hold because of reservations from current Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
In late February, Obama announced that the United States might seek to sign the deal with Karzai’s successor and possibly keep troops there after 2014 to train and advise Afghan forces and pursue al Qaeda militants.
Some U.S. officials believe Afghan forces will require substantial, hands-on support from foreign troops, in addition to help from the United States.
end quotes
So, yes, who knew what, and when?
And did Joe Biden ever know anything, at all?