President Biden To President Ghani: You’ve Got Some “Perception Problems”
[guest post by Dana]
Reuters has an eye-opening report about the leaked transcript of a phone call on July 23 between President Biden and now-in-exile Afghan President Ghani. It’s surprising how President Biden didn’t seem concerned about a Taliban threat. However, it was only weeks before that he told us that “the likelihood there’s going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely,” so… Anyway, the phone call centered on “perception problem,” and Biden’s thoughts on how to address those:
In the last call between U.S. President Joe Biden and his Afghanistan counterpart before the Taliban seized control of the country, the leaders discussed military aid, political strategy and messaging tactics, but neither Biden nor Ashraf Ghani appeared aware of or prepared for the immediate danger of the entire country falling to insurgents, a transcript reviewed by Reuters shows.
…
In much of the call, Biden focused on what he called the Afghan government’s “perception” problem. “I need not tell you the perception around the world and in parts of Afghanistan, I believe, is that things are not going well in terms of the fight against the Taliban,” Biden said. “And there is a need, whether it is true or not, there is a need to project a different picture.”
Biden told Ghani that if Afghanistan’s prominent political figures were to give a press conference together, backing a new military strategy, “that will change perception, and that will change an awful lot I think.”
The American leader’s words indicated he didn’t anticipate the massive insurrection and collapse to come 23 days later. “We are going to continue to fight hard, diplomatically, politically, economically, to make sure your government not only survives, but is sustained and grows,” said Biden.
After the call, the White House released a statement that focused on Biden’s commitment to supporting Afghan security forces and the administration seeking funds for Afghanistan from Congress.
While President Biden didn’t appear to feel that time was of the essence, President Ghani at least had an inkling of what might come:
Ghani told Biden he believed there could be peace if he could “rebalance the military solution.” But he added, “We need to move with speed.”
“We are facing a full-scale invasion, composed of Taliban, full Pakistani planning and logistical support, and at least 10-15,000 international terrorists, predominantly Pakistanis thrown into this,” Ghani said. Afghan government officials, and U.S. experts, have consistently pointed to Pakistani support for the Taliban as key to the group’s resurgence.
The White House has not responded to the report.
It’s still mind-boggling to me that there didn’t appear to be any real concern that the Taliban would rise up en masse at the opportunity and that we might find ourselves scrambling to get our people out. And most unbelievably, while completely reliant on the generosity of the Taliban. I’m guessing that whoever leaked the transcript of Biden and Ghani’s phone call must have felt an even more intense shock and revulsion.
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (174549) — 9/1/2021 @ 10:48 amWhen it comes to leaking transcripts of Presidential phone calls to foreign leaders… the Deep State strikes again!
B.A. DuBois (80f588) — 9/1/2021 @ 11:04 amPeople in the Afghan government have always mentioned Pakistan, and been ignored.
The United States needed to read the riot act to Pakistan and threaten immediate severe sanctions and more.
But the U.S. believed its intelligence.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/1/2021 @ 11:39 amNow it’s probably not the actual Pakistani government, but a rogue agency or a smaller group within it
That doesn’t want to expose itself by making a coup.
A rogue agency that other people are afraid to tamper with. Benazir Bhutto got killed..
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/1/2021 @ 11:43 amSurprise! The puddle of puss is a festering, insincere, lying, malarkey, blarney, and Beaush!t- shoveling mean-tempered Irish-Catholic mick after all.
DCSCA (f4c5e5) — 9/1/2021 @ 1:30 pmHey, look: an actual impeachable phone call featuring a President actually pressuring a foreign leader to lie because it would benefit him politically.
Edoc118 (099eea) — 9/1/2021 @ 4:17 pmThe contents of the call aren’t very earth shattering but the fact that it’s been leaked is interesting.
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/1/2021 @ 5:38 pm@7
The fact that it was leaked is outrageous.
I don’t like these kinds of leaks, even against an administration that I’m against politically and I certainly didn’t like it when it happened during the Trump years. This is one of those awful precedents that the left/democrat cheered under Trump years and are not gnashing their teeth because it’s their party is in the Whitehouse.
whembly (ae0eb5) — 9/1/2021 @ 6:16 pmI read about this earlier today, I believe it was on NRO, and there was another eyebrow-raising bit of the call that ought not to go unnoticed. Apparently President Biden promised President Ghani that the U.S. would continue to provide air support to the Afghan forces until the withdrawal was complete. We only pulled the rug out from under them — what? — two or three weeks early? It goes to show that Joe Biden just says what he thinks is the right thing to say at any given moment, and is utterly insincere.
JVW (ee64e4) — 9/1/2021 @ 8:43 pm@9 It also shows Biden trying to establish some quid pro quo for political reasons. That same sort of thing that Trump was impeached over (Ukraine).
Democrats don’t have any reason to complain if GOP take over Congress and starts impeachment proceedings over this. (I don’t believe this reaches to the level of impeachment…bad policies are just bad, and the voters wanted Biden. So, we get it good and hard here).
whembly (ae0eb5) — 9/1/2021 @ 9:11 pm#10 What quid pro quo? And you see no difference between the president making promises to a foreign leader that he cannot keep and actively trying to get that foreign leader to initiate a bogus corruption investigation of a political opponent?
Victor (4959fb) — 9/1/2021 @ 11:50 pmI’ve yet to see a critique of Biden’s actions from the right that didn’t boil down to – we should have stayed in Afghanistan and brought in more troops. Keeping Bagram? How many more troops would that have required? And how many more in addition to make sure people could get safely to Bagram?
Biden’s administration did not forsee a quick collapse, a failure of intelligence and taking in all contingencies. But whenever the collapse did happen, you’d have seen pretty much the same results unless, again, you chose to bring in just a whole bunch more troops. And for those who are horrified at the loss of 13 Americans in the bombing, how many more do you think would have died if we restarted the war?
From my perspective Biden’s main error was not expediting processing of refugees from an earlier moment. But given that Republicans are currently swinging massively against allowing refugees into the U.S., the same ones that they were oh so concerned about a week ago, I can understand why Biden was hesitant to make the process of asylum easier.
Victor (4959fb) — 9/1/2021 @ 11:55 pmWhembly, can you explain how you see a corrupt quid pro quo in this?
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 3:03 amFollow the money… http://ace.mu.nu/archives/fundingthetaliban.png
Economic assistance… to the Taliban so they can fight ISIS-K? Yeah… makes sense.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/2/2021 @ 5:18 amBuilding Billions in Bribes Better
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/2/2021 @ 5:20 amLet’s keep nibbling around the edges, shall we?
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/2/2021 @ 5:21 amhttps://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/bryan-preston/2021/09/01/billion-dollar-memory-hole-biden-admin-now-scrubbing-federal-websites-of-lists-of-weapons-it-gave-the-taliban-n1474953
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/2/2021 @ 5:23 amHeh… https://babylonbee.com/news/taliban-buys-hunter-biden-painting-for-presidential-palace
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/2/2021 @ 6:17 amVictor (4959fb) — 9/1/2021 @ 11:55 pm
They already had Bagram. The general contention is they should have held it until later in the process.
The original plan was to delay the collapse until after the US left. Keeping Bagram and the air support that was sourced from there is expected to have helped with that.
There have been a number of comments here, and ones I’ve seen other places, that was something other than stay with more troops. I’ve also noticed this common binary argument you’re making between expand the war and exactly what happened. There a number of possible outcomes that exist between the bad withdrawal we saw and staying forever with more troops.
frosty (f27e97) — 9/2/2021 @ 6:36 am12.
Well, no. From the pro-Trump right, it’s also that we should have left, but done it differently, somehow. It;s incoherent, and the aps in the argument are never closed.
There’s plenty of criticism of abandoning Afghanistan, but it’s not aligned with support for any politician.
The arguments for keeping Bagram seem to be that it was valuable for reasons not connected with Afghanistan, that it was easier to protect and should have been kept along with Hamid Karzai International Airport (but Biden wanted a limited number of soldiers and mainly wanted to protect the embassy) , and perhaps should been the last place in Afghanistan the United States left from, and that there was a prison there that held about 1,000 of the worst or most capable terrorists, many belonging to ISIS – and that if it was abandoned, we should have taken the prisoners with us.
The problem with the prisoners is that they were in Afghan custody, (mainly for diplomatic and political reasons, as the previous Administrations wanted to hold as few “war on terror” prisoners as possible and hadn’t added any to Guantanamo in maybe a dozen years) but at least some could have been taken away just like they were taken in 2002.
But on August 31, he seems to have claimed they did.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/08/31/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-end-of-the-war-in-afghanistan
Who knows to what degree any of that might be true?
Did someone mention that idea in a footnote, or at the end of a sentence? Or is that a half truth? Was the lowest estimate several weeks after the last American soldier was out? Or maybe they did say the collapse of Kabul was a possibility – about a week – or less – before it happened?
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/2/2021 @ 6:59 amcontinuing whembly @10
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:07 amHe didn’t really want to.
His goal was to promise much and do little, on the premise that, so long as he got sme in, the pro-Afghan people would look at his promises, while the anti-immigration or even anti-refugee people would look at the number of admissions per quarter.
I understand it too but don’t “understand” it. I understand why he misled everybody also.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:13 amThis was really poorly done. (And shouldn’t have been done at all) But I don’t think these events were a worst case scenario. I do think a great withdrawal (leave no person or material behind) would have required more troops and likely more casualties.
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:28 amError by me:
Number 21 (and 20) was responding to Victor @12, not whembly @10..
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:35 amTime123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:28 am
Worst case scenario was Kabul falling to the Taliban from a Friday to a Monday August 27 to 30, or a week or two later.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:38 amI’ve also noticed this common binary argument you’re making between expand the war and exactly what happened.
Pretty crazy that the same people who were insisting six years ago that our only two choices were entering into the Iran Deal or going to war with them (remember how Ben Rhodes crowed that the Obama Administration had cowed empty-headed young reporters into repeating that canard?) are now trying to insist that our only options in Afghanistan were to withdraw by the agreed-upon date or go to war with the Taliban. And this even after it has been reported that the Taliban offered to stay out of Kabul until we had completed our mission.
Look, the Trump Administration set the stage for this by removing a few thousand troops far too early, but the Biden Administration then took a bad situation and found a way to make it dramatically worse.
JVW (ee64e4) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:50 amSammy, Worst case scenario was many thousands of Americans taken captive and the Taliban attempting to inflict maximum casualties while we retreated. Picture Kabul as a war zone and lunatics trying to shoot down planes who tried to enter or leave.
Or Isis taking control of Kabul and doing the same while the Taliban stood back while we fought them.
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:50 amIf you keep Bagram and Hamid Karzai, you’re talking about maintaining a lot of troops. How many I don’t know because I am not an expert on logistics, but it took 5-6,000 to keep good control of one airport, so at least twice I assume. And if the theory is that we are also keeping control of prisoners, that means more. And if the other theory is that we abandon Karzai first, and Bagram second, then how are all those refugees going to get to Bagram? The whole point of that place was that it was off by itself, and easy to defend. That implies even more troops to protect convoys of refugees from other places.
As for the idea that we we weren’t losing too many troops each year before the Trump Deal, and so we could just go back to the status quo ante by keeping in a few thousand with air support, well as someone once said the enemy also gets a vote. Why would the Taliban be content with that kind of stalemate. If it’s reasonably clear that the only thing making the occupation bearable is that “only” 20 or troops are killed each year, then what stops them, really, from killing more troops?
Victor (4959fb) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:00 amJVW, Why do you assume that destroying all material left behind, including items that were ‘owned’ by the Afghan government wouldn’t have taken more troops? I don’t know how many or what casualty rate but it wouldn’t have been zero.
Also, what does it mean when the Taliban offered to let us have Kabul? At the point they made that offer what would that have gained us? I heard they were fighting with Isis there. Would we have gotten to do that instead?
I’m not saying that it wasn’t a mistake not to keep Bagrem airport or that this was done well. But assuming we could get better results with no additional resources or trade off doesn’t make sense to me.
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:03 am@20
I might have lost the thread here. I don’t think pro-Trump is making a strong case for staying with more troops. These comments may not be indicative of the larger public but Time123 and Dustin are hardly pro-Trump and they’re in the stay with more troops camp.
The pro-Trump camp is being accused of not caring about AF other than to use it as a wedge against JB. Part of the incoherence you’re seeing is both inconsistent statements by pro-Trump people and inconsistent statements being assigned to them by their critics.
There’s also a bit of inconsistency on what “it” is. There is a claim that the AF government was always going to fall even though that wasn’t the claim made by the administration prior to beginning the drawdown. So, the post US in AF case is one “it”. Another “it”, is the drawdown itself, ie the US trying to evacuate.
Even if both of those were going to be chaotic and violent I’d have expected a) more honesty up front and 2) something better than “well f it, this is the best we can do”.
If the AF government was always going to fall why leave weapons and equipment? The answer there is obvious. JB didn’t want the blame so it’s easier to give the Taliban equipment and now money to avoid that.
If the evacuation needed more people to secure Kabul and Bagram why not do that? Also obvious. Biden doesn’t want any deaths that can be assigned to something he ordered. These last few deaths are from defensive actions and he doesn’t really take responsibility for those. Ordering enough troops in to extend the secure area in Kabul was a bridge to far for him.
This last issue should be a big concern for everyone. He is a coward. It’s him confirming his inability to say yes to killing OBL. Biden’s foreign policy consists of not getting soldiers killed at any cost.
frosty (f27e97) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:15 amJust a reminder that while some are trying to read the tea leaves and make excuses for Biden there are still tons of Americans caught behind enemy lines and abandoned by this administration.
But carry on carrying water.
NJRob (eb56c3) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:22 am@10
The fundamental argument about Trump’s impeachment was the corrupt ask for Ukraine to investigate the Bidens, his likely and eventual political opponent. It was argued that the only reason why he asked this were for corrupt reasons (even though it could be argue that there was some colorable reason for the investigation).
The Biden-Ghani call is arguably corrupt in a similar way in that Biden (and Blinkin) advocated for Ghani to lie about the incoming collaspe so that they can “shift the narrative” in a more favorable light in order to continue with the evacuation without any realities on the ground and without concerns for the safety of everyone. What’s worst, Biden (the quid pro quo part) issued a carrot, the air support, to convince Ghani to publicly lie on behalf of Biden.
It’s no wonder Ghani left Afghanistan shortly after that.
Now, personally, I don’t believe this rises to the level of impeachment (I didn’t think Trump’s Ukraine call either). But, if Democrats is going to apply that standard, don’t be surprised when GOP applies the same standard when they’re in power.
Hence my repeated claims… the precedents set by critics of Trump will eventually come around to bite them.
Karma.
whembly (3bda0a) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:27 amVictor (4959fb) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:00 am
I wouldn’t assume Bagram would take the same number of people to secure as the Kabul airport. Bagram has a lot of physical security that Kabul doesn’t have. But I’m no expert either. But we had Bagram and I don’t see any reason we needed to add more people there to keep it secure.
There are at least two reasons to keep Bagram. You’ve cited one and listed the problems with that. The second one is that the air support provided by the US is widely believed to be the thing propping up the AF government. One of the reasons cited for the AF government collapsing so fast was that once the US shutdown Bagram it triggered the beginning of the end. So, the second reason to keep Bagram open until last was to delay the fall of the AF government until after the US had evacuated as many civilians as it could. That’s the case even if Bagram isn’t used for evacuation of refugees.
frosty (f27e97) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:30 am@33 frosty, I’m with you here… I don’t understand why others don’t believe there was a better way, and the way it happened was always going to be messy.
Bagram was already secured and was providing Air Support for the AF army.
A hypothetical troop surge would only be enough to secure Kabal, and along with Bagram providing air support, that should be a very easy and painless thing for our military.
whembly (3bda0a) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:36 am31… Rob… it’s a great way to have them unknowingly peel back the onion, thus revealing their true selves.
Colonel Haiku (5add1e) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:44 amLook, the Trump Administration set the stage for this by removing a few thousand troops far too early, but the Biden Administration then took a bad situation and found a way to make it dramatically worse.
No.
This is all on Choo-Choo Joey; he engineered it.
Some ride Amtrak; some just blow it.
“Think ya used enough dynamite there, Butch?” – Sundance Kid [Robert Redford] ‘Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid’ 1969
DCSCA (f4c5e5) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:52 amhttps://justthenews.com/government/security/were-americans-people-screaming-outside-gates-kabul-airport-turned-away
Michael Yon doing the work our media deliberately hides.
NJRob (eb56c3) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:56 amMean. Angry. Defensive. “Lying dog-faced pony soldier.” The ‘new’ Gold Star families are letting us know the true face of Biden. If he stepped into the street and was clipped by a 1976 Camaro, Americans would weep for the injured… Camaro.
DCSCA (f4c5e5) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:00 amDCSCA (f4c5e5) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:00 am
Is this something that would buff out with a little bondo or will somebody need to source parts? The former might be forgivable but the latter is impeachable.
frosty (f27e97) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:17 am“Buff out with Bondo”?
You are not following the directions…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:41 amWhembly, thank you for the reply. From the piece it appears that Biden was mostly concerned with the perception within Afghanistan that there was no plan to defeat the taliban and wanted Ghani to do a press conference with other local leaders to convince the Afghan people that there was a plan that would work. Basically telling a US ally to fix their local moral problem. I don’t see that as a corrupt act as helping maintain a friendly government in Afghanistan is in the US interest.
Also, this call was in late July, before this was much of a domestic political story. That timing diminishes the likelihood that he was asking in an effort to help his domestic political standing.
Do you see it differently?
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:50 amI think we should have kept Bagram open. But I think any assumption that things would be painless and easy is probably wrong.
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:52 am@41 Yes, I see it differently.
Biden *knew* the Talibans was winning, even at the July phone call. He miscalculated badly how the AF army would hold up after losing the air support, but even then that was apparent.
Furthermore, the “narrative” wasn’t about the local moral problem. The Narrative was for the world too.
whembly (867f2f) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:55 amThe Afghan army had a lot of that equipment in their possession. Unless you’re suggesting we should have disarmed them before we left our only option was to take it back from the Taliban, which really wasn’t feasible.
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:55 am@43, Yes, he knew they were winning. that’s why he was telling Ghani he needed to do change things up and rally his people so the army wouldn’t give up so easily.
How about this, if I’m right on what he was saying do you still think this was corrupt? If so we can move on to what he actually said and what it meant.
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:59 am@45 I don’t believe the primary purpose was to tell Ghani he needed to change things up and rally his people. I believe he was trying to buy time, politically, for US domestic and US allies purposes so that he wouldn’t be pressured enough to change his withdrawal plans. He even DROPPED a carrot on Ghani by holding the US air support in play for this request.
whembly (867f2f) — 9/2/2021 @ 10:02 amEven if you’re right isn’t buying time while we withdraw a US policy interest?
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 10:08 am@47 To allow him to haphazardly withdraw as he did while fending off pressures to change his plans? Absolutely not in US policy interest.
whembly (867f2f) — 9/2/2021 @ 10:11 amC’mon, man… we got 90% out!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/2/2021 @ 10:28 am“I was not going to extend this forever war, and I was not extending a forever exit,” this is Biden pushing a fallacy. No one asked for a forever exit, assuming that moronic phrase means anything. What Americans want is American citizens safely out of Afghanistan, that would not take forever, or even a year, just a matter of days, perhaps weeks. Biden has often hailed himself as a “foreign policy expert”, a diplomat extraordinaire. A diplomat able to tie his own shoelaces ought to be able to settle those days or weeks past August 31 with the Taliban, particular with American power at his back, military or monetary.
Following the safe return of our people, Americans demand a reckoning — not the usual consequence-free, Janet Reno style I take full responsibility — we want heads to roll — mass firings of general officers, Pentagon assholes, State Department flunkeys, specifically Mark Milley and all his staff, Anthony Blinken and all his staff, Lloyd Austin and all his staff. We want them fired, dismissed, disgraced for gross incompetence bordering on treason. No severance pay, no pension, no golden parachute. Personally, I’d like to see a degradation ceremony done on Milley, something like what was done to Alfred Dreyfus, except with more gusto since Dreyfus was innocent and Milley is as guilty as any guilty man in history. I’d love to watch his phony-baloney decorations ripped from his tunic, his stars torn from his epaulets, and his sword broken over the knee of a Marine gunnery sergeant.
h/t Quaestor
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/2/2021 @ 10:34 amWhembly, so you’re saying he knew our plan wasn’t working and was trying to hide that fact?
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 11:08 am@52 Yes, he had all the information he needed. The military brass tried to steer Biden in different direction. The States department clamored for changes. He had his mind fixed on the 8/31 withdrawal date, hell or high-water and has created an avoidable man-made disaster.
whembly (3bda0a) — 9/2/2021 @ 11:14 amWhembly, I agree with everything you said there. But unfortunately that was out policy, leave ASAP, make a deal with the Taliban not to hurt us while we ran away, hope the Afghan government survived for a while. It’s a stupid execution in support of a bad goal, but I think this call seems like a non-corrupt action in support of that (stupid) plan.
Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 11:21 amIn their possession as in they owned it, yeah, we gave it to them, but it was theirs. The fact that they did absolutely nothing to keep it is the real problem. Just goes to show that that there is Talibanistan, yes, they’ve been going by the name of Afghanistan for 20 years, but it was always thus. At most, the president of Afghanistan was the Mayor of Kabul, and not even all of that. Any training element you talk to could identify 2 general outlines of recruit, motivated probable Taliban sympathizer that you might bribe to be on your side but don’t let him behind you in a fire fight. And a lazy good for nothing that got goat roped into being a recruit, where you don’t want to be in the same zip code as him when he let fly.
We trained them up on bog standard either Canadian C7 or M16’s, with the odd M4 thrown in for “special forces”. Most had CompM2’s or ACOGs and you could still find guys missing the entire target at 100 meters. Granted, I was watching a reserve battalion, but a properly zeroed ACOG will get you an expert score every single time with almost no effort. You have to try to suck, and boy did they suck.
I wouldn’t let them escort one of my convoys from Bagram to Kabul with loaded weapons, too dangerous, not of green on blue on purpose danger, just because some yahoo is playing with his weapon and happens to let 15 rounds fly just at anything in general.
Afghanistan isn’t a country, doesn’t want to be a country, with the Taliban, it’s still not a country, it’s tribal, like from 1450 just add machine guns.
Would leaving a 5k QRF with CAS at Bagram indefinitely helped the US in any way, debatable, but most likely aircraft would suffice, and those we can launch cross border, or from Dayton Ohio. ToT might be longer, but risks are lower, to our folks. Supporting a FOB of that size at the end of a secure supply line is expensive. Launching a few LRCM’s a week is a pretty cheap alternative, and you get a live fire test range. In the instance you need boots, we have created a massive SOF that is perfectly capable of taking on battalion size units, which you wouldn’t do because you’d still have total air superiority.
I’m not saying just anyone can take over Afghanistan, but if Jeff Bezos had a pointy stick and an urge to spend $100B on a private army, he could rent it for a good long time, just with the pointy stick and a large wallet. But why, it has zero strategic value, it’s less than zero actually.
Colonel Klink (Ret) (8938e1) — 9/2/2021 @ 11:31 amhttp://ace.mu.nu/archives/talibanchopperBH.jpg
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/2/2021 @ 11:38 am@53 I’m trying to convince you it’s more serious than that.
Here’s good break down with more details:
https://nypost.com/2021/09/01/joe-bidens-call-to-afghan-president-is-impeachable-devine/
I still disagree that this is impeachable… but, under the same standards that was used for Trump’s phone call, this Biden call arguable would meet that standard.
whembly (867f2f) — 9/2/2021 @ 11:43 amReports are out there that there was intel that we knew who the suicide bomber was that murdered our Marines and Afghani civilians, we had a lock on his position before the bombing, but that we refused to pull the trigger because it might upset the Taliban.
If that’s true, heads must roll and how far up the chain of command must it go?
NJRob (eb56c3) — 9/2/2021 @ 12:40 pmGhani probably didn’t want to derail the briber-in chief’s personal agenda at the time he was about to head off off to UAE with $135M. Biden tied aid to the things he wanted: I want this this and this and we will continue to give you this this and this.
steveg (ebe7c1) — 9/2/2021 @ 5:38 pmOf course being Biden, he didn’t comprehend that American air power was the only way to save Afghanistan from the Taliban
Telling an “ally” that he ought to butch up a little in public is not impeachable.
Although telling an employee the same thing in America might be actionable as sex discrimination.
nk (1d9030) — 9/2/2021 @ 5:58 pmC’mon, man… we got 90% out!
Earth to Joe; Earth to Joe:
This isn’t Apollo 13.
It’s Apollo 1.
DCSCA (f4c5e5) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:49 pmOne interesting thing about this callll is that Reuters claims to have also a recording.
Probably ever since Nixon, a president hasn’t recorded anything. In cases where they wanted a record, and this was mostly for conversations with foreign leaders, whether made by the president or the Secretary of State, the call would be transcribed. (The FBI also wiretapped the calls f some foreign ambassadors but these were not virclated through normal channels, and of course the foreign countries might make their own recordings.
Trump’s call on July 25, 2019 with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelendky was listened to by a number of people who took notes, and they also had a system in place, like that for transcribing voicemail messages that made atranscript *which was corrected by those who had listened in. The original recording was not kept or maybe even made.
This system may have since changed, or maybe the recording and transcript was made by the Afghans and taken out of the country. By Afghan president Ghani or somebody else. I’m inclined to think this came from somebody from the Afghan side. After all, the people with a record of leaking on the U.S. side mostly oppose Republicans.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:53 pm57. NJRob (eb56c3) — 9/2/2021 @ 12:40 pm
And the ISIS-K car bomb maybe didn’t even exist. We destroyed the car of an innocent person from a family with people seeking to leave the country.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:55 pm41. Time123 (9f42ee) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:50 am
The problem, Ghani tried to tell him, was that it wasn’t a morale problem, it was a real problem, and it wasn’t a civil war, but Pakistan was behind it all, and even some of the Taliban soldiers were from Pakistan – it was an invasion he said, and Afghanistan could not repel with some United States military help because their army was not designed to function without it.
But Biden wasn’t listening, and evven now people aren’t listening to that.
Biden also told him that there was a need, whether it is true or not, to project a different picture of the prospects of success of the Afghan army. Which could be argued meant only that you have to do that, whether you are right or wrong, or else you’ll surely be conquered.
I see this as Biden trying to press his strategy on the Afghan government and determined not to let himself be argued out of complete withdrawal by August 31 decision.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:13 pmAnd the ISIS-K car bomb maybe didn’t even exist. We destroyed the car of an innocent person from a family with people seeking to leave the country.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/2/2021 @ 8:55 pm
Damn you, Lee Iacocca! At least it wasn’t another Toyota.
urbanleftbehind (c073c9) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:32 pm64. It looks more like there was a direct attack on the car of the man parking at his house and not a secondary explosion – which might mean that there was no car bomb there at all.
The United States was just told that a certain make and model of car was going to be used as a car bomb.
I’m trying to find something on point. The best I found right now is this (qhich notes there is an investigation going on)
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/570402-top-general-acknowledges-others-killed-in-drone-strike-targeting-isis-car-bomb
There’s been a problem for years!
The precedent in Afghanistan is, that the person who calls in the air strike, or provides the information, is the one responsible for any innocent deaths, and Afghans have mostly accepted that over the last 20 years..
I think reports from the scene were that twoooooooooooooooooo cars were damaged, but the one destroyed more belonged to the man returning from work and it was a direct hit, not a secondary explosion/ |But it is hard to get the facts – we even had two suicide bombers at Kabul airport and now they say there was just one.)
Milley:
The question is: Did any information come from double agents or even officially from the Haqquani network, which was in charge of security in Kabul?
Sammy Finkelman (b434ee) — 9/3/2021 @ 6:44 amhttps://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/30/world/asia/afghanistan-drone-attack-ISIS.html
There was only one incident, as far as anyone knows.
Sammy Finkelman (b434ee) — 9/3/2021 @ 6:50 am“We monitored that through various means, and all of the engagement criteria were being met. We went through the same level of rigor that we’ve done for years, and which, in the end, won us the war.”
Four-star clown!
nk (1d9030) — 9/3/2021 @ 6:53 amSo niot only did the United States not rescue every Afghan ally, it possibly was TRICKED by the Taliban, or Pakistani intelligence INTO KILLING ONE OF THEM! Mr. Naser at least)
Sammy Finkelman (b434ee) — 9/3/2021 @ 6:55 am— “What’s the difference between a Taliban training exercise and a wedding party?”
— “I don’t know, man. I just pilot the drone.”
And we’ve been giving these assholes medals for it the last few years, too.
nk (1d9030) — 9/3/2021 @ 6:58 amnk @67. I don;t see the words won us the war” in this transcript:
\
https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/2762169/secretary-of-defense-austin-and-chairman-of-the-joint-chiefs-of-staff-gen-mille
The family man killed was just driving home from work. So unless they were waiting for a Toyota Corolla to show up there, and that was the target,, it would sound like a coincidence.
Sammy Finkelman (b434ee) — 9/3/2021 @ 7:04 amFrom 20`3 0 detailing the rigor:
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/30/world/asia/drone-strike-pakistan.html
\Now you et accusations of doing wrong when they did the right thing:
The United \States always backed off.
Sammy Finkelman (b434ee) — 9/3/2021 @ 7:08 amnk @67. I don’t see the words won us the war” in this transcript:
I added those, Sammy. It’s sarcasm.
nk (1d9030) — 9/3/2021 @ 7:11 amMilley actually said things like:
and
and
Sammy Finkelman (b434ee) — 9/3/2021 @ 7:17 am61. urbanleftbehind (c073c9) — 9/2/2021 @ 9:32 pm
I don’t understand this reference.
It was a Toyota Corolla (the car that was destroyed completely)
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/08/u-s-strikes-suspected-suicide-bombers-in-kabul.html
That version is maybe not quite true. He stayed parked for some time. The children used to like to go to the car (I think because he gave them treats when he arrived.)
It is reported that it looked like that Toyota was the main, or only, target, although there was less damaged car nearby.
It did not look like it was destroyed by a secondary explosion – but if it was, what did they think they were doing by bombing a car suspected of being laden with explosives in the middle of a city?
That last is not true.
The military that works hardest to avoid civilian casualties (while still attacking its targets) is that of Israel.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/3/2021 @ 8:23 am“Oh, what a feeling… TOYOTA!!!”
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/3/2021 @ 9:36 amIIHS rates the Toyota Corolla 0 out of 5 stars on Drone Strike Impact…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/3/2021 @ 9:41 amThe military that works hardest to avoid civilian casualties (while still attacking its targets) is that of Israel.
Rubbish.
DCSCA (f4c5e5) — 9/3/2021 @ 10:59 amAfter several years, the United States adopted the “tap on the roof” tactic from Israel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roof_knocking
To really work, the missile that doesn’t kill people probably has to look like an unintentional miss.
How does ask become force?
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 9/3/2021 @ 2:19 pmMost ordinary Afghanis, with no visa to further countries, cannot leave Afghanistan. They are not let in to neighboring countries on possibilities or probabilities and I don’t think any diplomatic efforts are being made to let them.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tens-of-thousands-trapped-as-afghanistans-neighbors-close-borders-11630588397
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 9/3/2021 @ 2:38 pmThe lesson here is that people should flee fragile countries before a takeover.
Now is the time for Chinese to flee Hong Kong – or Taiwan.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 9/3/2021 @ 2:43 pmSammy, the gist of my joke is that if one erroneously “the ISIS-K car” as the “ISIS K-car”, they may think of the particular car platform K-car which was said to have lifted Chrysler Motors from the brink of dissolution under Lee Iacocca’s direction
urbanleftbehind (165768) — 9/3/2021 @ 3:03 pmDCSCA (f4c5e5) — 9/2/2021 @ 7:49 pm
This is not Apollo 1. It is not Apollo 13.
Not everybody died, or was left behind, and not everybody was rescued, and it is the fault of the same organization that did a lot of the rescuing..
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/3/2021 @ 3:52 pmIt is the Titanic.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/3/2021 @ 3:53 pmThis conversation was just over six weeks ago, and just two weeks before all of Afghanistan began to collapse, with provincial capitals suddenly falling, and three weeks and a day or do before the fall of Kabul.
Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c) — 9/5/2021 @ 2:45 pm