There is something I'm not understanding about the right wing Afghanistan narrative...

And the conditions were met by the Taliban because they were idiotic conditions.... Just like the agreement..... Just like the President* who signed it.

 

Ah! Right-wing binary thinking. It's either war forever, or we give terrorists everything they ask for. More than two options would be too confusing for a right winger

This is what decades of Fox echo-chamber has created. And it only got worse with Trump. We cannot allow the right to make decisions until they shed this nefarious mind frame.

 

Just WOW. It no wonder you love Biden so much. You both run away from questions like a cheetah. Just a question.

Do you ever sit back and wonder why every poster you lock horns with makes the same claim about you? Without exception!!!
Did you somehow convince yourself that these obvious see through attempts to dodge the very questions you raise go unnoticed?
This is what a debate thread looks like to you? This is the best effort you can make? This is your example of the validity of your research?
How many excuses have you made in this one thread alone to dodge a question?

Did you not post this in response to my questions?

So when I ask you was it better to keep the 5000 prisoners than to make the deal that safeguarded our Troops, you come up with this?

Ah! Right-wing binary thinking. It's either war forever, or we give terrorists everything they ask for. More than two options would be too confusing for a right winger. This is what decades of Fox echo-chamber has created. And it only got worse with Trump. We cannot allow the right to make decisions until they shed this nefarious mind frame.

I just want to get this straight, You actually sat down, read my question, then actually posted this thinking that was the appropriate answer?
It never even occurred to you once that a response of,
No, it wasn't a good deal because (X)
or
Yes, I would have made that deal

So its better in your mind to insult and come up with this kind of gibberish than it is to actually have an adult conversation that could result in you being wrong?
You haven't fooled anyone but yourself in these attempts to cast yourself above others.
Those are called maturity markers. If I were you I would use them sparingly as they don't dissolve over time.

 

My answer would have been that it didn't even matter.

The Trump/Taliban plan was to turn Afghanistan over to the Taliban.

EVERY prisoner held by the US or Afghans anywhere in Afghanistan got released. That was the PLAN!

So what's so darn special about this 5,000 when compared to the Trump objective for Afghanistan?

 

That 5000 prisoner release got us
No American soldier casualties since February 2020
No road side bombs
1000 Afghanistan military personnel released
13,000 troops sent home since the cease fire agreement
3 US military bases evacuated without Taliban intervention
Basically, and end to the war.

 

That release was completed in September of 2020.

The Taliban had been escalating its attacks on Afghanistan constantly throughout 2020 and they didn't stop escalation or change their targets as a result of the prisoner release. The escalations continued through December at least.

And, your 13,000 troops sent home as a result is ABSOLUTE BS. Sending those troops home left FAR too few troops to effect a safe withdrawal of allies, contractors and our remaining troops.

If anything, it's quite possible that those terrorists who were released were involved in terrorist activity that occurred after their release - right up to and including the bombing that killed US troops at HKIA.

 

Now you're just making up BS and you know it.
The agreement guaranteed no American soldier would be attacked
Were any American soldiers attacked for the over a year leading up to the evacuation? NO

According to Biden (unless you're calling him a liar) and his intel staff, the bombing at the airport was from ISIS-K.
And thousands were released from Bagram Airfield when the Taliban took over.

You can't name a single incident where the 5000 released made any difference to the 75,000 existing Taliban fighters that took over Afghanistan without a shot being fired. That is a moot point

If Biden had left Kabul before the Taliban occupation, why would you need more soldiers for a safe withdrawal? You don't need soldiers to evacuate unless you or under fire or threat.
If that was your concern then why are you not as angry when Biden evacuated our air base 30 days prior?
Please

 

I made up nothing. You just assumed that I suggested the escalation the Taliban carried out throughout 2020 was against US forces. But, that was a bad assumption!

There were solid justifications for Taliban behavior throughout 2020 and into August 2021 that had nothing to do with prisoner releases. In fact, if the terrorist bombing near the HKIA airport came from released prisoners, that would certainly have been a negative. My understanding is that it didn't come from the Taliban who were helping us with airport security.

Then, it sounds like you started making MY point - that the prisoner releases were essentially meaningless.

 

Hiding behind conflation isn't going to help you. If you don't know the difference between the Taliban forces and ISIS-K, I don't know what to tell you.
Do I really have to spell this out with alphabet soup. Really?

Trump released 5000 TALIBAN fighters that made no difference in ANYTHING as they joined 75,000 TALIBAN fighters that took over all of Afghanistan without a shot fired.
Are you with me so far

The TALIBAN release thousands of ISIS-K fighters from Bagram airfield when they took over Kabul.

The ISIS-K fighters (According to Biden and his Pentagon) confirmed it was ISIS-K fighters that bombed the airfield.

 

They were making overtures to tsake over by force early this year. To declare that breaking the conditions was as simple as a wave of the hand. Too bad someone else was not in office. Biden has really messed things up for our citizens, allies, and equipment. It looks like our relationship with the UK, our closest ally is strained to a great degree as well.

What a debacle. It is a sad period for our country.

 

Notice that I was responding to your post where you stated:

I disputed that for the reasons I stated.

 

You didn't dispute anything. You ONLY disagreed with Trumps decision. That isn't disputing anything. How do you dispute 13,000 troops coming home, when they actually came home.

That isn't a dispute, You just didn't agree with them being sent home. What you did fail to do was explain why you needed more troops to evacuate. Biden sent in more troops because he waited until the city was taken over by the Taliban and evacuated under occupation and had to secure the airport that was being overrun. He didn't confront the Taliban or fight anyone.

He didn't have to send in more troops to evacuate the air base and he wouldn't need more troops to evacuate Kabul when he has no resistance to leaving. So explain why we need more troops to leave if there is nobody to fight or hold off. We didn't need more troops to evacuate Saigon until the city was overrun. Whats the difference here?

And you said nothing about the following benefits either

No American soldier casualties since February 2020
No road side bombs
1000 Afghanistan military personnel released
3 US military bases evacuated without Taliban intervention
Basically, and end to the war.

 

It's hard to make a case that those "benefits" were caused by releasing 5,000 prisoners.

The Taliban demonstrated that they have been well aware that attacking US forces is not in their best interests.

In fact, they helped provide security so that we could more easily evacuate allies, contractors and troops from HKIA.

They also demonstrated their lack animosity concerning US presence by offering to have the US provide security in Kabul after the Afghan government and security forces departed so dramatically.

Their objective has been US departure. Their analysis has been that attacking the US is not likely to speed US departure. In fact, it could cause increases in our presence.

>>They knew the Trump/Taliban plan was for the US to turn over Afghanistan to them. That was total victory for them, and they clearly were uninterested in effing that up.

Plus, they had plenty of Afghans to slaughter and a whole new government to establish.

These are more important that 5,000 prisoners who would be released within a year regardless.

 

I'm not going back to story book land with you.

QUESTION #1
You claimed we needed more troops to evacuate. I asked you to explain why.
You can either answer or concede

You mean these benefits?

No American soldier casualties since February 2020
No road side bombs
1000 Afghanistan military personnel released
3 US military bases evacuated without Taliban intervention
Basically, and end to the war

The same benefits that are listed in the Taliban agreement?

QUESTION #2
So now you can explain how you came to the conclusion that benefits listed in the Taliban agreement are not related to the release of the 5000 Taliban fighters.

Yet we left (as Biden stated) 10% of our American civilians behind because the Taliban refused to allow us to stay past August 31 and we lost 13 warfighters to a bombing

QUESTION #3
Why would Biden refuse to allow out troops to provide perimeter security at the airport and refuse to allow our troops to go in and get our people out if the Taliban was so accommodating to our departure?

QUESTION #4
Why would our Allies (Germany, France, Britain, and the Dutch) send in their special forces to evacuate over 500 of their people successfully while Biden ordered our troops not to go in leaving Americans behind

These are all questions generated by your own claims. You either have answers or you will not want to explain you theories because you can't.

The story books are over with me. I read your information and I have disputed your claims with logical questions that need answered if you actually think your claims are valid.

 

Throughout 2021 US analysis has not supported the notion that 2,500 troops was sufficient for the US to carry out the search and travel for all allies and contractors that needed to be extracted.

How many times does this have to be said?

Yes, those benefits. Again, I've said that several times.

Those benefits were highly likely to be considered by the Taliban to be in the best interests of the Taliban, as I've pointed out in the past. So, ascribing them to one factor in the Trump/Taliban plan is hard to support.

Again, the Trump/Taliban plan was for turning Afghanistan over to the Taliban. That is something the Taliban was not interested in confounding.

Yes. The Taliban absolutely DID want us out. The agreement called for May 1. They started being more insistent and certainly wanted us out by August 31. I don't see anything the Taliban has said that would suggest that they would support our 2,500 troops going on search and extraction missions throughout Afghanistan.

The understanding so far seems to be that the bombing was done by terrorists, quite possibly terrorists that the Taliban refused to remove from their ranks. It's always been difficult for the Taliban to exert full central control.

My understanding is that US troops DID provide perimeter security at the airport. However, that was not adequate and the Taliban was surrounding the airport as well.

So, their help with security while allowing evacuees through was significant.

I don't know the blow by blow on that. I know there were Americans who chose not to leave - some had created families there. I don't know how many could not be extracted who wanted to be extracted. Again, having 2,500 troops did not allow us to travel Afghanistan to find and extract all those who needed extraction.

It is reported that the Taliban have slaughtered a lot of Afghans. My bet is that many of them would have liked to be extracted.

I would say that your primary direction has been to ignore what I've said entirely and resort to ad hom.

I've previously stated everything that I've stated here in response to YOUR POSTS!! And, I've cited much of this.

So, I fully expect you will ignore what I've said here and will once again resort to ad hom.

 

How come none of you lefties have responded to this thread?

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...fghanistan-poll.591661/page-5#post-1072912587

 

QUESTION #1
You claimed we needed more troops to evacuate. I asked you to explain why.

No such analysis EVER existed. (Deflection)
We sent 5000 more troops into Kabul to back up the 2500 on the ground so your idea we only had 2500 doesn't wash.
I asked you to explain why we needed more troops. It was your theory, but you refuse to explain it. (Deflection)

NOTHING you provided explains why we needed more troops (Deflection)

QUESTION #2
So now you can explain how you came to the conclusion that benefits listed in the Taliban agreement are not related to the release of the 5000 Taliban fighters.

That wasn't the question (Deflection)

Didn't ask anything about what the Taliban considered (Deflection)

Didn't ask anything about turning Afghanistan over to the Taliban (Deflection)
I asked you to explain how you came to the conclusion that the benefits listed in the Taliban agreement are not related to the release of the 5000 Taliban fighters.
You have refused to provide the information (Deflection)

QUESTION #2a
Yet we left (as Biden stated) 10% of our American civilians behind because the Taliban refused to allow us to stay past August 31 and we lost 13 warfighters to a bombing

Really, Wow, you shift gears depending on questions asked which is why posters continue to accuse you of contradicting yourself continuously. Here is the perfect example from your last statement on Taliban support.

I never asked you what the Taliban supports. (Deflection)
I stated we left Americans behind because Biden refused to go get our Americans out. You provided nothing to answer that question

QUESTION #3
Why would Biden refuse to allow our troops to provide perimeter security at the airport and refuse to allow our troops to go in and get our people out if the Taliban was so accommodating to our departure?

You don't know what perimeter security is. You construct a perimeter around the area you want to protect that is NOT located at the area you need to protect. You go out several meters setting road blocks and check points so you can provide early warning to the area of protection. Putting soldiers on the wall at the extraction point is not perimeter security. Had an American force provided the perimeter security your bomber would attack the security force instead of getting to the dense population at the extraction point killing 150 Afghans and 13 soldiers

QUESTION #4
Why would our Allies (Germany, France, Britain, and the Dutch) send in their special forces to evacuate over 500 of their people successfully while Biden ordered our troops not to go in leaving Americans behind

Not the question (Deflection)

Not the question (Deflection

We didn't have 2500 troops. We had over 7000 troops. we evacuated over 100,000 without sending in any troops and you don't think we could go in a get 2000 Americans with 7000 troops? That would be considered nonsense.

Yet you claim you can't find where the Taliban supported us going in to get our troops. Did you have information where the Taliban supported Germany, France, Britain, and the Dutch going in to get out their people out? Because if you don't your answer is just another deflection. Its nonsense.

These are all questions generated by your own claims. You either have answers or you will not want to explain you theories because you can't.

Which has nothing to do with anything I asked you (Deflection)

I gave you SPECIFIC questions, not volumes of stories. My primary direction was to point out that you will deflect and even contradict your own post as you try and worm around questions you don't want to answer. I have proven that exact thing with my questions and the numerous deflections you provided.
Ask me why I am not surprised.

Every single question I provided was to nail you down on you continued story telling. They also expose your continued need to deflect when you don't like a question because it doesn't support your partisan narrative.

I have made my point BEYOND dispute.

OR, you can respond with answers to the questions I provided.
But you won't so theres that

 

You ignored my answers on every one of these questions.

Why the HELL do you think I would retype them for you???

If you want to know my answers READ MY POSTS!!

 

Heres your first clue, Just because you babble off some off topic rant to a question, it doesn't mean you answered the question.
it just means you babbled off some off topic rant.

Heres just one example
You made the claim
(It's hard to make a case that those "benefits" were caused by releasing 5,000 prisoners.)

Oh Really. I just happen to know that the 5000 released are directly related to ALL the benefits I listed
Do you know how I know that
BECAUSE ITS SPELLED OUT IN THE AGREEMENT EXACTLY. WHAT WE TRADED FOR.

So to make you clarify that position I asked you
Explain how benefits listed in the Taliban agreement are not related to the release of the 5000 Taliban fighters.

Answer #1
How many times does this have to be said? Yes, those benefits. Again, I've said that several times.
I asked how are all the benefits listed are not related to releasing 5000 Taliban soldiers
I didn't ask if they were benefits DEFLECTION #1

Answer #2
Those benefits were highly likely to be considered by the Taliban to be in the best interests of the Taliban, as I've pointed out in the past.
I asked how are all the benefits listed are not related to releasing 5000 Taliban soldiers
I didn't ask why the Taliban considered it to be a good or be in their best interest .DEFLECTION #2

Answer #3
Again, the Trump/Taliban plan was for turning Afghanistan over to the Taliban. That is something the Taliban was not interested in confounding.
I asked how are all the benefits listed are not related to releasing 5000 Taliban soldiers
Not how the plan was going to turn over Afghanistan DEFLECTION #3

Answer #4
So, ascribing them to one factor in the Trump/Taliban plan is hard to support.
I asked how are all the benefits listed not related to releasing 5000 Taliban soldiers
This answer alone proves beyond any shadow of a doubt you have never even read the agreement yet you come in here and write pages like you are some authority on it. I accused you the same thing days ago and you still haven't read it DEFLECTION #4

You might live in a place where you convince people by baffling with Bulls*** that goes unchecked, but it don't fly here. Which is why you came back to me as everyone else has abandoned you on this thread for the exact reasons I just outed you on.

Which is why I informed you that you are not genuine and intellectually dishonest. If you can't account for yourself with straight answers and continue to dodge specific questions to try and provide gibberish to dance around the fact you are simply wrong, you wind up making 40K post with only10K likes. 25% over 9 years? REALLY? Thats pretty sad.

I haven't seen ANYONE with a ratio that low anywhere on these boards. Your own like/post ratio speaks for itself. You have been on these boards since 2013 and you can only convince 25% of the people you have run across and held discussions with to like your post? Thats even lower than Golems ratio.

I (just like the other 75%) have no interest in playing these run around games with posters. When you decide you can admit you posted something in error or just were wrong, let me know. I have no interest in fairy tales and story telling to dodge a simple question that we who have served in the military label as gibberish.

 

Just admit it. You have NOTHING.

I gave you SERIOUS and DEMONSTRATED reasons for the Taliban to leave us alone or even HELP us, and you keep up with your CRAP about 5,000 prisoners.

Then, you quote "likes" at me??? LOL!!!

I accept your total surrender and ask that you stop posting crap at me.

 

Which has nothing to do with ANY question I provided

You mean the crap you're pissed about because you can't answer the simple question
Because you keep posting fake information about those 5000 prisoners.

You thought we only had 2500 troops at the airport (Now that was laughable)
You don't know why we released the 5000 fighters
You don't know what we got for the 5000 fighters or why we made the deal
You don't know whats in the agreement we signed because you never even read it. You even admitted it lol
In one post you thought the 5000 (Probably more) were released at Bagram
You didn't know the US didn't have a parameter around the airport
You thought there was some analysis that didn't support going in to get civilians out
You thought one of the 5000 Taliban released was the bomber at the airport
Then you said they demonstrated their lack animosity concerning US presence and Their analysis has been that attacking the US is not likely to speed US departure
You thought 2500 troops was far too few to rescue the 500 Americans left behind

And when provided simple questions on those issues you post buckets of story time gibberish that has no connection what so ever to any of those questions.

What your really pissed about is I called you out with questions you provided from your own post and you couldn't even answer those without going off the rails.
Not to mention I dedicated hours providing answers for you that you just callously blew off because they didn't fit your uninformed narrative about Kabul.
So I informed you I was done with you.

You contacted me again so I gave you a second chance with very easy straight forward questions to debate over and you went right back to the same old BS gibberish trying to walk around answers that in no way could infer you were wrong on anything. Yeah, you didn't know I knew that, did you.

So you go celebrate your self imposed surrender party, I guess you will be looking for someone else to debate with as for you it seems the pickins are getting mighty slim.

You and Golem should post together. You two were made for each other. Just think of it, millions of words between you covering everything except the actual questions.

 

Please read my answers or do not ask the questions.

 

I read your answers. How do you think I came up with this list of what you didn't know.

You thought we only had 2500 troops at the airport (Now that was laughable)

You don't know why we released the 5000 fighters

You don't know whats in the agreement we signed because you never even read it

You didn't know the US didn't have a parameter around the airport

You thought there was some analysis that didn't support going in to get civilians out

Are these the answers you're talking about

 

I did not say that.

False.

False.

I stated SEVERAL TIMES that we had a perimeter around the airport before the end of our extraction.

True.

No, this isn't how it works.

I answered your questions in very reasonable detail MULTIPE TIMES.

I have NO inclination to do that again.

 

You thought we only had 2500 troops at the airport (Now that was laughable)

having 2,500 troops did not allow us to travel Afghanistan to find and extract all those who needed extraction.
Oh. now you didn't say that? Then what 2500 troops are you talking about. (Intellectual dishonesty)

You don't know why we released the 5000 fighters

It's hard to make a case that those "benefits" were caused by releasing 5,000 prisoners
Its written in the agreement what benefits we got for releasing those 5000 prisoners. There is no case to make. Its in black and white.
But because you don't want to admit it you come up with this? (Intellectual dishonesty)

You don't know whats in the agreement we signed because you never even read it

It's hard to make a case that those "benefits" were caused by releasing 5,000 prisoners
Every benefit I listed is in the agreement. You either never read it or you are falsely making this statement. (Intellectual dishonesty)

You didn't know the US didn't have a parameter around the airport

And you are wrong
We never had perimeter security around the airport, no road blocks, no check points, no gates, no early warning perimeter status at any time.

Which provided the answers I listed proving you either have no clue what you're talking about or you are being intellectually dishonest.
Even in the face of your own answers you claim you didn't make those statements or they are supposed to mean something else.
Sorry, no banana