Tucker Carlson: Someone is lying about the Afghanistan debacle

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  vic-eldred  •  4 weeks ago  •  59 comments

By:   Tucker Carlson (Fox News)

Tucker Carlson: Someone is lying about the Afghanistan debacle
Tucker Carlson reacts to Milley testifying in the U.S. Senate, and reveals the only person who has been fired over the situation in Afghanistan.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



If you tuned in to see the hearing in the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing today - if you didn't you missed out - you may have been surprised to see Mark Milley sitting there. You remember Milley, he's the fleshy, hooded-eyed man who is the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He is also a national disgrace, a living insult to the military he oversees. That's not an insult. It's objectively true. And yet somehow — despite the overwhelming evidence that Milley is dishonest, incompetent, partisan and dishonorable — he still has a highly prominent job. That's the amazing thing. And not only is Mark Milley still employed at the highest level, he is still lying, and doing so with his characteristic relish and enthusiasm. Today, for example, with an entirely straight face, Milley delivered an impassioned monologue about the importance of civilian control over the military. "This country doesn't want generals figuring out what orders we are going to accept and do, or not. That's not our job."

Oh really? Is that so Mark Milley? Isn't this the same Mark Milley who once illegally seized personal control of our country's nuclear arsenal? And then, when that wasn't sufficient, promised to tip off the government of China about future American military operations — and did all of this because he didn't like his boss, who unlike him, was a civilian elected by voters? Yes, it's the same Mark Milley, the one lecturing you about civilian control of the military.

It was all pretty amusing in a dark way, but it did make you wonder: what is this about? Why is Mark Milley saying something so obvious preposterous? It's got to be helping him in some way. And indeed it was helping him. What you watched in the Senate hearing today was pure blame-shifting. Joe Biden's foreign policy is a legitimate disaster. No one disputes that. Mark Milley wants you to know that none of it is his fault. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin wants you to know that too. So does the head of Central Command, General McKenzie. All three of them want to make it crystal clear that the senile guy in the White House did this. It's his fault, not theirs. It was Joe Biden, they told us today, who forced American troops to leave Afghanistan before we evacuated all American citizens. Because the Pentagon reflexively follows every order from the president to the letter, they had no choice but to obey these crazy decisions. They explained:

COTTON: General Milley, it's your testimony that you recommended 2,500 troops approximately stay in Afghanistan?

MILLEY: Yes my assessment was in the fall of 2020 and remained consistent throughout that we should keep a steady state of 2,500 and it could bounce up to 3,500. Somethings like that.

COTTON: General McKenzie, do you share that assessment?

MCKENZIE: Senator I do share that assessment.

COTTON: President Biden last month in an interview with George Stephanopoulos said no military leader advised him to leave a small troop presence in Afghanistan. … Did these officers and General Miller's recommendation get to the president personally?

AUSTIN: Their input was, was received by the president and considered by the president for sure. In terms of what they specifically recommended, senator, they just as they just said, they're not going to provide what they recommended in confidence.

Following this? Wheels are officially coming off, but woah what sleaze balls these guys are. "We told Joe Biden to keep 2,500 troops in the country. We demanded it. On the other hand, because we are bound by the ancient and sacred rules of confidentiality, we can't tell you what we told the president because that would be wrong."

These people so thoroughly deserve each other. It is wonderful to see them rat each other out, which is exactly what they proceeded to do for the entirety of the hearing. General McKenzie explained that, despite the fact he personally oversaw the disaster in Afghanistan, he really had nothing to do with it. It was all demented grandpa, pulling the strings from the White House:

MCKENZIE: I won't share my personal recommendation to the president but I will give you my honest opinion, and my honest opinion and view shaped my recommendation. I recommended we maintain 2,500 troops in Afghanistan. I also recommended earlier in the fall of 2020 that we maintain 4,500 at that time. That was my personal view. I also have a view that the withdrawal of those forces would lead inevitably to the collapse of the Afghan military forces and eventually the Afghan government.

What a dirtball that guy is. "I can't share my recommendation, but here was my recommendation." Take those medals off, you don't deserve them.

Until today, the generals and their many allies in government have been undermining Biden indirectly. Far be it from us to defend Joe Biden, who deserves no defense, but it is a defense of the American system which works well when civilians control the military. Up until today, they have been leaking Biden's phone calls with the president of Afghanistan. That's illegal, but they did it anyway. They have been giving nasty background quotes to their stenographers at NBC News about what a dope Biden is. All true, but still, they're not allowed to do that. But today's performance took place in public. It was on the record and under oath. In that performance, they directly contradicted their boss, the commander-in-chief. As a reminder, here's what Biden was saying just a few weeks ago on ABC:

STEPHANOPOULOS: But your top military advisors warned against withdrawing on this timeline. They wanted you to keep about 2,500 troops.

BIDEN: No, they didn't. It was split. That wasn't true. That wasn't true.

STEPHANOPOULOS: They didn't tell you that they wanted troops to stay?

BIDEN: No. Not at -- not in terms of whether we were going to get out in a timeframe all troops. They didn't argue against that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no one told -- your military advisors did not tell you, "No, we should just keep 2,500 troops. It's been a stable situation for the last several years. We can do that. We can continue to do that"?

BIDEN: No. No one said that to me that I can recall.

It's not a defense of any of them. They're all so awful and so undeserving of leading this great country. They should not be in charge of this country. It's too good a country for people like this. So the generals claim they told Biden the Afghanistan withdrawal would be a total disaster. Biden claims they didn't tell him that. The question is who's lying? Someone's lying. Biden himself has no idea. He doesn't know who's lying. He doesn't know what he had for lunch. All we know for sure — and this is the main point — is that no one in Pentagon leadership will ever be held accountable for this, the latest in a very long string of colossal screw-ups that have dramatically reduced American power and prestige and gotten a bunch of people killed. No one. This is unbelievable. Let's say you worked at a nuclear power plant, had too many beers on your lunch break one day, fell asleep and the reactor melted down. Thousands died. And then you got a massive raise. That's pretty much what's happening here.

The House of Representatives just passed a $776 billion defense budget. How big is that? That's fully $24 billion more than even the White House even requested. In other words, Congress just threw in a little extra for a job well done — a bonus for the generals who left $80 billion dollars worth of American military equipment for the Taliban to use. Good work guys.

So it's official now: no one will be punished for any of it. Not for abandoning Bagram Air Base. That was idiotic. Everyone knew it. They did it anyway. Not for leaving American citizens behind as they fled. Not for leaving our troops exposed to the suicide attack that killed thirteen young American servicemen. Not for the drone strike that blew up children, the one they lied about for weeks. The people who did these things are in great shape tonight. They'll retire exactly when they feel like retiring, at which point they'll get full benefits and jobs at Lockheed. That's how our system now works. It's very very frustrating. Not because recrimination is good. But because in order to function, a system has to be accountable.

As of tonight, there is only one man in the entire US government who's being punished tonight for the failure in Afghanistan. Just one man. His name is Stu Scheller. He's a lieutenant colonel in the Marine Corps. He's an honorable and honest man. He's also blameless. Scheller had no role in any of these decisions. His crime was criticizing those decisions. In August, he posted this video on the Internet:

SCHELLER: If an O-5 Battalion commander has the simplest live-fire EO complaint. Boom. Fired. But we have a Secretary of Defense that testified to Congress in May that the Afghan national security force could withstand the Taliban advance. We have Chairmen of Joint Chiefs who the commandant is a member of that, who is supposed to advise on military policy. We have a Marine combatant commander. All of these people are supposed to advise. And I'm not saying we have to be in Afghanistan forever. But I am saying did any of you, throw your rank on the table and say hey it's a bad idea to evacuate Bagram Airfield, the strategic airbase before we evacuate everyone?

So that's an honorable man. That's a man who's in it for the right reasons, not to get promoted or work at Lockheed, but because he cares about the country and wants to defend it. There's a man who believed in his superiors, who is not cynical, who is genuinely confused by his superiors' unwillingness to admit their own error. His confusion comes from decency. Almost immediately Scheller's superiors reacted to that video. They didn't apologize for the disaster they caused. They didn't explain why they did what they did. They punished Scheller. They relieved him of his command. They told him to shut up and stop talking. But he didn't stop talking. Here's how Scheller responded.

SCHELLER: To recap my position in the fallout of Afghanistan, I demanded accountability of my senior leaders, I stated then that I understood that I might lose my battalion commander seat, my retirement, and my family stability. As it has played out, I have, in fact, lost all three of those things. Would I do it again? … I don't know. My name is Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller and I was the only officer in the entire American coalition fired in the debacle of Afghanistan fallout. I acknowledge I should've been fired; however, the hypocrisy of the general officers not being held to the same standard is a microcosm for the entire problem that it's going to bring down the great institutions of this republic we love.

So that's the man you want serving in your officer corps in a serious country. A person who takes his job seriously, who's patriotic, who's honest, who demands accountability. And before you say "well, it's the military, they don't have freedom of speech, you're not allowed to give a political statement," two points. One: That was not an inherently political statement, in contrast to point two, the endless number of openly partisan statements from the leaders of the Pentagon. Mark Milley was openly thrilled by the election of Joe Biden. Was he punished for that? No, he was elevated. Congress just rewarded him and the entire leadership of the U.S. military with $24 extra billion.

But to Scheller for telling the truth, here's what happened to him. Military brass forced Scheller to undergo a psychological evaluation because only a crazy person would ask for accountability after the disaster in Afghanistan. Then, when he wouldn't admit he was crazy, they threw him in jail, where he sits tonight. Scheller's father just released this statement, explaining that his son is now behind bars with violent criminals. How long is he there? He is there indefinitely. This is happening tonight in America. Here's a quote from his father, "All our son did is ask the questions that everybody was asking themselves, but they were too scared to speak out loud. He was asking for accountability. In fact, I think he even asked for an apology that we made mistakes, but they couldn't do that, which is mind-blowing. ... They had a gag order on him and asked him not to speak. He did speak, and they incarcerated him. They don't know what to do with him."

One of the worst stories of our time, and there are a lot of bad stories.





This article is adapted from Tucker Carlson's opening commentary on the September 28, 2021 edition of "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

Tucker Carlson currently serves as the host of FOX News Channel's (FNC) Tucker Carlson Tonight (weekdays 8PM/ET). He joined the network in 2009 as a contributor.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    4 weeks ago

The Generals saved themselves yesterday and demonstrated what a blatant liar Joe Biden is.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2  JohnRussell    4 weeks ago

Pointless hysteria from the asshole Tucker Carlson.  I watched the first half  (before lunch) of this hearing and it did not come off at all as Carlson suggests, even though a number of the Republican senators zeroed in on this 2500 business. 

I dont recall Biden saying that it was these three military advisers who gave him the opinion that the US should leave completely, so maybe it was others. 

In any case, who gives a fuck? 

Biden is lying about it? Prove it. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2    4 weeks ago
Biden is lying about it? Prove it. 

What shall we do, pound it into the ground?   Biden told Stephanopolous that he wasn't told anything about leaving 2,500 troops there. That's why Senators zeroed in on it and that's why the responsible media has been repeating it. Yet you still say you need proof?  That's two who won't accept the glaring truth!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.2  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @2    4 weeks ago

Yeah, who gives a fuck.  

I agree, PROVE IT!

Also, what glaring truth?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
2.2.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @2.2    4 weeks ago

Psssst. It's right there in 2.1

You're welcome.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.2    4 weeks ago

Three military commanders said, under oath yeasterday, that they all told Biden to leave 2,500 troops there.

Biden is on tape, for all to see, telling George Stephanopolous that  "No. No one said that to me that I can recall."


And you and JR say that's not proof.   Got it!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.2.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.2    4 weeks ago

I'm glad that is your main complaint.  I doubt it will have much resonance outside right wing circles. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.2.4  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @2.2.3    4 weeks ago

It doesn't.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.2.3    4 weeks ago
I'm glad that is your main complaint.

It is simply the one you disputed despite clear evidence.

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
2.2.6  dennis smith  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.2    4 weeks ago

Once again Biden got caught lying and his sycophants still are in denial. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
2.2.7  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.5    3 weeks ago

Just further proof of there being none so blind they will not see. Routinely, any proof given they usually dispute anyway because it does not exactly match their own particular political narrative.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.2.8  Tessylo  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.2.7    3 weeks ago
"Just further proof of there being none so blind they will not see. Routinely, any proof given they usually dispute anyway because it does not exactly match their own particular political narrative."

So fucking true!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.9  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  dennis smith @2.2.6    3 weeks ago

Say it ain't so, Joe!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.10  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.2.7    3 weeks ago

They look the facts right in the eye and dispute it!

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
2.2.11  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.10    3 weeks ago

Yep, many on the liberal left are very much famous for that.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.12  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.2.11    3 weeks ago

They wouldn't conspire to keep the truth of the front page, would they?

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
2.2.13  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.12    3 weeks ago

Nah, never!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.14  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.2.13    3 weeks ago

Lol!  Just look at what's being posted as important news...

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
2.2.15  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.14    3 weeks ago

You post regular "book reports" with an agenda, but they aren't "important news" either.

Many of us are just sick of the negative politics about all Presidents 24/7.

Expand your horizons.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.16  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @2.2.15    3 weeks ago
You post regular "book reports" with an agenda, but they aren't "important news" either.

Book reviews clearly aren't news, nor does the Book Group have anything to do with news.


Many of us are just sick of the negative politics about all Presidents 24/7.

So we've noticed. It started a few months ago.


Expand your horizons.

A little bird told me it's something else.

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
2.2.17  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.16    3 weeks ago
Book reviews clearly aren't news, nor does the Book Group have anything to do with news.

Yet they end up on the front page, correct?


So we've noticed. It started a few months ago.

You've a very short memory then.


A little bird told me it's something else.

The little conspiracy bird of happiness? /s

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.18  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @2.2.17    3 weeks ago
Yet they end up on the front page, correct?

As does the Movie Club quiz and nature photos etc. We do have groups here that are devoted to other things, do we not?


You've a very short memory then.

I think the timeline is right.


The little conspiracy bird of happiness? /s

The bird who reads from the groups, which I believe you regard as required reading.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Guide
2.2.19  bugsy  replied to  Split Personality @2.2.15    3 weeks ago
Many of us are just sick of the negative politics about all Presidents 24/7.

You're right.

Maybe you can direct this same post to JR.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

Thread removed for no value. [ph]

 
 
 
Greg Jones
PhD Expert
7  Greg Jones    4 weeks ago

From the article: "Military brass forced Scheller to undergo a psychological evaluation because only a crazy person would ask for accountability after the disaster in Afghanistan. Then, when he wouldn't admit he was crazy, they threw him in jail, where he sits tonight."

Didn't Soviet Russia employ the same tactics. Putin's regime probably continues the practice

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8  JohnRussell    4 weeks ago
“All our son did is ask the questions that everybody was asking themselves, but they were too scared to speak out loud,” Marine Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller’s father Stu Scheller Sr. told America’s Task & Purpose. “He was asking for accountability, even asked for an apology that we made mistakes, but they couldn’t do that,” he further said in his first statement. 

Since when do superior officers publicly apologize to their subordinates?

Scheller went on social media to criticize his superior officers in public. It is not surprising he has felt repercussions. 

When is he appearing at the next Trump rally ? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @8    4 weeks ago
Since when do superior officers publicly apologize to their subordinates?

George Patton did!


Scheller went on social media to criticize his superior officers in public. It is not surprising he has felt repercussions. 

Woke officers should be expelled from the military. They are getting Americans killed.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
8.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @8    4 weeks ago
Since when do superior officers publicly apologize to their subordinates?

A good one does.  

When is he appearing at the next Trump rally ? 

Because he questioned Biden's integrity you make that assumption?  That's a simpleminded comment.

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
8.2.1  dennis smith  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @8.2    4 weeks ago

It is a simpleminded comment for sure

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
9  Dismayed Patriot    4 weeks ago

Tucker Carlson on Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller who was critical of the Biden Administration: "So that's the man you want serving in your officer corps in a serious country. A person who takes his job seriously, who's patriotic, who's honest, who demands accountability."

Tucker Carlson on Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman who was critical of the Trump administration: “Why not just say, ‘Mr. Vindman and your lawyer brother, take a hike, They are not in control of the government. It’s not their government.” “No one elected Mr. Vindman to anything or his lawyer brother or any of these people,” “Go work in Ukraine,”.

If right wing conservatives didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
10  seeder  Vic Eldred    4 weeks ago

 Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller was open and straight forward. Vindman and his democrat handlers tried to pretend somebody else had blown the whistle, when it was clear that it was Vindman.

That's the difference.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
10.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @10    4 weeks ago

Lt. Col. Vindman went through the change of command by taking his complain to NCS's legal council, not just blasting his superiors on Facebook.

That's the difference.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
10.1.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @10.1    4 weeks ago
Lt. Col. Vindman went through the change of command

Lt. Col. Vindman also admitted to attempting to alter official documents.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
10.1.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @10.1.1    4 weeks ago
Lt. Col. Vindman also admitted to attempting to alter official documents

The White House released a reconstructed transcription of the July phone conversation and noted it was not a verbatim transcript and that it represented a record of “the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty officers and National Security Council policy staff” who listen to official conversations.

Vindman listened in on the July 25 call and tried to change the reconstructed transcript made by the White House staff to reflect omissions. The white house was lying with an edited transcript and Vindman who listened to the call attempted to correct it. That's what true patriots do instead of endlessly defending a lying sack of shit like dishonest Donald as so many of his weak sniveling sycophant loser followers do daily.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
10.1.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @10.1.2    4 weeks ago
it was not a verbatim transcript

So it was altered.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
10.1.4  Split Personality  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @10.1.3    4 weeks ago

The original transcript was altered by omitting unflattering or problematic comments

that Vindman attempted to make everyone aware of.

Any transcript should be 100% complete.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
10.1.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Split Personality @10.1.4    4 weeks ago
The original transcript was altered
Any transcript should be 100% complete.

Which is the problem.  You are correct the transcript should be 100%.  Lt. Col. Vindman saw to it that it wasn't.  He. Altered. Official. Documents.

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
10.1.6  Split Personality  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @10.1.5    4 weeks ago
The original transcript was altered by omitting unflattering or problematic comments

Thanks for playing with my words./s

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
10.1.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Split Personality @10.1.6    3 weeks ago

Thanks for finally admitting the documents were altered and not 100%.

 
 
 
Thomas
Sophomore Guide
10.1.8  Thomas  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @10.1.7    3 weeks ago

You do realize that you came out on the shitty end?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
10.1.9  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Thomas @10.1.8    3 weeks ago

Wait, I'm sorry, who are you and why should I care?

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
10.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Vic Eldred @10    3 weeks ago

I would take Scheller over Vindman any day! 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
11  Nerm_L    4 weeks ago

Why is the sudden need for accountability falling only on the military?  The generals recommended that troops remain in Afghanistan but the order was to withdraw all military from the country.  And that order was based on a lot more than advice from the military.  The State Dept. had as large a role in the final decision and Presidential order as did the Defense Dept.  The intelligence agencies had a say, too.  Are we supposed to believe the CIA didn't have a field office in the embassy? 

The military is not responsible for issuing visas and green cards; that's a State Dept. responsibility.  And burning sensitive documents in the embassy courtyard had nothing whatsoever to do with military planning.  The ambassador and diplomatic corps are responsible for communicating with the political government and are responsible for assessing the stability of that political government.

Why would the US need to keep Bagram Air Base?  The Taliban had stood down and was not threatening or confronting the troops.  Bagram wasn't needed for military operations because there was a de facto cease fire in place.  Granted Bagram Air Base would have been a more appropriate rally point to assemble troops for final withdrawal.  But what transpired suggests that the military was overruled to prop up the political government.  Again, that's the purview of the State Dept. and not the Defense Dept.  In fact, the Taliban did not threaten, provoke, or confront the troops after the Taliban had taken Kabul.  The Taliban did not interfere with the military withdrawal.

What was botched was the civilian side of the planning.  Obviously there was inadequate planning to evacuate civilians.  Obviously there was no planning to close the embassy.  There weren't any plans to arrange for passenger aircraft, receiving stations, housing areas, or visa processing.  The scramble to find countries that would receive evacuees wasn't planned.  The capability to perform health screenings wasn't even in place during a pandemic.

Yes, a lot of people are lying about what happened in Afghanistan.  But don't ignore that the press is lying, too.  Clickbait reporting isn't intended to tell the public the truth.

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
11.1  Split Personality  replied to  Nerm_L @11    4 weeks ago
Granted Bagram Air Base would have been a more appropriate rally point to assemble troops for final withdrawal.

That's the only point I would disagree with, Bagram began downsizing as soon as the Doha deal was signed. 

As the aircraft flew off permanently, the contractors were let go etc.

Bagram has been the target of multiple rocket attacks and many suicide attacks at the main gate and inside the base.

It is  30 miles from the Embassy through territory contested between ASC, Taliban and Daesh with dozens of "checkpoints"

which would have made a mass evacuation a major clusterfuck.

The original runway at Bagram could not handle heavy planes like a 747 etc.  It was fine for combat aircraft, C130s and helos.

The American runway built in 2006 was longer, more capable of handling any size planes

and the original Soviet runway has been decommissioned for 15 years making Bagran a one runway airfield, just like Kabul

where the vast majority of the refugees were.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
11.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  Split Personality @11.1    4 weeks ago
It is  30 miles from the Embassy through territory contested between ASC, Taliban and Daesh with dozens of "checkpoints" which would have made a mass evacuation a major clusterfuck.

That's precisely the point.  If Bagram were the rally point there would have been no civilian evacuation.  The military could have withdrawn without being encumbered by civilians.  The military could have destroyed excess materiel without concern over needs to keep the air base operational.  Since the Taliban had stood down, the military withdrawal would have been quick and clean from Bagram.

There wasn't any planning in place for a mass evacuation.  Aircraft weren't positioned for mass evacuation.  Receiving stations and housing wasn't in place for a mass evacuation.  No one knew where the evacuees were to be sent.  There wasn't anything in place for health screening or vetting the evacuees.  There wasn't even any plans to vaccinate the evacuees before allowing them into the receiving countries during a pandemic.

Using Bagram as the rally point for final military withdrawal wouldn't have been a bigger clusterfuck than what happened in Kabul.  There was no planning for a mass evacuation, that's why it was a clusterfuck.  And the military didn't have sole responsibility to plan for a mass evacuation.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
11.1.2  Split Personality  replied to  Nerm_L @11.1.1    4 weeks ago
That's precisely the point.  If Bagram were the rally point there would have been no civilian evacuation.  The military could have withdrawn without being encumbered by civilians.  The military could have destroyed excess materiel without concern over needs to keep the air base operational.  Since the Taliban had stood down, the military withdrawal would have been quick and clean from Bagram.

OK so you were willing to just pull out like Vietnam and screw allies and Americans alike?

There wasn't any planning in place for a mass evacuation.

Sure there was, how do you think every available C-17 in the world ended up in Kabul piloted by USAF Reservists

who volunteered and took time off from flying for the major air carriers?

That alone took weeks to arrange and get those planes to Kabul.

Using Bagram as the rally point for final military withdrawal wouldn't have been a bigger clusterfuck than what happened in Kabul.

Absolutely no evidence to support that and only evidence to the contrary.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
11.1.3  Nerm_L  replied to  Split Personality @11.1.2    4 weeks ago
OK so you were willing to just pull out like Vietnam and screw allies and Americans alike?

What we got was Saigon 2.0.  Don't play coy.

Sure there was, how do you think every available C-17 in the world ended up in Kabul piloted by USAF Reservists

The United States military has somewhere between 200 and 280 operational Globemaster III aircraft.  Only a small portion of the fleet of C-17s were activated for the Afghanistan withdrawal.  Most, if not all, of the C-17s used in the evacuation are forward deployed and operate out of foreign stations.  Meanwhile, the airlines have passenger aircraft sitting idle that are capable of carrying almost as many passengers as a C-17 and are capable of operating at the Hamid Karzai commercial airport.  The airport is designed to handle commercial aircraft.

Why didn't the civilian evacuation begin months before the date for military withdrawal?  Why were embassy personnel still at the embassy?  The State Dept. and Defense Dept. had more than six months to prepare for the withdrawal date set by Trump.  Joe Biden extended the withdrawal deadline and gave the State Dept. and the Defense Dept. an additional four months to arrange for civilian evacuation.  

The State Dept. and Defense Dept. had at least 10 months to prepare.  So, why did we get Saigon 2.0?

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
11.1.4  Split Personality  replied to  Nerm_L @11.1.3    4 weeks ago

Saigon 2.0?

How many planes crashed or were shot down in Vietnam.  1 with loss of crew and 156 passengers.  7,000 moved by helos to a carrier and various amphibious assault ships.

How many in Kabul?  Zero crashes.  124,000 airlifted out.

 Why use commercial aircraft with limited seating when the first C-17 to leave Kabul took 862 people plus the crew?

The State Dept. and Defense Dept. had at least 10 months to prepare.  So, why did we get Saigon 2.0?

Because NO ONE including the Afghans themselves would have predicted or expected the ASFs

to melt away in less than 2 weeks in most cases without firing a shot.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
11.1.5  Nerm_L  replied to  Split Personality @11.1.4    4 weeks ago
How many planes crashed or were shot down in Vietnam.  1 with loss of crew and 156 passengers.  7,000 moved by helos to a carrier and various amphibious assault ships. How many in Kabul?  Zero crashes.  124,000 airlifted out.

How close is Kabul to a coastline?  The amount of fuel required limited the payload for helicopters.  Fixed wing was the obvious choice.

There weren't any loss of aircraft because the Taliban stood down.  The Taliban had already captured a lot of military hardware and munitions.  The Taliban did not threaten or impede the withdrawal.  That doesn't mean the Taliban are 'good guys' but that does mean a big worry was taken off the military withdrawal.   The military was not retreating and withdrawing under fire (unlike Vietnam).  

Because NO ONE including the Afghans themselves would have predicted or expected the ASFs to melt away in less than 2 weeks in most cases without firing a shot.

Yet Joe Biden blamed Trump for negotiating with the Taliban and setting a date for withdrawal.  Apparently Trump knew who would be in charge after the military withdrew.

Hamid Karzai was the envoy between the Taliban and Pakistani government.  How could everyone miss that?  Ashraf Ghani had stopped paying the military (mostly with money provided by the US).  How could everyone miss that?  The Taliban came into power with the support of Afghans to end inter-tribal fighting that was escalating into a full blown civil war.  How could everyone miss that?  

The Russian occupation of Afghanistan failed because of corruption in the Afghan government.  How could everyone miss that? 

What the hell was the State Dept. and diplomatic corps doing over the last decade?  How could we have missed that incompetence?  Shift blame onto the military?

There isn't anything to suggest the civilian evacuation out of Afghanistan was planned.  What happened demonstrates that the military is better at improvising than the State Dept. is at planning.

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
11.1.6  Split Personality  replied to  Nerm_L @11.1.5    4 weeks ago

What is wrong with you?  Who cares how far the coastline is from Kabul?

Kabul is 1,600 miles to Gwadar on the Pakistan border with Iran.    Helos were never an option.

Saigon is less than 100 miles from the South China sea.

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_90_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_90_smiley_image.gif

What happened demonstrates that the military is better at improvising than the State Dept. is at planning.

Finally, agreement although both have had their calamitous fuck ups.

I'm done.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
PhD Guide
11.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  Nerm_L @11    3 weeks ago

Hey, we agree! That whole debacle is not on the military and they have nothing to answer for. They followed their orders.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
12  XXJefferson51    4 weeks ago

Tucker is on a roll!  He’s right every night.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
12.1  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @12    4 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
12.2  MrFrost  replied to  XXJefferson51 @12    4 weeks ago

Tucker is on a roll!  He’s right every night.  

He lies almost constantly. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
12.2.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  MrFrost @12.2    3 weeks ago

He has even admitted to lying when he does not know something.  The only roll I want him on is a Kaiser roll being served to a hungry giant for lunch.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
13  XXJefferson51    3 weeks ago

Biden lied, people died.  

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
13.1  dennis smith  replied to  XXJefferson51 @13    3 weeks ago

After he lied, he has had nothing to say about the Afghan calamity he is respnsible for.

He has moved on to fucking up the immigration crisis, inflation, inablity to get the Dems to agree with themselves on infrastructure, continues to refuse to take questions unless he is allowed to by his puppet masters etc, etc.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
14  seeder  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

And here is more lying & treachery:

"A Black woman is accused of posing as a White  Ku Klux Klan  member and sending racially charged notes to the homes of families in an  Atlanta  suburb, according to local reports. 

Terresha Lucas, 30, was arrested Wednesday and charged with eight counts of terroristic threats and acts. She made her first court appearance Thursday morning and was denied bond, the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office told Fox News. 

No further details were provided. The Douglasville Police Department could not be reached for comment. 

Douglasville families told  WGCL-TV  they had received handwritten notes from a "man" claiming he was from the KKK and threatening to kill their families. 

"The letter is using the N-word, talking about the KKK, hanging people, killing kids, killing whole families and setting houses on fire," one father told the station. 

Families began receiving the letters as early as last December,  Atlanta's FOX 5 reported

"The notes threatened to burn their houses down and kill them and said that they didn't belong in the neighborhood," Detective Nathan Shumaker told the station. 

After a months-long investigation, Shumaker and another detective, Andre Futch, connected evidence to Lucas. 

Lucas remains in custody at the Douglas County jail. It wasn’t immediately clear if she has retained an attorney who could speak on her behalf. 

Douglasville is about 20 miles west of Atlanta."



Here we learned two things:

1) there is so little white racism in America, that the left has to manufacture it.

2) anything can happen in Fulton County GA.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

shona1
GregTx
CB
XXJefferson51
JohnRussell


45 visitors