Biden claims the US is 'not at war,' despite combat deployments to Iraq and Syria, and counter-terror missions in Africa
By: Bryan Metzger (Business Insider - MSN)
Joe Biden definitely wants to turn the page on Afghanistan. But Biden's claim that United States is not at war is too nuanced to be honest. Biden doesn't want us to read the footnotes at the bottom of that page. We still have as many troops deployed to Iraq as we had in Afghanistan. And the outcome of the Iraqi misadventure is still in doubt.
Out of a total US force of 1.4 million personnel, 16 pct is deployed in foreign countries. 83,000 are deployed to Eastern Asia (28,000 in South Korea alone), 70,000 are deployed to Eastern Europe (former Soviet bloc), 64,000 are deployed to Europe, and 8,000 are deployed to Northern and Eastern Africa. That does not include military personnel conducting missions to foreign countries from US bases (such as the C-17s flying Afghans out of Kabul).
And the total US force of 1.4 million personnel requires 800,000 civilian contractors to perform support functions; 8 pct of those civilian contractors are supporting deployed troops.
Joe Biden may not be lying but Biden is not being honest, either. Biden's team botched the withdrawal from Afghanistan and Biden has the articulate insolence to sweep that under rug in front of the assembled nations of the world. It's doubtful Joe Biden is fooling anyone except American voters. But Joe Biden has been doing that for fifty years, after all.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Speaking before the 76th session of the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, President Joe Biden concluded his speech by making a bold - and ultimately false - claim about the United State's military engagements abroad.
"I stand here today - for the first time in 20 years the United States is not at war," Biden declared as he concluded his speech. "We've turned the page."
Biden's speech was part of a wider effort to move on from the 20-year Afghanistan war, which ended with an ignominious withdrawal at the end of August. "The President will essentially drive home the message that ending the war in Afghanistan closed a chapter focused on war and opens a chapter focused on purposeful, effective, intensive American diplomacy," a senior administration official told reporters ahead of Biden's speech.
But Biden's claim ignores ongoing US military engagements abroad, including in Iraq, Syria, and Africa, underscoring the difficulty of closing the chapter in the way Biden envisions.
The New York Times reported on Monday that roughly 2,500 American troops are still in Iraq right now, largely guarding US military installations, and that many of them were mere toddlers when the US first invaded the country. Those troops have become the target of rocket fire by Iranian-backed militias, triggering retaliatory US drone strikes and thereby a continuation of military activities.
Additionally, 900 American troops are currently in Syria advising the Syrian Democratic Forces in their fight against the remnants of ISIS. Senior administration officials told POLITICO in July that there are no plans to change that in the near future, despite the lack of any formal declaration of war and the opposition of Bashar al-Assad's Syrian government.
Beyond Iraq and Syria, US forces remained stationed in a variety of foreign countries. In a June letter to Congress required under the War Powers Resolution, including approximately 2,976 United States military personnel in Jordan, 2,742 in Saudi Arabia, and 83 in Lebanon for the purposes of counterterrorism. The letter also mentions an undisclosed number of counter-terrorism forces in the Lake Chad Basin, the Sahel region, and East Africa.
Tags
Who is online
448 visitors
Joe Biden has turned the page. But don't dare read the footnote on that page. Biden's nuance must be taken as gospel truth. Fact checkers be silent, your President has spoken.
Biden is correct, it takes an act of Congress to go to declare a war.
I guess you, Biden and the rest of the lemmings forget that while Biden was VP we were placed back "at war" in Iraq. How did that happen "without Congressional approval"?
You realize your claim has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand....don't you?
It has everything to do with the topic at hand. While stumbling through his term as VP, we went to war in Iraq and Syria. In order to do this Congressional approval was needed.
Just pointing out Biden is, yet again full of shit with the claim that we are not at war.
Well spotted! That is the nuance Joe Biden is relying upon. Now all that is needed is the neoliberal trope of fighting for the peace.
So you consider the actual definition of the term "war", as a "nuance"?
The FACT is that Biden was correct, we are not at WAR with anyone currently.
You're too late. I've already pointed out that Joe Biden is correct. But I also pointed out that Biden is not being honest.
That nuance also means the US invasion of Afghanistan was not a war because Congress never enacted a declaration of war. So, Biden is claiming to have ended a war that technically wasn't a war.
Joe Biden has not declared an end to the War on Terror. Biden has not relinquished Congressional authorization to use force, conduct domestic and foreign surveillance, and deploy the military on combat missions as part of the War on Terror. The United States is still on a war footing and engaged in war activities.
Not sure "honest" would be the correct word for this. But will agree he is not being forthright.
I thought Congress had declared it when they were tracked down to Afghanistan. Long morning already and being too lazy to look it up for myself, so I'll just agree with you.
I think Obama should have, Trump should have, and now Biden should declare an end to the Patriot Act.
Another nuance that would be correct but doesn't tell the whole story.
No, Congress never enacted a declaration of war with Afghanistan. The nuance for the authorization to use force was that terrorism is stateless. Wars are fought between countries.
Portions of the Patriot Act have expired, been replaced by the USA Freedom Act, and some expired portions have been renewed. The original Patriot Act has metastasized to such an extent that it has become justification for a shadow government within the bureaucracy. But that has been nuanced into a Qanon conspiracy for public consumption.
Claiming there isn't a deep state is as correct as Joe Biden claiming that the United States is no longer at war. But the nuanced claims aren't being forthright (as you state it).
Yet if you think using proper language equals "nuance", I'm not sure we have any further to discuss that. We are currently not "at war" with anyone, but do have military conflicts. So take that any way you want.
But if you are claiming there is a "deep state", it is on you to furnish evidence to that effect.
The closest I have seen to a "deep state" is a general taking steps to prevent POTUS from being able to launch a nuclear attack for personal reasons. But everything revealed about that shows in an action by 1 man only, not a conspiracy of "deep state" operatives.
BLM is proof of a deep state. BLM ostensibly is about protesting assumed authority by a bureaucracy. And BLM is calling for the elimination of that bureaucracy. Even the idea of systemic racism is built upon the idea of a deep state; a self sustaining bureaucracy that serves its own interests and political goals rather than serving public interests and that is not accountable to democratically elected government.
The deep state consists of a politically independent and autonomous bureaucracy that assumes authority over the people of the United States without the constraint of democratic elections. The deep states becomes a threat when the bureaucracy assumes authority over democratically elected government.
If that were true, you'd have to show how BLM is a state sponsored organization.
Apparently we are talking about different organizations named BLM. The one I am aware of is " B lack L ives M atter. Which one are you talking about?
Oh, now I understand. You are making up your own little, personal, definition of "deep state". In that case disregard what I wrote, since I am working off the commonly understood definition of "deep state".
The deep state in the United States is a conspiracy theory which some authors allege consists of a clandestine network of actors in the federal government , high-level finance and high-level industry, who further claim that it operates as a hidden government that exercises power alongside or within the legitimate, elected US government.
Biden is so clueless and far gone that he actually believes the unmitigated bovine excrement he tries to push off the citizens of this country and the world!
This comment was in response to post #2.2.2 above by Nerm_L. Don't know why it wound up down here. No more so than Korea and Vietnam. While wars in every other sense of the word, they were never "declared" wars and many historians still refer to them as conflicts rather than wars. Semantics are funny things. When I was in Vietnam, it sure the heck was a war to me and many others who were over there.