Biden's Handling Of The Pullout Of Afghanistan

Jump to Last Post 1-7 of 7 discussions (39 posts)
  1. Sharlee01 profile image90
    Sharlee01posted 2 years ago
    In ten words, thoughts on how Biden handled the pullout from Afghanistan.

    My short view --   Illogical decisions resulted in deaths, and people being left behind.

    Can you offer ten words that sum up your thoughts on Biden's pullout of Afghanistan?

    1. Kyler J Falk profile image90
      Kyler J Falkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      There was no good choice, we should have glassed them.

      1. Sharlee01 profile image90
        Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I think there could have been a better plan. I think it would have taken much more time to achieve a better withdrawal, and no timeline should have been set. Just a steady withdrawal over a couple of months. But this would have had to take place before the Taliban was left unchecked.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image77
          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Its as plain as the noise on anyone's face, except ...

          actually, I would have gotten every single American and worthy Afghanistan out first; before ANY troops left the country. Then I would have dealt with the Afghan citizens and their president telling them that we were planning to leave them in charge and that we would help them defend themselves from the Taliban.

          Then I would have given them time to get their own resources and train their own army. We could have given our weapons to their army when the time was right. (The right time could have taken a couple years. What were the stationed Americans doing all these twenty years?) 

          This did not happen.
          The question is why.
          So yes, there is a lot we don't know.

          Mission, Afganistan:  F

          1. CHRIS57 profile image59
            CHRIS57posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Isn´t there a basic misinterpretation?

            There were no "they" to train "their" own army...

            Your statement would imply that some kind of functional administration existed in Afghanistan. There never was.
            Afghanistan was corruption at warpspeed. Administration was cleptocratic and incompetent to say the least.

            All this was known, known to all administrations. If we seach for failures then why was this obvious fact overlooked. Imho the answer is: Way too many on the money controlling side (in the USA) were involved and profitted.

            And yes, there were many tactical errors made in the last phase of the withdrawel. The Biden administration can´t escape from this. But this is tactical. The strategic decision to withdraw was absolutely right (from the Trump administration to initiate and from the Biden administration to pursue).

            1. Sharlee01 profile image90
              Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              So well said...

    2. Credence2 profile image78
      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this … an/619925/

      My take on it....

      A few more than 10 words?

      1. Sharlee01 profile image90
        Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I had hoped to elicit a response that gave your opinion in a few given words. I read your article and at the end, I came out, although I don't agree with,  what I must think you believe.

        Biden shoulders no blame for the results of the pullout.

        I wish you would share your ten words, not an article with someone else's many words.

        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          The article IS my opinion, shared blame at most with 3 previous administrations.

          But, to have you bash Biden as the sole and exclusive cause of a disaster in the making for over 20 years is unacceptable.

          But I am a progressive, so we are not going to see things on the same plane for virtually anything. And that is unfortunate.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image90
            Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            In no respect did I blame Biden for the US 20-year presence in Afganastan, you may have misunderstood my words or I was not clear enough in this post. I had hoped to converse the Biden's actual plan that he used to withdraw from Afganastan. 

            "Biden's Handling Of The Pullout Of Afghanistan"
            In ten words, thoughts on how Biden handled the pullout from Afghanistan.

            My short view --   Illogical decisions resulted in deaths, and people being left behind.

            Can you offer ten words that sum up your thoughts on Biden's pullout of Afghanistan?"

            I think the context was clear. I agree Biden did not create the war, and that Trump made the decision to pull out as he did in Syria. Biden made the decision to complete the withdrawal.  I just found the plan a poor one.

            I think many don't feel as comfortable bashing Biden as they did Trump for so much lesser offenses.  Offenses that in some cases were ruled not to be true in the end.

            I intend to bring up the negative as I see it... As some, here did at every turn in regard to Trump. I can appreciate your decision not to discuss anything you chose not to.

            1. Credence2 profile image78
              Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              I did not say that I turn tail and run anytime someone does not agree with me.

              I am still interested in your opinion on things even though it is more likely than not that it would not be mine.

              There is just so much more to this entire fiasco than the simple explanation about Biden handling the withdrawal poorly.

              All the parts and players contribute to the whole.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image90
                Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                So agree just today it is being reported --  Top Pentagon officials Wednesday said it is "possible" the United States will work with the Taliban against ISIS-K in Afghanistan while warning that the Taliban are a "ruthless group from the past." Seem like I am living in Bazaro world.

                We just pull out and in two days this administration makes such a statement.  This sickens me...  One could call it a fiasco, I choose to call it a tragedy, a tragedy that will most likely get worse due to an administration that makes kneejerk decisions that are truly half-ass backward.

                More is also coming out about many American's that are hiding in Afghanistan due to pure fear.

                I think an investigation needs to be done immediately, and the blame is squarely be placed on those that deserve the ire. We need answers and we need them now. I don't think we as American's should live under a fear of "what next" from this administration. Too much going on with China, Russia, Iran, North Korea... I for one do not want Biden making any foreign policy decisions. Hee can do well to stick to deciding what flavor of ice cream he is allowed to have, but that's about all I hope to see him doing. He scares the hell out of me. 

                Can't say I did not see this coming, just not this quickly.

      2. GA Anderson profile image88
        GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Geez Creed, is that article really your"take" on it? Would that take remain if names and political affiliations were removed?

        For instance; What does any previous administration have to do with the Afghan "retrograde," (sorry, just had to use that word since it seems to be the PC term for evacuation and retreat), of the last few weeks?

        A simple layman's presumption might be that the boss gives an order and his next management level, (down, of course), either formulate how to carry out that order or try to change the boss's mind. Does that seem a fair presumption to you?

        Since this involves a military component wouldn't it seem a fair presumption that planning would include a range of scenarios; from best case to a worse case options?

        Consider the known facts(?); The "management" level knew the status of the situation as early as four to six months ago, and the military probably knew the same a lot earlier. And it seems proven that the boss knew this also, at least as late as July. The public image of the last few weeks certainly doesn't indicate a "best case" situation on the ground, but that is what is publically claimed.

        I would certainly agree that the military did a fantastic emergency job of evacuation, but why did they have to do that? Where was their "worst case" plan?

        So here is my "take." I think the boss gave a good order. I think there was enough time, (since election day), for his advisors and military to formulate plans to implement that order. I think the boss's management failed him. So for a week, I would give the boss a pass.

        After that week it was obvious the wheels had come off and the boss could see the failure of his management and military advisors.

        Now there are two choices for the boss; chop some heads and make a move, or, claim that failure is a tremendous success and bar the castle gates until a disastrous action falls out of the news cycle.


        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Look what the cat dragged in. Where have you been, GA?

          "What we’re seeing is the culmination of 20 years of bad decisions by U.S. political and military leaders."

          GA, it is both neither partisan nor fair to solely blame Biden for the screw up on the extrication of appropriate personnel from Afghanistan.
          Unlike his three immediate predecessors in the Oval Office, all of whom also came to see the futility of the Afghan operation, Biden alone had the political courage to fully end America’s involvement.

          This had to happen at some point and when it ever it happened, it was inevitable that it was neither going to be  smooth or slick.
          critics castigated the Biden administration for its failure to properly coordinate the departure of the last Americans and allies from the country. The White House was indeed surprised by how quickly the Taliban took control, and (those early days could have been handled better). But the critics argued that more planning both would have been able to stop the Taliban victory and might have made America’s departure somehow tidier, more like a win or perhaps even a draw.

          Would it have, really?
          The chaos, many said, was symptomatic of a bigger error. They argued that the United States should stay in Afghanistan, that the cost of remaining was worth the benefits a small force might bring.

          I think that the critics are going through buyers remorse, they just as soon we had stayed in Afghanistan and continue to man the decks of a sinking ship. All of this while feeding the public the bland blue food of dishonesty through endless "happy talk".

          Former military officers and intelligence operatives, as well as commentators who had long been advocates of extending America’s presence in Afghanistan, railed against Biden’s artificial deadline. Some critics were former Bush-administration officials or supporters who had gotten the U.S. into the mess in the first place, setting us on the impossible path toward nation building and, effectively, a mission without a clear exit or metric for success.

          What did they say about the Trump artificial deadline that was to occur 4 months sooner? Why continue to waste to time and resources toward a known exercise in futility?


          Some were Obama-administration officials or supporters who had doubled down on the investment of personnel in the country and later, when the futility of the war was clear, lacked the political courage to withdraw.

          Some were Trump-administration officials or supporters who had negotiated with and helped strengthen the Taliban with their concessions in the peace deal and then had punted the ultimate exit from the country to the next administration.

          What was the purpose of an agreement that left out the Afghan government as a participant and signatory? That could only be a source of more chaos. The Taliban prisoners that the US wanted to release in good faith toward the Taliban was opposed by the Afghan government for good reason. In my opinion, Trumps concessions and arbitrary exit strategy only revealed our vulnerabilities and weakness from the Enemy's standpoint.
          "A simple layman's presumption might be that the boss gives an order and his next management level, (down, of course), either formulate how to carry out that order or try to change the boss's mind. Does that seem a fair presumption to you?"

          But the entire affair was a sham and coverup from the standpoint of both the boss and the management levels down.


          Never mind the fact that the Taliban had been gaining ground since it resumed its military campaign in 2004 and, according to U.S. estimates even four years ago, controlled or contested about a third of Afghanistan. Never mind that the previous administration’s deal with the Taliban included the release of 5,000 fighters from prison and favored an even earlier departure date than the one that Biden embraced. Never mind that Trump had drawn down U.S. troop levels from about 13,000 to 2,500 during his last year in office and had failed to repatriate America’s equipment on the ground. Never mind the delay caused by Trump and his adviser Stephen Miller’s active obstruction of special visas for Afghans who helped us.

          Do you think that Trump, by reducing the uS forces in such a precipitous manner and not repatriating equipment at that point made it easy for Biden? Seems to me, that there is plenty of blame to go around.

          My point is 1. That what happened with the Biden withdrawal is as much of the result of the cumulation of 20 years of lies and mismanagement by our military industrial complex. Biden hardly deserves ALL the blame for what has occurred.

          2. Rather than continue with failed policies to avoid a political confrontation as with his predecessors, Biden decided not to continue to just kick the ball (lies and misconceptions) down to the next court. That in itself is noteworthy.

 … ghanistan/

          1. GA Anderson profile image88
            GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Are you sure you were replying to my comment Creed? There seem to be unfamiliar quotes, and points I never brought up. The entirety of your response was political stuff.

            What is your "take" on the issue without the drag of political implications? Without the names, parties, and ideologies. No Biden, no Trump, no parties. Simply a structure of the issue—the boss and an order.

            The correctness of the order isn't at issue. The arbitrary departure date isn't at issue. The issue is the apparent disaster that resulted. Surely you wouldn't rate our exit from the country a tremendous success?

            I think there is only one fact from previous administrations that pertains to this—the original exit agreement. After reading your link, (which I accept because I think it supports my perspective), I couldn't see it in any of your previous comments, (which probably means I misread them. ;-))

            We can agree the Boss' knew how bad things were seven months before the final date. Of course, this means all of his administration levels also knew.

            We might also agree that there were probably political entanglements at almost every level. So what was his administration and military telling him during that planning time? What options were they offering him? I might wonder if those answers even mattered, (re. this issue of course), in the early planning days

            If we can agree that the management team knew how bad things were, I would certainly think someone was qualified enough to know to plan for the worst and hope for the best.

            I would say that the situation, as it continually developed, had reached a point where even the most blinded of supporters could not deny the problem, was as early as July, and still nobody changed course. They just turbo-boosted their failed efforts.

            That `nobody' now includes the boss. The need for a change is obvious and the boss only doubles down.

            Appearances are saying that no one; from the closest advisors to his trusted military planners, planned for what seems, to the lay public, (meaning me), to be an obvious disaster.

            Do you see the core issue of our exit differently?


            1. Credence2 profile image78
              Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              Nobody knew nor planned as there were really NO good options under the circumstances. This chapter in American foreign policy had to end and there were no painless ways to accomplish that. I don't know if  I am addressing the points you are making. What if there were no "safe" alternate route available. We have plenty Monday morning quarterbacks to criticize what has transpired.

              I don't know if there were anyone available that was qualified to extricate the US from the mire it found itself in. No matter how you this extrication process, it was going to be a rough ride, regardless.

              Yes, the Boss knew things were bad, but were there really that many alternatives so that this all could have been handled more smoothly? If there were do you think that we would have spent the last twenty years in quicksand?

              Every road or alternatives had land mines in place. Biden had to work with blueprints that he was given and that were not of his creation.

              Did I answer question about the core issue?

              1. GA Anderson profile image88
                GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Nope. But almost. Maybe it is that you think "Biden had to work with the blueprints he was given"  and I think Biden should have been the one deciding on blueprints that is causing our disconnect. You still insist on defending political aspects, (i.e. Biden/Trump/twenty years/quicksand).

                I see your perspective as Biden deciding on the order and asking for implementation options, and then given only one very suspect assumption—that the Afghans would hold the perimeter, and a plan based entirely on that assumption.

                I think any president would ask a few `what ifs'. Primarily, what if they don't hold the perimeter? What is the backup plan, etc., etc? I find it difficult to believe our nation's top military minds and top strategists would not plan for different options.

                So, seven months before Exit-day it seems clear, at every level, that plan A's assumption was wrong, and they don't have a Plan B? And in that time frame those great strategists can't come up with a Plan B?

                I think other military plans—addressing different scenarios must have been studied and some possibly presented. I must have at least that level of confidence in our military leaders.

                I know this seems a very simplistic view, apparently ignoring political realities, but it isn't. It is a view that must be taken, and either accepted or tossed. As long as the political is discussed first the truth of the core issue will never be discussed.


                1. Ken Burgess profile image76
                  Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  This is the core truth of the matter.

                  Biden and his Advisers chose this route, chose to pull out air support when they did, and chose to openly spread falsehoods that the Taliban would take months to take control... that all Americans would be evacuated, etc... when they already knew these statements to be false.

                  I heard an interesting story today, it seems Biden's dog had been sent to a training school because it had bitten a Secret Service agent.  When asked about the matter, the press secretary reiterated that it was only one agent that was bitten, it occurred only once.

                  However it seems others leaked that several agents had been bitten, and that it was an ongoing problem with the dog, and that the dog had even attacked quests.

                  The issue isn't that Biden has a troubled dog that has repeatedly attacked people.  The issue is that the White House deliberately lies about the matter.  About a dog... that just about everyone that works around the President knows has issues.  Why?

                  Why lie about it?

                  You can say that there was some security interests in spreading lies about what was transpiring in Afghanistan... but there is no such plausible excuse to be lying about a dog.

                  1. GA Anderson profile image88
                    GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                    I think your "core issue" is a separate thing. I think your opening thought is mostly right, but the rest of the lying part is like one of those `everybody knows that' things and is not what I was trying to focus on.

                    To be more clear, I am talking about the evacuation debacle and its time frame, and the degree of involvement by all management levels. I see the administration's levels as focused on the political, (and maybe in a couple of cases national interest too), aspects of the planning. Which, I don't see as wrong—that's a big part of their job.

                    I see the military as the prime and most important component of all other considerations. I see the top brass getting the order to develop a plan. I then see that top brass as passing the actual task to whatever military planning components are needed.

                    I must think that at this mid-level the folks involved in the planning would have a mostly realistic real-world understanding of the facts on the ground, and what directions might be available, or demanded, to plan for.

                    I see a scenario of multiple plans being developed and groomed for presentation. And here is the point where I see politics begin to shape the choice.

                    The Boss and his advisors knew this exit was coming. Did they think about it since taking office, or did they just ignore it until sevens months before Exit day? *shrug*

                    My thought is that the initial failure lies at the feet of the Boss's administration and military top advisors. Could they have presented only the options that met their political needs? Could they have only offered an Armaggedon-type alternative choice? *shrug*

                    I see this embarrassment as clearly the Boss's fault. Not because he is a Democrat, or incompetent, or a puppet, but because he was the Boss that gave the order, and then the Boss that failed to take corrective action, (if that choice was even available after such a commitment to Plan A).

                    I think the greatest blame lies at the feet of the military's top brass for allowing, (my situational optimistic naivete is showing), such a plan to be presented without an alternative choice, (again, that is assuming there was one).

                    Once that can be considered as a possible common agreement, or debunked as a misinformed perspective, then the issue of the partisan politics involved can stand on a firm common starting point.


      3. Sharlee01 profile image90
        Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Biden's TimeLine ---What was he did and when

        Biden Follows Through
        Feb. 3 — The Afghanistan Study Group, which was created by Congress in December 2019 and charged with making policy recommendations for a peaceful transition in Afghanistan, releases a report recommending changes to the agreement with the Taliban. “The most important revision is to ensure that a complete withdrawal of U.S. troops is based not on an inflexible timeline but on all parties fulfilling their commitments, including the Taliban making good on its promises to contain terrorist groups and reduce violence against the Afghan people, and making compromises to achieve a political settlement,” it said.

        (Facts prove, the Taliban was not keeping to the agreement in regard to ---  making good on its promises to contain terrorist groups and reduce violence against the Afghan people and making compromises to achieve a political settlement,” it said.

        Feb. 19 — Biden reiterates his campaign promise to bring U.S. troops home from Afghanistan, saying during remarks at the Munich Security Conference, “My administration strongly supports the diplomatic process that’s underway and to bring an end to this war that is closing out 20 years. We remain committed to ensuring that Afghanistan never again provides a base for terrorist attacks against the United States and our partners and our interests.”

        March 7 — Secretary of State Antony Blinken TELLS Afghanistan President Ashra Ghani that, despite future U.S. financial assistance, he is “CONCERNED  that the security situation will worsen and the Taliban could make rapid territorial gains.”  ( as early as March 7, 2021, Blinken feared that the Taliban was on the move taking over territories.

        March 25 — Gen. Richard Clarke, commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command, tells the Senate Armed Services Committee that “it is clear that the Taliban have not upheld what they said they would do and reduce the violence. While…they have not attacked U.S. forces, it is clear that they took a deliberate approach and increased their violence…since the peace accords were signed.”  Again another adviser makes the claim the Taliban is not keeping Trump's agreement)

        March 25 — During a press conference at the White House, Biden says “it’s going to be hard to meet the May 1 deadline. Just in terms of tactical reasons, it’s hard to get those troops out.” He assures that “if we leave, we’re going to do so in a safe and orderly way.” Without committing to a pullout date, Biden says, “it is not my intention to stay there for a long time. But the question is: How and in what circumstances do we meet that agreement that was made by President Trump to leave under a deal that looks like it’s not being able to be worked out, to begin with? How is that done? But we are not staying a long time.”  ( Biden admits he see problems in keeping the deal and appears to have no plan other than"not staying a long time")

        April 14 — Saying it is “time to end the forever war,” Biden announces that all troops will be removed from Afghanistan by Sept. 11. (Sept 11... Appears to be a very political move on Biden's part...)

        In a speech explaining the decision, Biden says he became convinced after  trip to Afghanistan in 2008 that “more and endless American military force could not create or sustain a durable Afghan government.” Biden says the U.S. achieved its initial and primary objective, “to ensure Afghanistan would not be used as a base from which to attack our homeland again” and that “our reasons for remaining in Afghanistan are becoming increasingly unclear.”

        Biden says he “inherited a diplomatic agreement” between the U.S. and the Taliban that all U.S. forces would be out by May 1. “It is perhaps not what I would have negotiated myself, but it was an agreement made by the United States government, and that means something,” Biden says, adding that final troop withdrawal would begin on May 1.

        “We will not conduct a hasty rush to the exit,” Biden says. “We’ll do it responsibly, deliberately, and safely.” Biden assures Americans that the U.S. has “trained and equipped a standing force of over 300,000 Afghan personnel” and that “they’ll continue to fight valiantly, on behalf of the Afghans, at great cost.”

        The Taliban unleashed a threat on April 15 — In response to Biden’s decision to delay full withdrawal until Sept. 11, the Taliban releases a statement that says failure to complete the withdrawal by May 1 “opens the way for [the Taliban] to take every necessary countermeasure, hence the American side will be held responsible for all future consequences.”

        April 18 — In a released statement, TRUMP  criticizes Biden’s Sept. 11 withdrawal deadline saying, “we can and should get out earlier.” He concludes, “Getting out of Afghanistan is a wonderful and positive thing to do. I planned to withdraw on May 1st, and we should keep as close to that schedule as possible.”

        May 18 — The Defense Department IG releases a report for the first three months of 2021 that says the TALIBAB had INCREASED its ATTACKS  against Afghanistan government forces during this period and appears to be preparing with al-Qaeda for “large-scale offensives.” ( after the may 1st deadline passed the Taliban increased attacks and was taking over areas of Afghanistan)

        MID MAY ---  “The Taliban initiated 37 percent more attacks this quarter than during the same period in 2020,” the report said. “According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, the TALIBAN maintained close ties with al-Qaeda and was very likely PREPARING  for LARGE- SCALE offensives against population centers and Afghan government installations.”

        May 18 — In a House hearing on U.S. policy in Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan reconciliation, downplays the prospect of a swift Taliban takeover when U.S. forces leave. “If they [Taliban] pursue, in my judgment, a military victory, it will result in a long war, because Afghan security forces will fight, other Afghans will fight, neighbors will come to support different forces,” Khalilzad says.

        Later Khalilzad added, “I personally believe that the statements that the [Afghan] forces will disintegrate, and the Talibs will take over in short order are mistaken. The real choices that the Afghans will face is between a long war and negotiated settlement.”

        June 8 — Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid tells Foreign Policy that after foreign forces leave Afghanistan the group’s goal is to create an “Islamic government,” and “we will be compelled to continue our war to achieve our goal.”

        June 26 — At a rally in Ohio, his first since leaving office, Trump boasts that Biden can’t stop the process he started to remove troops from Afghanistan, and acknowledges the Afghan government won’t last once U.S. troops leave.

        “I started the process,” Trump says. “All the troops are coming back home. They [the Biden administration] couldn’t stop the process. 21 years is enough. Don’t we think? 21 years. They couldn’t stop the process. They wanted to, but it was very tough to stop the process when other things… It’s a shame. 21 years, by a government that wouldn’t last. The only way they last is if we’re there. What are we going to say? We’ll stay for another 21 years, then we’ll stay for another 50. The whole thing is ridiculous. … We’re bringing troops back home from Afghanistan.”

        July 6 — The U.S. military confirms it has pulled out of Bagram Airfield, its largest airfield in Afghanistan, as the final withdrawal nears. 5,000 prisoners were left in the Bagram prison in the hands of the Afgan army, which began also abanding Bagram. ( Aug 14th the Taliban took control of Bagram and released the 5,000 prisoners. On Aug 15, the Taliban took walked in and took control of Kabul.

        July 8 — Saying “speed is safety,” Biden moves up the timeline for full troop withdrawal to Aug. 31. Biden acknowledges the move comes as the Taliban “is at its strongest militarily since 2001.” Biden says if he went back on the agreement that Trump made, the Taliban “would have again begun to target our forces” and that “staying would have meant U.S. troops taking casualties. … Once that agreement with the Taliban had been made, staying with a bare minimum force was no longer possible.”

        Biden assures Americans that a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan “is not inevitable,” and denies that U.S. intelligence assessed that the Afghan government would likely collapse.

        Asked if he sees any parallels between the withdrawals from Vietnam Afghanistan, Biden responds, “None whatsoever. Zero. … The Taliban is not the south — the North Vietnamese army. They’re not — they’re not remotely comparable in terms of capability.  There’s going to be no circumstance where you see people being lifted off the roof of an embassy in the — of the United States from Afghanistan.  It is not at all comparable.”

        Biden adds that “the likelihood there’s going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely.”

        Biden also promises to help accelerate the issuance of special visas for Afghan nationals who helped the U.S. during the war.

        July 23, 2021 ---   July 23 call, in which Biden told the Afghan leader to change the “perception” about the fight against the Taliban, “whether it’s true or not.” "I need not tell you the perception around the world and in parts of Afghanistan, I believe, is that things aren’t going well in terms of the fight against the Taliban," Biden told Ghani during the 14-minute phone call. "And there’s a need, whether it is true or not, there is a need to project a different picture." 

        "I don’t know whether you’re aware just how much the perception around the world is that this is looking like a losing proposition," Biden told Ghani, "which it is not, not that it necessarily is that."

        But Ghani didn't appear to project much confidence back to Biden.

        "Mr. President, we are facing a full-scale invasion, composed of Taliban, full Pakistani planning and logistical support, and at least 10-15,000 international terrorists," Ghani said, "predominantly Pakistanis thrown into this, so that dimension needs to be taken account of."

        July 24 — At a rally in Phoenix, Trump again boasts, “I started the move out of Afghanistan,” adding “I think it was impossible for him [Biden] to stop it, but it was a much different deal.”
        Trump says that when he was president, in a phone conversation with the leader of the Taliban, he warned that after U.S. troops leave if “you decide to do something terrible to our country … we are going to come back and we are going to hit you harder than any country has ever been hit.” Trump says he believes the two “had a real understanding” but that after Trump left office “now they’re going wild over there.”

        Aug. 6 — The Taliban takes control of its first province — the capital of Nimroz province in Afghanistan — despite the agreement it signed with the U.S.

        Aug. 15 — Taliban fighters enter the Afghanistan capital Kabul; the Afghan president flees the country; U.S. evacuates diplomats from its embassy by helicopter.

        Aug. 16 — In a speech to the nation, Biden says, “I do not regret my decision to end America’s warfighting in Afghanistan,” and deflected blame for the government’s swift collapse o Trump and his advisers.

        We then witnessed complete chaos with  Biden's poor withdrawal plan that has clearly failed with the loss of 13 American soldiers, and hundreds of Afagnastan civilians, and Hundreds of American citizens left behind.

        What can we expect now --- perhaps Biden making it rain in the way of coughing up cash to get America out of Afghanistan... And most likely Biden taking an ill-earned victory lap for getting American's out. 

        Time to take a real look at the man that sits in the White House, and consider he just is not in any fashion up to the job, and that is putting it kindly.

    3. gmwilliams profile image85
      gmwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      (1) Biden has made a mortal blunder but he refuses to acknowledge it!

      There's more.....
      (2) Biden's incompetence is making America look weak, losing other's respect.

      1. Sharlee01 profile image90
        Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Trump warned of hasty withdrawal... And Biden's mistruths have spiked up in regard to how he would handle the withdrawal... Is Biden lying purposely or does he just say what he thinks we want to hear? 

      2. Sharlee01 profile image90
        Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this … withdrawal

        52% of Voters Think Biden Should Resign Over Afghanistan Withdrawal

        "The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan was so badly handled that President Joe Biden should resign because of it, according to a majority of voters. However, most don’t think Vice President Kamala Harris is qualified to replace Biden if he leaves office.

        A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey found that 52% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Biden should resign because of the way the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan was handled. Thirty-nine percent (39%) disagree, and nine percent (9%) are not sure."

    4. Kathleen Cochran profile image77
      Kathleen Cochranposted 2 years ago

      It is too soon to voice opinions from the cheap seats when there is much we haven't been told about an ongoing operation where real lives were at stake. If you knew anything about the military, and 99 percent of us don't, you'd know that.

    5. Live to Learn profile image60
      Live to Learnposted 2 years ago

      Democrats in denial over the reckless abandonment of citizens/allies.

      Sorry. Needed an extra word.

      1. Sharlee01 profile image90
        Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Most polls indicate even Democrats don't approve of his handling of the withdrawal. Independents and Republicans strongly disapproved of how he handled the withdrawal.

    6. abwilliams profile image69
      abwilliamsposted 2 years ago

      Fourth string Quarterback, Junior Varsity, in deep doo-doo, oblivious, clueless

    7. MG Singh profile image68
      MG Singhposted 2 years ago

      Joe Biden tarnished America's image in the world forever. There have been other retreats like Napoleons from Russia but they were not chaotic like the American retreat and vacating the Bagram base in the dead of the night without even informing the Afghan government and leaving the base to be looted. The Americans under Biden have reached the nadir of world prestige and I really wonder how they're going to get out of this. One can glass over this but one cannot avoid the fact that almost $500 billion worth of military equipment is now in the hands of the Taliban and we had to thank Joe Biden for it.

      1. gmwilliams profile image85
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this


        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Apparently concerned Americans aren't the only one seeing a very bad move by our President. 

 … uXFF6Gejuk

          1. Sharlee01 profile image90
            Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Thank god we have many honest journalists from other countries as well as America doing diligence, and digging for the truth, and reporting it. The fake ones have no real voice in this situation or little voice.

      2. Sharlee01 profile image90
        Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        At this point, not much will be glassed over. The true journalist is has been reporting what's going on. Even the nightly talk jocks have nowhere to turn but the truth...  This president should be removed before more damage is done to America.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image90
          Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          No news on our American hostages that Bide left behind in Afghanistan. Yesterday SOS gave a press conference. I came away with the thought he is possibly putting out the deal to pay for our citizens. He will Travel to the region Monday...

          QUESTION: Mr. Price --  "Thank you, Mr. Secretary.   It’s been four days since you stood here and talked about the 100 to 200 Americans who remain.  In those four days, has that number changed at all?  Has any – have any more people managed to get out, and if so, how?  And you talk a lot about the conversations that are being had around how to get more people out, whether it’s Afghans or Americans.  Has that been more solidified, and is there any sense that the Taliban may renege on their – on their decision to allow those people out?"

          SECRETARY BLINKEN:  "Yeah.  Thanks, Alex.  So a couple of things on this.  As I mentioned, we are in very regular contact with a relatively small number of American citizens who remain in Afghanistan and who’ve indicated that they’re interested in leaving.  And we have dedicated teams assigned to each of these American citizens to be in constant contact with them.  We’re providing them with very tailored, very specific guidance.  Let me just say that for their protection and also to protect the viability of – of our tactics, I’m not going to go into any details beyond that for now, just to say that we’re in very active contact. " … ilability/

          Aug 17, 2021   --- Are these the funds the Taliban would like to get their hands on?

          "The U.S. has frozen nearly $9.5 billion in assets belonging to the Afghan central bank and stopped shipments of cash to the nation as it tries to keep a Taliban-led government from accessing the money, an administration official confirmed Tuesday."

          I am really thinking at this point,( and yes this is an 'if come" a view from the cheap seats ) that Biden is going to release that frozen cash or pay taxpayers cash calling it foreign aid our American hostages.  Has America not held the long-time value of not paying ransoms for hostages in the past?

      3. Miebakagh57 profile image68
        Miebakagh57posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        $500 billion worth of military equipment? Really? Okay...thank you, Joe Biden?                                       Actually, the USA is the loser. God save America period.

    8. Freeway Flyer profile image82
      Freeway Flyerposted 2 years ago

      The right decision, but evacuations should have started sooner.

      1. Sharlee01 profile image90
        Sharlee01posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        good point...

    9. Valeant profile image85
      Valeantposted 2 years ago

      To say the course was not changed, even though troop presence was increased, sort of ignores a piece of the puzzle I would say.

      1. GA Anderson profile image88
        GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I think the troop increase is more the doubling-down or turbocharging I mentioned than an actual change of course. It seems the plan, as I understand it, was to center our efforts on Kabul and count on the Afghan forces to hold the perimeter of our withdraw.

        It doesn't seem, to me, realistic that no one considered a worst-case plan. The troop increase was a last-minute save our butt effort, not an implementation of a change. Maybe we just have different perspectives.



    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

    Show Details
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)