A useful reminder of who actually surrendered to the Taliban
-
If the agreement was so horrible, as Williamson asserts, why did Biden not change the terms? He had more than half a year to do so. And he didn't. If you can change border policy on day 1 of your administration, why can't you change an agreement with the Afghan government, or Taliban (if, indeed, they were at the table)?
Was this done with Congressional approval?
What should have been done differently, either by Trump or by Biden.
-
-
Under Biden, the Taliban broke six out of the seven things they had agreed to under the Trump brokered Doha Agreement.
How in the hell can you hold the Trump Administration responsible for a withdrawal agreement, when the Taliban broke it to pieces after Biden took office? The Resident could have done what he wanted and been completely
within his rights, since an agreement becomes pretty much null and void when one party shreds everything agreed to.Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@jon-nyc said in A useful reminder of who actually surrendered to the Taliban:
‘Biden didn’t undo his shitty deal’ isn’t exculpatory. Especially given the timeline.
He had 8 months. Granted, that might not be enough time for him to have climbed the stairs to Air Force One, but it might have been enough for his handlers to renegotiate/cancel the agreement that was so horrible.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@George-K said in A useful reminder of who actually surrendered to the Taliban:
... but it might have been enough for his handlers to renegotiate/cancel the agreement that was so horrible.
So it's established that an agreement existed, and that it was "horrible."
So much for the Art of the Deal.
-
@Jolly said in A useful reminder of who actually surrendered to the Taliban:
... the Taliban broke six out of the seven things they had agreed to under the Trump brokered Doha Agreement.
This is where you argue "known or should have known." What, the deal maker didn't foresee the Taliban reneging on various provisions of a deal and put contingencies into the deal?
To make a deal so easily broken, so much for the Art of the Deal.
-
@Axtremus said in A useful reminder of who actually surrendered to the Taliban:
@Jolly said in A useful reminder of who actually surrendered to the Taliban:
... the Taliban broke six out of the seven things they had agreed to under the Trump brokered Doha Agreement.
This is where you argue "known or should have known." What, the deal maker didn't foresee the Taliban reneging on various provisions of a deal and put contingencies into the deal?
To make a deal so easily broken, so much for the Art of the Deal.
We had something to address contingencies.
The Resident didn't use them.
-
@Axtremus said in A useful reminder of who actually surrendered to the Taliban:
@George-K said in A useful reminder of who actually surrendered to the Taliban:
... but it might have been enough for his handlers to renegotiate/cancel the agreement that was so horrible.
So it's established that an agreement existed, and that it was "horrible."
So much for the Art of the Deal.
-
Regardless, most people don’t give a rat’s ass about the actual decision to leave, but the method of that withdrawal. I’ll entertain the idea that it would have been the same officers making the same plans, I’ll even entertain the idea that the 13 servicemen and women would be dead and Afghani translators would have been falling off of airplanes. But I guarantee you one difference, Heads would have rolled at the Pentagon instead of everyone saying mission accomplished…
Me/rry/Christmas
-
@LuFins-Dad yes.
The other thought is that these decisions (which are blamed on Trump) are unlikely to be 100% his. They came from advisors and military "experts" in the Pentagon, and he agreed.
It's possible, though unlikely, that he came up with this plan on his own, but I doubt it - no, I can't prove it.
Still the point stands that it happened on Biden's watch - I've been assured that things that happen on a President's watch are his responsibility even if put in motion by his predecessor.
Again, if, as is asserted, it was so horrible, why did Biden's handlers permit it to proceed? They had months to reverse it.
