Biden Foreign Policy

[Archy1221]

48 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I agree, but that isn't the only thing that could have gone wrong. And would another admin have actually brought those people back to the US? I doubt it.

I don’t see any reason to talk about what another administration would or wouldn’t have done.  I just hope future Presidents and Generals learn from this 20 yr boondoggle. 

[RedDenver]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

I don’t see any reason to talk about what another administration would or wouldn’t have done.

Then you can't say the withdraw was "bad" or "mishandled" or almost anything else because those require context and comparison.

 

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

 I just hope future Presidents and Generals learn from this 20 yr boondoggle. 

Agreed, but I'm skeptical any will.

[Archy1221]

57 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Then you can't say the withdraw was "bad" or "mishandled" or almost anything else because those require context and comparison.

Sure I can.  We have no idea what anyone would have done and wondering that is a useless waste of energy.  All we can debate is what should have been done.  

[RedDenver]

59 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Sure I can.  We have no idea what anyone would have done and wondering that is a useless waste of energy.  All we can debate is what should have been done.  

You mean like not being there for the past 20 years? That conversation is entirely about other administrations.

 

And debating what should have been done is entirely about wondering what others would have done.

[teachercd]

Assuming this is really all over, will the US ever again be involved in a war, especially one that the US "Starts"?

 

 

[nic]

13 hours ago, teachercd said:

Assuming this is really all over, will the US ever again be involved in a war, especially one that the US "Starts"?

 

 

If I had to guess, troops will be going back into Afghanistan to free hostages. 

[BigRedBuster]

14 hours ago, teachercd said:

Assuming this is really all over, will the US ever again be involved in a war, especially one that the US "Starts"?

 

 

Unfortunately, yes.  Years from now, politicians will forget how bad this was and think they need to save the world.  I'm not opposed to all wars.  Sometimes it's needed.  But, we need to stop starting them ourselves.  And, for the record, this one wasn't one that we started.  We were just there a lot longer than we should have been.

[Cdog923]

10 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Unfortunately, yes.  Years from now, politicians will forget how bad this was and think they need to save the world.  I'm not opposed to all wars.  Sometimes it's needed.  But, we need to stop starting them ourselves.  And, for the record, this one wasn't one that we started.  We were just there a lot longer than we should have been.

 

As long as we're dependent on foreign interests for our energy needs (and unless we clean up our act, clean water), we'll always be in the market for war. 

[Enhance]

My problem with all the finger pointing happening right now is that the "process" for getting the U.S. out of Afghanistan has literally been years in the making. For example, you have to take into the account the years spent training the Afghanistan military and negotiations with the Taliban, things that preceded the Biden administration and cultivated several red flags that contributed to this most current situation.

 

Biden's administration certainly deserves blame, but so does Trump. So does Obama. So does Bush. Anyone choosing to place a majority of their criticism on Biden are ignoring facts for political machinations. Unsurprising, but no less disappointing.

[Archy1221]

Interesting way of putting it.

 

 

[ZRod]

5 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Interesting way of putting it.

 

 

The National Gaurd isn't an active combat group...

[knapplc]

How did the "Biden Admin" have troops in D.C. for "weeks" on January 6th when Biden wasn't inaugurated until January 20th?

 

There was no "Biden Admin" on 1/6, and Biden had no control over troops at that time. 

[DevoHusker]

5 minutes ago, ZRod said:

The National Gaurd isn't an active combat group...

 

??? You do realize that Guardsmen spent about as many hours in the Desert as active duty folks, right?

 

 https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/Article/576180/the-national-guards-contribution-300000-plus-iraq-deployments/ 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/after-wars-in-iraq-and-afghanistan-rethinking-how-national-guard-members-are-deployed

https://www.uso.org/stories/2934-10-need-to-know-facts-about-the-national-guard 

and, 

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/01/11/national-guard-inauguration-deployment-twice-as-large-as-troop-levels-in-afghanistan-and-iraq-combined/

 

[nic]

33 minutes ago, knapplc said:

How did the "Biden Admin" have troops in D.C. for "weeks" on January 6th when Biden wasn't inaugurated until January 20th?

 

There was no "Biden Admin" on 1/6, and Biden had no control over troops at that time. 

troops were not there on 1/6. I think they showed up prior inauguration. The tweet didn't say they were there on 1/6. Did the DC mayor or Pelosi order it? We're there really 25k? Now I am curious. 

[Archy1221]

46 minutes ago, ZRod said:

The National Gaurd isn't an active combat group...

I don’t think anyone said it was