Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2021 16:02:13 GMT
And for the record, these are the experts I'm referring to.
As Afghan security forces battle Taliban fighters near several major cities on Thursday, U.S. intelligence officials warned that Afghanistan’s capital city and the seat of its government, Kabul, could fall to the Islamist militant group within 90 days
That was just last Thursday. Biden listened to them. And to nobody who has ever paid attention's surprise, they were wrong.
I'd wait until we get the full story on the intelligence. For example, there are people saying the following: "There absolutely was intelligence reporting that it could happen this fast. This was not a surprise." ( Source) Remember the bounty story. There was disagreement among the intelligence community on that, and if you read deep enough into the stories, you saw that some of those intelligence estimates were based on admittedly weak intelligence. There was likely disagreement on this as well. You also had the military lying to Congress and the public for years about the strength of the Afghan army (even when they knew better), so they were probably lying to the President as well. I also think Biden was hoping the army could hold that long.
There is no "full story" that matters when it comes to the American people. There is only the narrative that becomes reality. Just because you and I might buy and read the books no one else reads it doesn't change that reality for the population at large.
I am quite sure Louis XVI and George III had people giving him good advice. The problem is they were drowned out by the people Louis, George and Joe actually did listen to. So they do not matter.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Aug 17, 2021 16:32:09 GMT
There is no "full story" that matters when it comes to the American people. There is only the narrative that becomes reality. Just because you and I might buy and read the books no one else reads it doesn't change that reality for the population at large. I'm not sure the public at large is going to really care a whole lot, particularly by the time 2022 or 2024 rolls around. We got out, which probably all most people care about based on the polling. People just really haven't paid a whole lot of attention to Afghanistan, and that includes the media. The recent flood of coverage has been something to behold. Based on his statements, I think Biden talked himself into, and let himself be talked into, a much more optimistic scenario where the Afghan government was going to hold out at least for a little while. And honestly, he wasn't the only one; he was just the one who ultimately had to make the call.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2021 16:46:51 GMT
People are paying attention now. Oof are they paying attention.
Biden followed the advice of his experts. The rationalizations don't matter. He was following the advice of highly paid experts who spend a great deal of time lecturing the American people about how they know best.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Aug 17, 2021 16:52:38 GMT
People are paying attention now. Oof are they paying attention. Are they though? I mean, I am, but I've been paying attention to this for a long time. Not sure that most people are, or that people would rate this highly in importance. Guess we'll find out soon enough. Experts who may have been bsing him and not giving him complete information. For example: Take that for what it's worth, but IF this was the situation, then the intelligence community did the President (and not just this one) and the Afghans a grave disservice.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Aug 17, 2021 18:09:16 GMT
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,541
|
Post by thor on Aug 17, 2021 18:18:54 GMT
There is no "full story" that matters when it comes to the American people. There is only the narrative that becomes reality. Just because you and I might buy and read the books no one else reads it doesn't change that reality for the population at large. I'm not sure the public at large is going to really care a whole lot, particularly by the time 2022 or 2024 rolls around. We got out, which probably all most people care about based on the polling. People just really haven't paid a whole lot of attention to Afghanistan, and that includes the media. The recent flood of coverage has been something to behold. Based on his statements, I think Biden talked himself into, and let himself be talked into, a much more optimistic scenario where the Afghan government was going to hold out at least for a little while. And honestly, he wasn't the only one; he was just the one who ultimately had to make the call. A few other notes/possibilities: 1. The Biden Administration was aware that disintegration of the ANA was a given, and thought by expressing public confidence in the Afghan government, this might buy a bit of time. 2. Once the 'peace' agreement (or whatever you want to call it) was signed back in November, many Afghan Army units and government entities began making their own arrangements for their own benefit/escape/survival. Once the Biden Administration 'pulled the trigger', as it were, transfer of power to the Taliban was a mere formality. I hold the opinion that once many Afghans knew what was coming, they chose to look after themselves and much of our on-the-ground intelligence (HUMINT) dried up due to the price of collaboration that is likely coming. It will be a long time before much of what happened comes to light, and the 'real' story will not match the 'official' one.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Aug 17, 2021 18:24:26 GMT
^ Definitely possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2021 11:56:31 GMT
People are paying attention now. Oof are they paying attention. Are they though? I mean, I am, but I've been paying attention to this for a long time. Not sure that most people are, or that people would rate this highly in importance. Guess we'll find out soon enough. Experts who may have been bsing him and not giving him complete information. For example: Take that for what it's worth, but IF this was the situation, then the intelligence community did the President (and not just this one) and the Afghans a grave disservice.
Yes, Demos. They're paying attention. The images coming out of Kabul are some of the most disastrous foreign policy pictures in American history. Those pictures aren't going to be leaving heavy rotation in campaign ads any time soon. I had lunch with my 75 year old aunt yesterday and she brought up "Are you seeing what's going on in Afghanistan? Boy Joe Biden's sure having a rough couple days."
And I'm sure the twitter accounts of the naysayers will be super important in the dissertations of PhD candidates circa 2125. But, unfortunately, nobody's paying attention to them today or yesterday or 9 years ago. Nobody who matters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2021 12:55:56 GMT
But on that note, which members of "the military" were publicly slowwalking and shelving Biden's requests for an exit plan? Milley is the most prominent one. He was explicitly arguing against it - both under Trump, then Biden. By the way, here's Mark Milley being all "resistancy" a month ago. Nice closing line. "And I want to emphasize, repeatedly, and I've said this before ...a negative outcome, a Taliban automatic military takeover, is not a foregone conclusion." That aged well. "Experts" amirite???
|
|
|
Post by Maestro on Aug 18, 2021 13:42:38 GMT
Milley is the most prominent one. He was explicitly arguing against it - both under Trump, then Biden. By the way, here's Mark Milley being all "resistancy" a month ago. Nice closing line. "And I want to emphasize, repeatedly, and I've said this before ...a negative outcome, a Taliban automatic military takeover, is not a foregone conclusion." That aged well. "Experts" amirite??? The thing is, "not a forgone conclusion," along with Biden's "not inevitable" comment are really meaningless predictions specifically worded as to be immune from being disproven. The fact that the thing that you claimed was "not inevitable" or "not a forgone conclusion" happens doesn't actually make your prediction incorrect. In order to prove it incorrect, you have to prove that there was no way any other outcome could have happened, that no actions or circumstances of any kind could have prevented it, which is pretty much impossible to do.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Aug 18, 2021 14:08:35 GMT
Yes, Demos. They're paying attention. The images coming out of Kabul are some of the most disastrous foreign policy pictures in American history. Those pictures aren't going to be leaving heavy rotation in campaign ads any time soon. People are reacting to what they're seeing right now, as well as hearing right now: Support for Afghanistan withdrawal plummets as Taliban seize controlBut once that reaction fades and the story is no longer covered, as is inevitable, what then? Large majorities have supported withdrawal; is that going to change long term? Are people really going to want to go back into Afghanistan? I just don't see this as something that moves the needle much in a year or in 2024, especially when you have the economy, COVID, the border, etc. Plus, foreign policy never has moved the needle much in elections. The account from the line intel guy is about what was making it through and whether the intelligence was being "politicized." For me, that's an important consideration, because it points to systemic problems in how U.S. foreign policy is developed and conducted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2021 14:09:51 GMT
By the way, here's Mark Milley being all "resistancy" a month ago. Nice closing line. "And I want to emphasize, repeatedly, and I've said this before ...a negative outcome, a Taliban automatic military takeover, is not a foregone conclusion." That aged well. "Experts" amirite??? The thing is, "not a forgone conclusion," along with Biden's "not inevitable" comment are really meaningless predictions specifically worded as to be immune from being disproven. The fact that the thing that you claimed was "not inevitable" or "not a forgone conclusion" happens doesn't actually make your prediction incorrect. In order to prove it incorrect, you have to prove that there was no way any other outcome could have happened, that no actions or circumstances of any kind could have prevented it, which is pretty much impossible to do. Oh absolutely. That's why modern political rhetoric is always referred to as "weaselly." And both the downside and the upside to using rhetoric such as Milley used is, it allows the listener to apply whatever their own preconceived notions about the subject matter being discussed. He's as much "covering his ass" as he is providing ammo to his detractors.
But Milley is an expert from whom Biden was receiving counsel. It dovetails nicely with my earlier link about leaks from intelligence analysts arguing a 90 day timeframe.
And more importantly, it's an interesting observation on the stance of the "most prominent" people opposing a withdrawal from Afghanistan.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2021 14:17:28 GMT
Yes, Demos. They're paying attention. The images coming out of Kabul are some of the most disastrous foreign policy pictures in American history. Those pictures aren't going to be leaving heavy rotation in campaign ads any time soon. People are reacting to what they're seeing right now, as well as hearing right now: Support for Afghanistan withdrawal plummets as Taliban seize controlBut once that reaction fades and the story is no longer covered, as is inevitable, what then? Large majorities have supported withdrawal; is that going to change long term? Are people really going to want to go back into Afghanistan? I just don't see this as something that moves the needle much in a year or in 2024, especially when you have the economy, COVID, the border, etc. Plus, foreign policy never has moved the needle much in elections. The account from the line intel guy is about what was making it through and whether the intelligence was being "politicized." For me, that's an important consideration, because it points to systemic problems in how U.S. foreign policy is developed and conducted. The large majorities that have supported withdrawal are, by both our admission, completely clueless as to what has been going on in Afghanistan for the past 20 years.
We'll find out soon enough. But one thing that's not going to happen. Opportunists won't stop talking about it. Those videos and pictures will play prominently in Republican attack ads.
One of my biggest grievances with we dwellers of the Internet in recent years has been this remarkable blindspot where we all seem to have forgotten we are unique and unusual amongst the citizenry. Yes. For you it's an important consideration. It's also a data point I've been using for several years now ... the politicization of the intel community. But I don't fool myself into thinking my thoughts, my opinions and my observations are reflected in the body politic at large. 90% of them don't even read the headlines that 60% of news readers don't read past.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2021 14:19:50 GMT
90% of them don't even read the headlines that 60% of news readers don't read past. But pretty much every one of them is seeing the footage I'm talking about.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Aug 18, 2021 14:24:27 GMT
The large majorities that have supported withdrawal are, by both our admission, completely clueless as to what has been going on in Afghanistan for the past 20 years. Fair enough. I just don't think they'll be paying much attention once the media coverage is over and will go back their prior position. And by whom: the same people who made this mess for the last 20 years. It's very frustrating to see Karl Rove, Leon Panetta, H.R. McMaster, David Patreaus, etc., et. al. being interviewed about this. Some of them are the same people who lied to Congress and the public about Afghan forces, ignored the blatant corruption going on, etc. And here they are again being allowed to uncritically weigh in. I wonder about that though. If they do, they'll have to walk a fine line on it given some of their previous statements supporting a withdrawal. But they'll only do it if their polling suggest its a viable attack.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Aug 18, 2021 14:33:02 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2021 14:56:06 GMT
The large majorities that have supported withdrawal are, by both our admission, completely clueless as to what has been going on in Afghanistan for the past 20 years. Fair enough. I just don't think they'll be paying much attention once the media coverage is over and will go back their prior position. And by whom: the same people who made this mess for the last 20 years. It's very frustrating to see Karl Rove, Leon Panetta, H.R. McMaster, David Patreaus, etc., et. al. being interviewed about this. Some of them are the same people who lied to Congress and the public about Afghan forces, ignored the blatant corruption going on, etc. And here they are again being allowed to uncritically weigh in. I wonder about that though. If they do, they'll have to walk a fine line on it given some of their previous statements supporting a withdrawal. But they'll only do it if their polling suggest its a viable attack.
You are likely correct on your first point. You really can't go wrong banking on the American people's capacity for self medicating and self absorption. Religion used to be the opiate of the masses. Now it's instagram and celebrity PR releases.
And you are definitely correct on your 2nd point. Karl Rove in particular should die screaming in a fire fueled by the wreckage he's done to our country and across the globe.
I'm not sure about that fine line thing tho. I talk to a lot of people with varied educational backgrounds, political persuasions and current events informational levels. Only one of them shares my resolve on this subject. The rest are looking pretty fucking wobbly. And primed for influence campaigns.
I'm not saying we're going back into Afghanistan. I'm just saying our permanent departure from Afghanistan is "not a foregone conclusion..."
|
|
|
Post by Maestro on Aug 18, 2021 15:51:56 GMT
The thing is, "not a forgone conclusion," along with Biden's "not inevitable" comment are really meaningless predictions specifically worded as to be immune from being disproven. The fact that the thing that you claimed was "not inevitable" or "not a forgone conclusion" happens doesn't actually make your prediction incorrect. In order to prove it incorrect, you have to prove that there was no way any other outcome could have happened, that no actions or circumstances of any kind could have prevented it, which is pretty much impossible to do. Oh absolutely. That's why modern political rhetoric is always referred to as "weaselly."... To be fair to Biden, and this is directed at me as much as you, he was asked the question with the word "inevitable" in it: LINKQ Is a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan now inevitable?
THE PRESIDENT: No, it is not.
Q Why?
THE PRESIDENT: Because you — the Afghan troops have 300,000 well-equipped — as well-equipped as any army in the world — and an air force against something like 75,000 Taliban. It is not inevitable.In this instance, Biden's mistake isn't an example of being a weasel, but in making the rookie mistake of repeating a damningly-worded question as a statement in his answer. A better response would have been to start by doubting the seriousness of the question. After all, nothing is inevitable. It's a silly thing to ask. He actually went for this tactic on the very next question he was asked: Q Do you trust the Taliban, Mr. President? Do you trust the Taliban, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: You — is that a serious question?But that was one question too late.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Aug 18, 2021 20:15:43 GMT
SourceTrump writing for CNN under the pen name Julia Horowitz.
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,541
|
Post by thor on Aug 19, 2021 4:29:11 GMT
Interesting, but not surprising.
|
|