|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Build back better /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1631252447 Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 09/09/21 at 22:40:47 |
|
Title: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/09/21 at 22:40:47 It's not really a great slogan because it implies Destroy Then Build it back, bigger and stronger But Biden IS off to a pretty good start. Handed Afghanistan and a Taliban that had been very diminished.. And Bah GAWD he built THEM back,, much better. Stunning Suck Sess |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/10/21 at 07:58:21 I have seen zero evidence that the Taliban had been very diminished. If anything their core strength and general influence has gone up in the past 6 years. In 2001 the estimate was just under 50,000 in core strength. By 2009 it was estimated that their core strength was at it's lowest being between 10,000 and 11,000. It's widely accepted that 2008 - 2009 was the period of least Taliban control and numbers. Of course this is from people who work/live there so they probably don't know as much as people sitting safely on their couch in the US. By 2015 they were back up to 50,000, and if you include support elements it was closer to 65,000. The numbers now look to be 75,000 or more. Very diminished I would say applied about 14 years ago. Looking over Trump's direct control transfer to the Taliban, with no invitation to the US assisted Afghanistan Government, I don't know how anyone can say that the Taliban takeover would not have happened. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/10/21 at 09:47:28 Joe said it would NOT happen for a while.. But he was wrong. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/10/21 at 13:52:18 Regardless of your understanding,, the Taliban are in better shape now,, which Is the definition of Build Back Better. You Go Joe,you pudding brained tyrant |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/10/21 at 15:16:20 "Joe said it would NOT happen for a while.. But he was wrong." This is true. I believe Trump was intending to bypass this event by just handing control directly over to the Taliban. This would have placed them in even better shape as well, most likely better than what we have now at least along the diplomacy spectrum. I see the reasoning behind this as I never expected the Afghan Government to maintain things for long. Not just due to corruption but also the high casualty rates. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/10/21 at 19:07:11 believe Trump was intending to bypass this event by just handing control directly over to the Taliban. You win! Dumbest thing ever said in this forum. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/10/21 at 20:56:13 You win! Dumbest thing ever said in this forum. Can you breakdown what you think the Doha Agreement resulted in? "Ongoing talks" or we would do what exactly? Not go back. Prisoner exchange and then what happened? Not fewer Taliban attacks that's for sure. The people you LISTEN to have what to say about Kunduz and Helmand? You think that agreement was actually designed to hand over control to anyone other than the Taliban? |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/10/21 at 21:25:18 Control, maybe, Apparently the Afghan people were not up to defending themselves from the Taliban. The time of year is important according to what I've heard. Something about the fighting season. Biden made a frikkin mess of it. But not before we got people out and I don't believe for a second we would have left them with the weapons Biden did. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/11/21 at 05:10:16 But not before we got people out and I don't believe for a second we would have left them with the weapons Biden did. What weapons do you think we left behind that were US owned. Owned not made? Oh that's right, you don't believe arms agreements with Afghanistan exist. 20 years of lies about that one, even Trump sat around lying about it. If we maintain the stance that the US never sold or gave weapons to Afghanistan we can pretend Biden left behind US owned weapons. Let's not let truth and logic get in the way now. https://www.openthebooks.com/assets/1/6/GAO_Report_-_Afghanistan_Equipment1.pdf Maybe Trump had it right: "They’ve left $83 billion worth of equipment behind, including brand new Apache helicopters, thousands of Humvee vehicles with armor guard, equipment that nobody has ever even seen before, it was so sophisticated," This is false. The US has brought 82.9 billion total since 2001. We did not leave all of that there, it's just lies. It is obvious they are using the report from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction that represents the total appropriated funding for the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund since 2001. As of June 30, about $75 billion was actually disbursed. When you LISTEN to people that were in Afghanistan what do they have to say about leaving US owned weapons behind? Are any of them actually telling you they were ordered to leave behind US owned and operational equipment? Are you even familiar at all with how that stuff is managed in the field? Of course, in all large-scale military operations, there will be items left behind, but this 83million in working US owned equipment is ridiculous. A sitting US President can't order that. "Brand new" Apache helicopters, give me a break. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/11/21 at 08:45:36 Once it was obvious that the Afghan Army would not stand, leaving equipment for the enemy was wrong. Who OWNS it stops being relevant. I know, nuance,, Who was gonna Have the equipment was obvious. Thankfully some grunts saw what was going on and sabotaged some equipment. America AND Afghanistan would be better off today had it all been destroyed. By leaving it for the Taliban we did Afghanistan a disservice. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/11/21 at 12:59:09 "Once it was obvious that the Afghan Army would not stand, leaving equipment for the enemy was wrong. Who OWNS it stops being relevant. I know, nuance,," This is incorrect. Since you deny any arms agreements exist you can maintain this logic so your observed reality will stay in place with your opinions, but the real world isn't fooled. Destroying equipment because you "think" it might get into the wrong hands is against a number of treaty obligations whether think those exist or not. This is why politics and war are so sh!tty, you can't "win" by bombs alone. You can't just declare nuance and change the rules and the surrounding implications in the real world. "America AND Afghanistan would be better off today had it all been destroyed. By leaving it for the Taliban we did Afghanistan a disservice." I agree leaving for the Taliban was not an ideal situation, but no negotiation addressed this, including the Trump initiated ones. Imagine Biden ordered US equipment destroyed and we spent another number of months blowing sh!t up, then left. You think you would not be sitting here right now saying we did Afghanistan a disservice by leaving them helpless without any of the equipment we obviously didn't need - since we blew it up? "Thankfully some grunts saw what was going on and sabotaged some equipment." It's not like a few guys just grabbed some grenades and took care of it on behalf of the US military. There is a procedure for this as a lot of that equipment has to be dismantled for the blasts to be efficient. Looking at the damage on the aircraft alone one can see the damage would not have addressed all sensitive components under demilitarization standards. I think part of our delay earlier in the year was the dismantling of equipment. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/11/21 at 19:52:22 I don't know how you manage to turn everything into a pain. Look,, Months Not required. You can pretend to know what I would say if Biden had destroyed arms. No. You pretend I'm some petulant jerk. No. Biden fukkedUp. Destroying arms should have been done Who OWNED them means nothing. Who has them NOW????? Stop being such a snob and deal with Reality. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/11/21 at 22:18:52 "Look,, Months Not required." Based off of what? All your time in Afghanistan addressing logistics issues? I am getting this information from people who were there doing the work, and who I worked alongside. Of course you say I am lying about that which is a convenient way of reducing credibility. The acquisition and kinetic destruction of previously owned US equipment from the past 7 years of appropriated funds dispersal that you say doesn't exist, would take about 8 months based off the assessments of people in-field tasked with the distribution. But they must be wrong because people doing the job can't know more than those watching YouTube and surfing the internet. "You can pretend to know what I would say if Biden had destroyed arms. No. You pretend I'm some petulant jerk. No." I asked you a question. Is this really any different that you calling Biden my "Illustrious leader" with no knowledge of who I voted for and not one single reference of me saying anything positive or negative comparatively to Trump? "Destroying arms should have been done Who OWNED them means nothing." Incorrect. Those of us that do not deny 20 years of arms negotiations exist can accept that this is not a reality we can just get away with. It's like saying we can just dump anything we don't want in the ocean like we did in WWII. We can't. This is a violation of multiple treaties across multiple nations, the world changed since 1945 - ocean dumping is an international incident now. Blowing up stuff we gave to another country because we think they might lose it is not as easy as typing down on a keyboard. I imagine a reason you deny arms agreements ever existed with Afghanistan, or that aircraft went to Uzbekistan, or that contractors worked on older US made helicopters, is because you might actually know how ridiculous kinetic destruction of an allies' equipment really is. "Who has them NOW?????" The Taliban. They would have gotten them after the Trump Doha negotiations anyway but you can deny that by refusing to acknowledge it exists. We can't just pre-emptively blow up anything we think the Taliban might get. The real world doesn't work that way, this would have come across as a direct violation of our own agreements and an intentional weakening of the Afghanistan forces based off of a "maybe" that the Taliban would get those items. You want Reality, stop denying 2 decades of arms deals exist. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/12/21 at 00:38:30 I know arms deals existed. I wonder where they got money too. And I Really don't care about who owned it. What would the fallout be? Our allies lose faith in us? Ohh,FUKK, that is exactly what Biden accomplished And he built the Taliban back BETTER. Preach to me about How the world works. Its being run by fools |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/12/21 at 02:48:06 I know arms deals existed. http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1629980331/7#7 "Blah blah blah,, I don't buy it." So which is it? You know or you don't buy it? "And I Really don't care about who owned it. What would the fallout be? Our allies lose faith in us?" I understand you don't care, but that changes a whole lot of nothing about how US wartime conventions work. There's a number of things that could happen if we sell equipment to a country then blow it up once we decide we want to leave and say "maybe" the "enemy" (That we literally negotiated with, without our allies) might get ahold of that equipment - that isn't ours. There's an issue with killing an "enemy" that is part of a negotiated truce when they aren't engaging. You may not care but a lot of nations we have treaties with will. We negotiated with the Taliban less than a year ago , we can't just call them "the enemy" all the sudden because we decided we want to leave now without a degree of impact among our international relations. No matter what you think or Trump says, we didn't leave "brand new" Apache helicopters, we left old UH-60's with tech we stopped using in the 90's. We were going to leave them even with the previous Administration, Biden didn't change that, it was going to happen. That doesn't mean the evacuation process wasn't a complete sh!tshow. I am just saying the same thing I always do: We don't need to make up lies to make a bad decision seem worse. Just let it be a bad decision. We don't need to violate every international agreement because we decided on a poor exit strategy, just let it be a poor exit strategy. We don't need to pretend "the enemy" wasn't diplomatically recognized and that any exit strategy involved US dispersed, not owned, equipment was never going to end up in Taliban hands. It was and that's a large part of what people were complaining about back when Trump started the negotiations. There's no easy solution to getting out of Afghanistan. People sitting safe at home reading the internet aren't exactly experts. I've seen what goes on there and I couldn't begin to tell you what the best processes are. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/12/21 at 05:45:01 I'm pretty sure bailing out overnight and leaving people to be hunted down isn't very high on the list of good plans. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/12/21 at 11:42:22 I'm pretty sure bailing out overnight and leaving people to be hunted down isn't very high on the list of good plans. I agree with this. I don't agree that we should have just blown up anything we thought would end up in Taliban hands. C-130's I am not sure, nobody I know has info regarding what the contingency with those was outside of demilitarization when compromised. MRAPs, HMMVW, previous gen M4's were all going to be left behind, I knew that 6 years ago. The biometric devices are suspect. I can see those simply being abandoned by complacency - not orders. One thing to remember is there are a bunch of 18-22 year old's out there and I saw a fair amount of what I would consider to be normal levels of "Don't giva sh!t anymore" from enlisted personnel. Drones, Apaches, stuff nobody ever saw before is just politics. Something one can say because they know most people will just go along with it whether it's true or not. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/12/21 at 12:07:41 5575777F6275100 wrote:
So, no drones? No apaches? Or you just don't know either? So, allegations Now are just politics But Russia Russia Russia for years wasn't? Pardon me, but MY patience is worn Very Thin with the bullshit. I SERIOUSLY don't Giveafukk about who owned what. Where it was going to wind up was clear and obvious. Biden tried to get the Afghan president to spread the propaganda that the opposition forces were doing better than they were. I'm not typing the whole reason why he wanted that or how screwed up I'm tired of the back and forth. Everything Biden touches turns to SHEEIT. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/12/21 at 12:19:12 "So, no drones? No apaches? Or you just don't know either?" The evidence that drones or "brand new" Apaches is zero. It was said, and those words are the entirety of that evidence. "So, allegations Now are just politics But Russia Russia Russia for years wasn't?" I never said that. I actually said there wasn't enough evidence. "I SERIOUSLY don't Giveafukk about who owned what. Where it was going to wind up was clear and obvious." I know. And that still doesn't change any of the agreements you initially denied exist. Don't Givafukk, and I will still indicate how inaccurate it is to either claim arms agreements don't exist or that the US can just kinetically destroy anything they "think" will end up in the hands of a group they diplomatically recognized. This is simply not going to have the outcome you think it would. It's like saying the solution to crime in Chicago is to have the Marines blow up anything that they think criminals will use in crimes. Who cares who OWNS it if the enemy can get it. What's the worst that will happen? People lose faith in the government? |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/12/21 at 14:28:33 I see your points, I do. I am just completely dissatisfied with HOW it was done that I'm probably not willing to go with the things you seem to know. I'm just totally pisstawf at what looks like a complete failure. I don't see away to have pulled out that would have a a bigger fustercluck. You operate based on a set of rules. I Used to. My willingness to live according to The Rules has changed. I don't agree with the way things are being done. Chicago isn't Afghanistan, well,, maybe that is debatable.. If you just look at the way things are going.. I know I have a redneck approach and international relations are dealt with differently,, I'm frustrated with seeing America made a laughingstock of. It's also irritating to me watching the media work to destroy Trump, driving a bullshit Russia Russia Russia thing and not ripping into Biden while he turns everything he touches to Sheeit. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by Eegore on 09/12/21 at 14:47:02 You could change the media you consume. There are plenty of anti-Biden media outlets out there. "I don't agree with the way things are being done." I don't either. I just know that more bombs isn't the solution to that. Somewhere between armed initiatives and a high-speed withdrawal would have worked better, but I have no idea how that would have been done. |
|
Title: Re: Build back better Post by justin_o_guy2 on 09/12/21 at 17:40:36 I'm not willing to go to any msm. I just prowl a few blogs. I don't watch TV news, I don't even know where I saw the Egg attack on Elder by the screeching harpie in a gorilla mask that wasn't a hate crime because Well, because, democrat |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |