In the real world there are more people involved than just Joe Biden. There's plenty of blame to go around.
The buck stops with Biden with regards America's recent pull-out.
That doesn't mean he's the only one to blame for this, there's plenty of people who's actions have led to this. The "buck stops" means nobody else gets the blame in the future.
that suggest this was avoidable
But the bomber doesn't appear to have attacked aircraft or the airport itself. No matter how far out they pushed out the perimeter there would be a weak spot somewhere in the vicinity where people looking to get out would congregate.
At the end of the day Biden is the president. He takes responsibility. He did not have to follow any previous arrangements. That's the gig.
Talking about Trump is utterly irrelevant.
It's completely RELEVANT. This is Trump's deal in action FFS. Absolutely nothing happens in a vacuum.
I know this is a difficult thing for some to understand. But there it is nonetheless. Putting the entirety of blame on one man's shoulders is simple minded.
I think North Korea is an example of it working. Everyone knows the guy is batsh*t crazy and capable of anything. And as a result nobody dares to be too aggressive.
Wouldn't the fact that Kim has increased NK's arsenal of nuclear and other weapons constitute a sign of someone daring to be aggressive and belie the claim that Trump's tactics were successful to any significant degree? Anyway, hadn't trump made it pretty clear he was intent on getting his country out of these infernal forever wars, I think they'd have easily concluded his heart wasn't all that in it.
Complete joke sending them in there in first place. What were they ever going to do?
They had to cadge a lift in and one out.
How many divisions would you want to go in?
You do know IEDs were hammering them even when they had 100,000 in the country?
They left it too late, they should have secured the area long before and even never left in first place.
If anybody bothered watching the Rory Stewart piece you would see it is worse than Saigon.
In Saigon the US were fleeing a proper army, an army that had a proper command structure and was relatively well equipped in comparison to the US forces and the US allies had been defeated on the battlefield and in the media backhome the war effort was so unpopular they had been rioting.
In Kabul the US are pulling out after their proxy allies ran away, they are pulling out not in the face of millions of battle hardened well trained well resourced army, but a bunch of fighters, albeit very determined and battle hardened, that usually turn up on the back of Toyoat hiluxs before they were gifted all the American kit left by the government forces.
It makes the US look very week, it makes the NATO look like a joke.
The winners in this are the jihadists, the Russians and the Chinese.
It is way worse than Saigon.
im not sure the Russians or the Chinese benefit from instability close by. They do benefit from the drop in respect for the US
the biggest gains for the Jihadists in the last 20 years has been the US attacks on secular dictators in the ME and Asia. .
Are the images that CNN showing right now from the area where we’ve already seen videos of people walking through the sewage water?
Ok Russia gains because NATO look weak, because the Americans basically went it alone to an extent and Trump's start with distancing US from NATO has only been taken further with this.
Who is going to now count on the US. First the Kurds were thrown to the wolves and now Afghans.
And all it would have taken is US special forces, advisors and air power to show up every so often to remind the opposing side.
Granted the US often took the side of some very nasty individuals and regimes down through the years, but they normally stood by them if they played ball.
Russia will probably use neighbouring ex Soviet states as buffer to Afghanistan and don't forget Russia won't pussy foot around with separatists and jihadists in their own country.
China benefits likewise because it weakens US.
China is playing hardball in South China Sea, is pushing influence in Africa.
There are no real gains here for either Russia or China.
There may be a momentarily perception of "weakness" regarding the US or NATO. But so what. There's nothing to capitalise on.
That suggests you think he couldn't have done better and he did the best he could.
Ah now Tony. Stop.
Biden is president of America. The buck stops with him.
...which means nobody else gets the blame in the future.
That doesn't mean that he's the only person to blame for this.
Biden is responsible for this withdrawal. It happened under his watch.
We're talking about a situation that's been 20 years in the making and a withdrawal agreement that was signed in discussions held by the last administration. Trying to place the blame on a single person, no matter who it is, is the reasoning of a 5 year old.
Reuters reporting US troops among those killed.
Link?
Really difficult for Biden if true.
Well casualty doesn't automatically mean killed depending on how they are using the word
Now saying "a number of US servicemen have been killed"
This gets worse and worse from every vantage point by the day.
it's true
So the narrative is the US went there to stop terrorists using it as a base from which to attack the homeland and this is now how they are leaving. It's just appalling really.
Sorry, forgot to include it.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/least-four-us-military-personnel-killed-kabul-blasts-sources-2021-08-26/
Just a question for those who are rightly saying that the withdrawal is bidens fault which it is because he’s the president. Had this been trump, Obama, or bush that it happened under would the blame be exactly the same ?
I think you already know the answer to that.
Well I’m not assuming anything which is why I’m asking the question. Bar a couple who are known trump posters who will back up anything he did or said come what may, I’m genuinely interested what the vast majority of posters here would say to this question.
American troops were getting killed in Afghanistan every year. There were 2,448 soldiers and 3,846. contractors and civilians killed over 20 years i.e. 6294 over the course of the conflict. About 300 a year. Most weren't reported. People appalled at this should be aware of those facts, if you want more soldiers killed, stay there.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c9236bc67b608c3603b1ed089c896282.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/87962ff026856470eacf12f9c3179c90.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b9d7cf56a75eee6d7dd35aa28294f673.svg)
