President Trump speaks on 9/11

 
tribute in light

Photo by Anthony Quintano

 September 11, 2021: President Trump released two videos for 9/11, remembering our losses and encouraging Americans that we would be great again, that the Biden front of the radical left would not keep us in danger for much longer. This morning, he walked into a New York Police Department precinct and a NY Fire Department house, spending about a half hour in conversation with them, no prepared answers on note cards, no handlers.

Address on the 20th Anniversary of September 11th:*

https://rumble.com/embed/vjqyyd/?pub=4

You Will Never Be Forgotten:

https://rumble.com/embed/vjpb5b/?pub=4

President Trump in New York meeting with FDNY and NYPD members:

In the early evening, President Trump joined Sean Feucht’s Day of Prayer for America event virtually on the Mall, giving a short prepared address.

In marked contrast, the prepared remarks mouthed by Biden on a carefully produced video blamed America, pushing the Islamophobia versus Religion of Peace line first shamefully peddled by Bush 43. The authority blob sees today as a day to be stupid


* Regrettably, Ricochet continues to fail to properly interpret standard IFRAME URLs served up by Rumble in posts, although it properly displays them in Ricochet group messages.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 27 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    Clifford A. Brown:

    * Regrettably, Ricochet continues to fail to properly interpret standard IFRAME URLs served up by Rumble in posts, although it properly displays them in Ricochet group messages.

    I expect that is because Max can make direct changes to the group pages but the regular ones are served up by WordPress.  They have to choose to support it.

    • #1
  2. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Wow.  Trump: I can’t say if I’m running or not running because of campaign finance laws.

    Which only apply if you’re running.  “But you’ll be happy.”  Interesting.

    • #2
  3. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat
    @FrontSeatCat

    That totally made my day – it made me a little choked up because you could tell they really appreciated being appreciated! They’re on the front lines every day – even the short ones!! Thank you for posting this!

    • #3
  4. ToryWarWriter Thatcher
    ToryWarWriter
    @ToryWarWriter

    Judge Mental (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown:

    * Regrettably, Ricochet continues to fail to properly interpret standard IFRAME URLs served up by Rumble in posts, although it properly displays them in Ricochet group messages.

    I expect that is because Max can make direct changes to the group pages but the regular ones are served up by WordPress. They have to choose to support it.

    I knew it!  Don gave me all kinds of heck over my inability to get Rumble to work on a page.

    • #4
  5. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Predictably, Democratic Representatives Pramila Jayapal, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Judy Chu chose this date to introduce a resolution addressing the “hate, discrimination, racism and xenophobia that Arab, Muslim, Middle Eastern, South Asian and Sikh communities across America continue to experience two decades after 9/11”.

    I’ve run out of words to express my contempt of these parasites.  My only remaining question is who I detest more; the above individuals or the dullards who send them to Washington.

    • #5
  6. Gary Robbins Reagan
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    While Biden and W are speaking in New York, Pennsylvania and/or DC, Trump is providing ringside commentary at a 9/11 boxing match.  I thought that this was a parody.  No.  Trump is celebrating the 20 year anniversary of a boxing match by giving a ringside commentary.  I guess we all have our own priorities.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/09/08/trump-commentary-evander-holyfield-september-eleventh/ 

    • #6
  7. ToryWarWriter Thatcher
    ToryWarWriter
    @ToryWarWriter

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    While Biden and W are speaking in New York, Pennsylvania and/or DC, Trump is providing ringside commentary at a 9/11 boxing match. I thought that this was a parody. No. Trump is celebrating the 20 year anniversary of a boxing match by giving a ringside commentary. I guess we all have our own priorities. https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/09/08/trump-commentary-evander-holyfield-september-eleventh/

    President Trump went and visited and spoke to Firefighters and NYPD officers earlier today in New York.  He took unscripted questions from heroes who every day work to save the lives and make things better for people.

    The two people you mentioned had the victims and heroes of 9/11 roped off from them and never took a questions from anyone.

    I mean seriously this was a poor rejoinder.  The fact that you dont know about Trumps earlier work today.  Is a poor showing of whatever source your choosing to get your news from.

    Image

     

    The speech W gave was disgusting and despicable.  He sanctioned Torture.  Hes a war criminal.  And should be in prison.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    • #7
  8. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Clifford A. Brown:

    https://rumble.com/embed/vjqyyd/?pub=4

    You Will Never Be Forgotten:

    https://rumble.com/embed/vjpb5b/?pub=4

    Clickable.

     

    • #8
  9. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    The Reticulator @thereticulator

    Clickable.

    Thanks for the nudge. Fixed them.

    • #9
  10. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat
    @FrontSeatCat

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    While Biden and W are speaking in New York, Pennsylvania and/or DC, Trump is providing ringside commentary at a 9/11 boxing match. I thought that this was a parody. No. Trump is celebrating the 20 year anniversary of a boxing match by giving a ringside commentary. I guess we all have our own priorities. https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/09/08/trump-commentary-evander-holyfield-september-eleventh/

    President Trump went and visited and spoke to Firefighters and NYPD officers earlier today in New York. He took unscripted questions from heroes who every day work to save the lives and make things better for people.

    The two people you mentioned had the victims and heroes of 9/11 roped off from them and never took a questions from anyone.

    I mean seriously this was a poor rejoinder. The fact that you dont know about Trumps earlier work today. Is a poor showing of whatever source your choosing to get your news from.

    Image

     

    The speech W gave was disgusting and despicable. He sanctioned Torture. Hes a war criminal. And should be in prison.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Gary – Not only that, Trump was very well received. Everyone wanted their picture taken with him – and one of the officers asked if he’s not going to run again for president, could he run for mayor of New York? They cheered him inside and outside. The police officers gave him a special pin and asked that he sign their guest book.  He was there to thank them – that’s all.

    People brought their kids to see him. It’s not his job to go to the three sites and give speeches – it’s Biden’s job and his administration. I don’t fault W – he was there so he was a good choice. Can you imagine if we had Al Gore? 

    • #10
  11. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    According to the news Trump played golf all day while the other President acted Presidential. You can’t disrupt their narrative after all. 

    • #11
  12. D.A. Venters Member
    D.A. Venters
    @DAVenters

    Clifford A. Brown:

    In marked contrast, the prepared remarks mouthed by Biden on a carefully produced video blamed America, pushing the Islamophobia versus Religion of Peace line first shamefully peddled by Bush 43. 

    I’ve seen this sentiment voiced a few times on Ricochet lately. What is the thinking here? That Bush should have infuriated peaceful Muslims around the world by declaring their religion evil, made it a religious war, and that would somehow have helped reduce terrorist attacks? Do you think Muslims around the world would have said, “Oh Jeez, I had no idea Islam was so violent. I’m going to convert now!”

    As conducted by Bush and his successors, the war on terror has resulted in exactly zero 9/11 scale follow up attacks in the US.  Would that have been the case if he had, in effect, declared war on Islam? Would that be he case if Islam were really as violent as its detractors portray? 

     

    • #12
  13. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    Would that have been the case if he had, in effect, declared war on Islam?

    Those are the only two choices?

    Declare Islam a “religion of peace” a manifestly untrue statement (see Dar Al Harb vs Dar Al Islam)

    Or declare war on Islam?

    No middle ground? How about Bush doesn’t make platitudes about Islam and he doesn’t declare war on it as well. Could we be saying that is a choice too?

    Edited to change “delete” to “declare” dang autocorrect.

    • #13
  14. D.A. Venters Member
    D.A. Venters
    @DAVenters

    Instugator (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    Would that have been the case if he had, in effect, declared war on Islam?

    Those are the only two choices?

    Declare Islam a “religion of peace” a manifestly untrue statement (see Dar Al Harb vs Dar Al Islam)

    Or declare war on Islam?

    No middle ground? How about Bush doesn’t make platitudes about Islam and he doesn’t delete war on it as well. Could we be saying that is a choice too?

    Of course. But what harm do the platitudes do? He’s trying to reassure potential Muslim allies in the war on terror that Americans don’t consider this a religious war. What’s the harm in that?

    • #14
  15. Gary Robbins Reagan
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    W. also denounced domestic terrorists, alluding to the 1/6 Capitol rioters.  Good for W.  See:  https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/09/11/bush-calls-americans-confront-domestic-and-foreign-terrorists/8299807002/,  https://www.reuters.com/world/us/george-w-bush-calls-out-threat-domestic-terrorism-911-anniversary-2021-09-11/, and  https://www.newsweek.com/george-bush-delights-democrats-infuriates-maga-world-veiled-jan-6-9-11-comparison-1628208

    • #15
  16. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Predictably, Democratic Representatives Pramila Jayapal, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Judy Chu chose this date to introduce a resolution addressing the “hate, discrimination, racism and xenophobia that Arab, Muslim, Middle Eastern, South Asian and Sikh communities across America continue to experience two decades after 9/11”.

    I’ve run out of words to express my contempt of these parasites. My only remaining question is who I detest more; the above individuals or the dullards who send them to Washington.

    Maybe they intended “Middle-Eastern” to include Jews? That would be progress. 

    • #16
  17. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    Instugator (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    Would that have been the case if he had, in effect, declared war on Islam?

    Those are the only two choices?

    Declare Islam a “religion of peace” a manifestly untrue statement (see Dar Al Harb vs Dar Al Islam)

    Or declare war on Islam?

    No middle ground? How about Bush doesn’t make platitudes about Islam and he doesn’t delete war on it as well. Could we be saying that is a choice too?

    Of course. But what harm do the platitudes do? He’s trying to reassure potential Muslim allies in the war on terror that Americans don’t consider this a religious war. What’s the harm in that?

    It actually disempowered truly moderate potential allies and treated Muslims as children. The adult and respectful speech was given by President Trump in 2017, clearly stating what the Arab heads of state knew, indeed echoing what Egyptian President Al-Sisi first dared say: that Islamic countries had an internal problem with the way the religion was being preached and practiced.

    • #17
  18. D.A. Venters Member
    D.A. Venters
    @DAVenters

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    Instugator (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    Would that have been the case if he had, in effect, declared war on Islam?

    Those are the only two choices?

    Declare Islam a “religion of peace” a manifestly untrue statement (see Dar Al Harb vs Dar Al Islam)

    Or declare war on Islam?

    No middle ground? How about Bush doesn’t make platitudes about Islam and he doesn’t delete war on it as well. Could we be saying that is a choice too?

    Of course. But what harm do the platitudes do? He’s trying to reassure potential Muslim allies in the war on terror that Americans don’t consider this a religious war. What’s the harm in that?

    It actually disempowered truly moderate potential allies and treated Muslims as children.

    How so? I’m not asking rhetorically, I really don’t claim to know much about it. 

    The adult and respectful speech was given by President Trump in 2017, clearly stating what the Arab heads of state knew, indeed echoing what Egyptian President Al-Sisi first dared say: that Islamic countries had an internal problem with the way the religion was being preached and practiced.

    Isn’t that the obvious implication of saying Islam is a religion of peace? You’re saying these certain terrorist groups, who obviously aren’t peaceful, espouse a perverted form of it.  Seems to me, by emphasizing the peaceful side, you avoid putting pressure on moderate Muslims to side with the radicals.

     

    • #18
  19. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown:

    In marked contrast, the prepared remarks mouthed by Biden on a carefully produced video blamed America, pushing the Islamophobia versus Religion of Peace line first shamefully peddled by Bush 43.

    I’ve seen this sentiment voiced a few times on Ricochet lately. What is the thinking here? That Bush should have infuriated peaceful Muslims around the world by declaring their religion evil, made it a religious war, and that would somehow have helped reduce terrorist attacks? Do you think Muslims around the world would have said, “Oh Jeez, I had no idea Islam was so violent. I’m going to convert now!”

    As conducted by Bush and his successors, the war on terror has resulted in exactly zero 9/11 scale follow up attacks in the US. Would that have been the case if he had, in effect, declared war on Islam? Would that be he case if Islam were really as violent as its detractors portray?

    He could have kept his mouth shut.

    • #19
  20. Brian M Boyce Coolidge
    Brian M Boyce
    @Brian M Boyce

    This Biden- Trump binary that Ricochet members are engaging in is sad and mistaken.  Both Trump and Biden were wrong in their desire to withdraw from Afghanistan.  The only saving grace that Trump possesses in this respect is the fact that he didn’t do it, that he ostensibly delayed it until after his reelection so that he could claim that he had laid the groundwork for a withdraw prior to the 2020 election.  His fundamental premise, however, is and was just as mistaken as Biden’s.  

    Trump recognized a terror group (the Taliban) as the legitimate authority to negotiate with about the future of Afghanistan.

    Trump stabbed the legitimate authority (Afghan government) in the back before, during, and after the Doha negotiations.

    Trump lambasted the Obama administration for releasing five, count them, five Taliban leaders from GITMO in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl.  Trump then forced the Afghan government to release five THOUSAND Taliban, ISIS, and Al Qaeda fighters from their prisons in some sort of confidence building exercise with the terror group.

    These were all foolish and misguided.  Trump’s plan was Biden’s plan and vice-versa.  The best option in Afghanistan was to remain with an adequate force in order to back up the Afghani government and to maintain the intelligence assets, special forces assets, and air power necessary to prevent massing of the enemy and to continue to conduct anti-terror strikes with special ops.

    As a side note, we could have maintained listening posts in Afghanistan to monitor China’s space program and missile programs in Western China.  This was a BIG mistake, if you happen to believe that China is slowly forming an existential threat to the United States.

    Now, because of Trump’s negotiation with the Taliban and Biden’s foolish follow-through, ALL OF OUR ALLIANCES are at risk.  NATO is shaken to its core, we actually endangered NATO troops in Afghanistan with our foolish pullout and ensuing disaster.  NATO is at serious risk.

    Don’t be surprised if Russia makes a play on our NATO allies in the Baltic very soon.  Do not be surprised if China makes a move on Taiwan.  The U.S. is not a serious country, and that is a bipartisan sickness.   The stability of the world is at stake and all of this bipartisan folly risks thermonuclear disaster.

    • #20
  21. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Brian M Boyce (View Comment):

    This Biden- Trump binary that Ricochet members are engaging in is sad and mistaken. Both Trump and Biden were wrong in their desire to withdraw from Afghanistan. The only saving grace that Trump possesses in this respect is the fact that he didn’t do it, that he ostensibly delayed it until after his reelection so that he could claim that he had laid the groundwork for a withdraw prior to the 2020 election. His fundamental premise, however, is and was just as mistaken as Biden’s.

    Trump recognized a terror group (the Taliban) as the legitimate authority to negotiate with about the future of Afghanistan.

    Trump stabbed the legitimate authority (Afghan government) in the back before, during, and after the Doha negotiations.

    Trump lambasted the Obama administration for releasing five, count them, five Taliban leaders from GITMO in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl. Trump then forced the Afghan government to release five THOUSAND Taliban, ISIS, and Al Qaeda fighters from their prisons in some sort of confidence building exercise with the terror group.

    These were all foolish and misguided. Trump’s plan was Biden’s plan and vice-versa. The best option in Afghanistan was to remain with an adequate force in order to back up the Afghani government and to maintain the intelligence assets, special forces assets, and air power necessary to prevent massing of the enemy and to continue to conduct anti-terror strikes with special ops.

    As a side note, we could have maintained listening posts in Afghanistan to monitor China’s space program and missile programs in Western China. This was a BIG mistake, if you happen to believe that China is slowly forming an existential threat to the United States.

    Now, because of Trump’s negotiation with the Taliban and Biden’s foolish follow-through, ALL OF OUR ALLIANCES are at risk. NATO is shaken to its core, we actually endangered NATO troops in Afghanistan with our foolish pullout and ensuing disaster. NATO is at serious risk.

    Don’t be surprised if Russia makes a play on our NATO allies in the Baltic very soon. Do not be surprised if China makes a move on Taiwan. The U.S. is not a serious country, and that is a bipartisan sickness. The stability of the world is at stake and all of this bipartisan folly risks thermonuclear disaster.

    This neglects the question: Who was advising Trump his last year in office and Biden his first months in office?  I don’t know who, but there seems to be a consistent process and goal involved.

    • #21
  22. Brian M Boyce Coolidge
    Brian M Boyce
    @Brian M Boyce

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Brian M Boyce (View Comment):

    This Biden- Trump binary that Ricochet members are engaging in is sad and mistaken. Both Trump and Biden were wrong in their desire to withdraw from Afghanistan. The only saving grace that Trump possesses in this respect is the fact that he didn’t do it, that he ostensibly delayed it until after his reelection so that he could claim that he had laid the groundwork for a withdraw prior to the 2020 election. His fundamental premise, however, is and was just as mistaken as Biden’s.

    Trump recognized a terror group (the Taliban) as the legitimate authority to negotiate with about the future of Afghanistan.

    Trump stabbed the legitimate authority (Afghan government) in the back before, during, and after the Doha negotiations.

    Trump lambasted the Obama administration for releasing five, count them, five Taliban leaders from GITMO in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl. Trump then forced the Afghan government to release five THOUSAND Taliban, ISIS, and Al Qaeda fighters from their prisons in some sort of confidence building exercise with the terror group.

    These were all foolish and misguided. Trump’s plan was Biden’s plan and vice-versa. The best option in Afghanistan was to remain with an adequate force in order to back up the Afghani government and to maintain the intelligence assets, special forces assets, and air power necessary to prevent massing of the enemy and to continue to conduct anti-terror strikes with special ops.

    As a side note, we could have maintained listening posts in Afghanistan to monitor China’s space program and missile programs in Western China. This was a BIG mistake, if you happen to believe that China is slowly forming an existential threat to the United States.

    Now, because of Trump’s negotiation with the Taliban and Biden’s foolish follow-through, ALL OF OUR ALLIANCES are at risk. NATO is shaken to its core, we actually endangered NATO troops in Afghanistan with our foolish pullout and ensuing disaster. NATO is at serious risk.

    Don’t be surprised if Russia makes a play on our NATO allies in the Baltic very soon. Do not be surprised if China makes a move on Taiwan. The U.S. is not a serious country, and that is a bipartisan sickness. The stability of the world is at stake and all of this bipartisan folly risks thermonuclear disaster.

    This neglects the question: Who was advising Trump his last year in office and Biden his first months in office? I don’t know who, but there seems to be a consistent process and goal involved.

    The guidance comes from two different sources.  They are both anti-American. The left has been anti-American since the 60s and now we have a Trump era version of the anti-Americanism emerge on the right.  They both see our influence in the world as malign, and they seek to end it.  They are both profoundly mistaken.

    • #22
  23. ToryWarWriter Thatcher
    ToryWarWriter
    @ToryWarWriter

    Trump and Biden were wrong in their desire to withdraw from Afghanistan.  The only saving grace that Trump possesses in this respect is the fact that he didn’t do it, that he ostensibly delayed it until after his reelection so that he could claim that he had laid the groundwork for a withdraw prior to the 2020 election.  His fundamental premise, however, is and was just as mistaken as Biden’s.  

    –Fundamentally disagree.  The USA won in Afghanistan and then promptly created a fresh insurgency.  There was so many stupid short term decisions that created the Taliban reborn.

    Trump recognized a terror group (the Taliban) as the legitimate authority to negotiate with about the future of Afghanistan.

    –How do you think insurgencies end?  They end when the occupying power negotiates a settlement with the insurgency or they crush them.  The USA had previously crushed the Taliban, then broke that surrender and created a fresh rebellion.  The British government worked out a deal with the IRA to end the Troubles.  The USA government worked out a deal with the Phillipines the French in so many of there colonies. 

    Trump stabbed the legitimate authority (Afghan government) in the back before, during, and after the Doha negotiations.

    –The only legitimacy the ANA had was the backing of foreign powers.  To the vast majority of Afghanis the Kabul government were a bunch of bandits and drug dealers, who occupied the country and spread terror.  A fact that you and the guys at Commentary don’t want to admit to the vast majority of Afghanistan, the Taliban are an improvement.  At least the Taliban, follow their religion, don’t try to force transgenderism down them, or rape their children. 

    Trump lambasted the Obama administration for releasing five, count them, five Taliban leaders from GITMO in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl.  Trump then forced the Afghan government to release five THOUSAND Taliban, ISIS, and Al Qaeda fighters from their prisons in some sort of confidence building exercise with the terror group.

    –So what. 

    These were all foolish and misguided.  Trump’s plan was Biden’s plan and vice-versa.  The best option in Afghanistan was to remain with an adequate force in order to back up the Afghani government and to maintain the intelligence assets, special forces assets, and air power necessary to prevent massing of the enemy and to continue to conduct anti-terror strikes with special ops.

    –That was a losing strategy.  It could last another 5 years, the Afghan papers pretty much proved that unless a fresh insertion of another 50000 US troops the ANA was slowly being dismembered.

    As a side note, we could have maintained listening posts in Afghanistan to monitor China’s space program and missile programs in Western China.  This was a BIG mistake, if you happen to believe that China is slowly forming an existential threat to the United States.

    –You can do that with space satellites. Also I fail to see how leaving tens of thousands of US troops dependent on Russia or Pakistan was ever a good idea.  I loved reading about how during the Obama surge the US Army had to pay the Taliban to escort there supplies in order to attack the other Taliban.

    Now, because of Trump’s negotiation with the Taliban and Biden’s foolish follow-through, ALL OF OUR ALLIANCES are at risk.  NATO is shaken to its core, we actually endangered NATO troops in Afghanistan with our foolish pullout and ensuing disaster.  NATO is at serious risk.

    –What is the purpose of NATO?  Trumps negotiations with the Taliban were not foolish.  It’s the only way to win a war.  Unless you prefer to leave thousands of troops hostage in the centre of central asia, to the whims of the Chinese, Russias and Pakistan.  Cause if there ever were a major conflict with say China, all those soldiers would have been dead.  Having a base in that par of the world surrounded by a sea of enemies, is probably one of the dumbest military ideas in the last 100 years.

    –I also note Trumps negotiations were done in conjunction with our allies, and would have likely involved continued cooperation with NATO in any pullout.  Unlike Biden.

    Don’t be surprised if Russia makes a play on our NATO allies in the Baltic very soon.  Do not be surprised if China makes a move on Taiwan.  The U.S. is not a serious country, and that is a bipartisan sickness.   The stability of the world is at stake and all of this bipartisan folly risks thermonuclear disaster.

    –I don’t think Russia will be doing a play against the Baltics.  Not really what Putin wants at this point.  China is going to go after Taiwan no matter what.

    –I do have a question for you.  I didn’t serve.  I tried to but the CAF can be a pain to join.  Very bureaucratic.  But I am curious if you did?  I am curious of anyone who is fine with sending thousands of young people in perpetuity to face dangers in a hostile land.  If they actually served themselves.

    • #23
  24. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    Flicker (View Comment):

    This neglects the question: Who was advising Trump his last year in office and Biden his first months in office? I don’t know who, but there seems to be a consistent process and goal involved.

    We know who was advising Trump and many of them were still advising Biden. The big difference is that Trump listened and Biden ignored that advice.

    The political will to maintain active operations in Afghanistan was lost. Lot of reasons for that, but the messaging to why we were there was not well done as it became mired in politics. The Democrats wanted to portray it was a Republican folly, but then when Obama was in office realized that they couldn’t leave. Biden wanted to as VP, and did as President to disastrous result.

    The military advice was always to stay and never to fully leave. The political reality was that the American people wanted out because we lack the strength and cohesion for a long conflict. This is especially true when the pundits and the politicians are more concerned with scoring plling points than with doing what is best for the country.

    So, Trump and Biden are symptoms of a larger problem, one that corrupts out politics, and it really doesn’t matter who is in the White House or the Congress, the decision making is terrible.

    That being said, Biden’s implementation was so utterly stupid that it would call I to mind his capability to lead the nation if we weren’t so screwed up as a nation that there are still about 20% that strongly approve of his actions in Afghanistan. 

    • #24
  25. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):

    –Fundamentally disagree. The USA won in Afghanistan and then promptly created a fresh insurgency. There was so many stupid short term decisions that created the Taliban reborn.

    Exactly correct.  Our goal was terrorists in caves is better than terrorists in planes (Great quote by @roblong)

    Trump recognized a terror group (the Taliban) as the legitimate authority to negotiate with about the future of Afghanistan.

    –How do you think insurgencies end? They end […].

    Once again, spot on.  You win by getting the people to turn on the insurgents.  There were vast swaths of Afghanistan that were never turned and never were going t0 turn.  In many ways Afghanistan is less a country than a arbitrary border drawn around a set of tribes that all hate each other at various levels.  Our best outcome by 2020 was to choose to allow Afghanistan to partition itself into two basic camps.  One that was closely aligned with the US centered on Kabul and the main cities, and the other the rural areas where the Taliban might hold sway.  This is acceptable as long as the central areas are capable of holding their own territory (even if it requires our help).

    Trump stabbed the legitimate authority (Afghan government) in the back before, during, and after the Doha negotiations.

    –The only legitimacy the ANA had was the backing of foreign powers. To the vast majority of Afghanis the Kabul government were a bunch of bandits and drug dealers, who occupied the country and spread terror. A fact that you and the guys at Commentary don’t want to admit to the vast majority of Afghanistan, the Taliban are an improvement. At least the Taliban, follow their religion, don’t try to force transgenderism down them, or rape their children.

    This was a recognition that the Kabul gov’t was corrupt and inept.  The ANA was going to be the foundation of a new Afghan gov’t as its leaders learned how the west military worked and how a pluralistic gov’t was organized.  This was going to take 10-20 years, at least.  The upside for us is that our commitment to them was small compared to fighting the Taliban.

    Trump lambasted the Obama administration for releasing five, […]. Trump then […] release five THOUSAND Taliban, ISIS, and Al Qaeda fighters from their prisons in some sort of confidence building exercise with the terror group.

    –So what.

    Two things on that.  Those were, essentially, POWs and were going to be released as part of the end of hostilities.  Even so, we had oversight on who was released, until the gov’t fell and everyone got out.  Do you think that after a conflict ends that POWS should be kept interred indefinitely?  That would likely violate the Geneva Conventions (even the parts we are signatories to, not just the idiotic ones designed to allow communist insurgents to topple gov’ts).

    • #25
  26. Brian M Boyce Coolidge
    Brian M Boyce
    @Brian M Boyce

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):

     

    I was a Marine infantryman and jet pilot for twenty years.  I also working as an intel collector and know a thing or two about collection and the necessity of human intelligence and contact on the ground.  Satellites are no substitute for CIA operations on the ground. 

    • #26
  27. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Brian M Boyce (View Comment):

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):

     

    I was a Marine infantryman and jet pilot for twenty years. I also working as an intel collector and know a thing or two about collection and the necessity of human intelligence and contact on the ground. Satellites are no substitute for CIA operations on the ground.

    I believe you should have explained that to Stansfield Turner.  He wouldn’t have listened but at least you would have had the pleasure of trying.

    • #27