Trump is telling lies about withdrawing from Afghanistan.

[ad_1]

Former President Donald Trump tells lies about how he handled the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, opening up a new way for Trump-dazed Republicans to attack President Joe Biden.

Trump released the following statement on Thursday, amid the collapse of the Afghan army in the wake of Bidens’ antics:

If our 2020 Presidential election was not a shock and if I were president today, the world would find that our withdrawal from Afghanistan was a withdrawal based on conditions. I have personally had discussions with top Taliban leaders where they understand what they are doing now is unacceptable. It would be a very different and more successful retreat, and the Taliban understood that better than anyone.

This is a false series of unspoken lies on every level. His opening reference to rigged elections is, of course, the Big Lie, but the other lies are also very strong.

First, the peace agreement signed by Trump’s ambassadors with the Taliban in February 2020, in Doha, only imposed certain conditions and the Taliban is violating none of them so far. The Taliban has only agreed not to allow any individuals or groups, including al-Qaida, to use Afghan soil to threaten the security of the United States and its allies. The agreement did not prohibit the Taliban from fighting Afghan government troops or from taking over Afghan provinces alone.

Second, Trump claims he has discussions with top Taliban leaders have been overstated. A few days after the signing of the agreement, over the phone, through an interpreter, he had a discussion with a leader, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, who was the Talibans ’delegate to the Doha talks. Then, Trump said he had very good contact with Baradar, praised the Taliban for killing terrorists by some bad people, and said about the war, they were looking to end it and sought to end it. A statement released by the White House said Trump stressed the need to continue reducing violence and urged the Taliban to participate in intra-Afghan negotiations. The statement said nothing about the Baraders ’response, if any.

In other words, there is no evidence that a retreat under Trump would be more successful than going under Biden. Trumps quickly withdrew a small contingent of peace troops from Syria in Oct. (The Kurds have been instrumental in helping U.S. troops crush ISIS in northern Syria.)

Despite the lies, Trumps ’statement will no doubt be parroted by Republican congressmen and conservative pundits in the coming weeks and months. When Biden first announced his resignation in April, his critics were not talking. After all, Trump has long called for a pullout; in fact, he first supported Bidens ’decision. Although the Taliban began moving Afghan security forces and occupying entire provinces earlier this summer, critics remained unsure how to respond, especially as polls showed most of the Americans who agreed to Bidens’ move.

Critics, however, have received word from their leader-in-exile: The withdrawal is not a bad thing, but the withdrawal under Trump may be subject to conditions; it will be more successful. When things get worse in Afghanistan, as they almost certainly will, this will be their mantra for attacking foreign policy in Bidens and for acquitting themselves of complicity.

None of this is to deny that Biden will handle the situation badly. The latest evidence came on Thursday, when the Pentagon announced it would send 8,000 troops back to Afghanistan to expedite the evacuation of the U.S. embassy in Kabul5,000 from bases in the Middle East, 3,000 (a full combat brigade) from in Ft. Hood, Texas. If the withdrawal was more carefully planned, the evacialor even a major personnel drop occurred early this summer, before the last thousand U.S. troops in the country were withdrawn.

When the retreat began, U.S. officials still said Afghan security forces could fight the Taliban for another six to 12 months of plenty of time to plan for a smooth transition. It’s interesting to know which intelligence agencies predicted that Afghanistan’s military, along with it, the government could last a long time. The retired officers I spoke to at the time were skeptical that the Afghan army could last even a few months without the close support of the US and NATO, logistics, intelligence, repair and maintenance personnel, medevac and operating units, and looking at the helicopter that the Biden administration sees now accepting.

The 20-year war in Afghanistan has been one misbegotten adventure after another, from almost the beginning. The initial missionrooting al-Qaida, ousted the Taliban from power, and killed or captured Osama bin Laden, in response to the terrorist attacks on September 11. The add-onsestablishing a central government (in a decentralized country run by warlords), building a civil society, and promoting something like a democratic Western style was a dream profit. The vision had a glimmer of hope and possibility earlier, in 2003-04, when the U.S. commander, a creative three-star general named David Barno, launched small counterinsurgency projects that hiring volunteers from corporations and non-profits to train Afghan officials. in the basics of governance and governance, starting economic assistance and justice reform programs to capture the hearts and minds of the people. But President George W. Bush returned resources, turned his gaze to Iraq, and by the time the attention returned to Afghanistan, the effort had become excessive on militarization and all was overwhelming. As money flowed, corruption arose; the Kabul government has never won the trust of the people; the Taliban moved to fill the vacuums.

Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and the MyPillow Guy Are At Big Work Filmed Ciot Riot. When the FBI Called, I Faced a Vexing Dilemma. Immoral Lifestyle Republicans Won’t Condemn AA Rogue DOJ Lawyer Almost Keeps Trump in Office

Biden, to his credit, acknowledged this when he was still Barack Obamas vice president. In National Security Council debates in 2009-10, Biden was almost alone in opposing a broad troop or a nation-building campaign, rather than arguing for a small troop increase to train and give of furniture the Afghan army. Obama sided with the wave faction but, 18 months later, Biden was seen to be right. He returned to the uprising, abandoned the country’s development, restored the level of soldiers to 5,800, and limited their missions to training and supporting Afghanistan’s military while also countering terrorists on the Pakistan border.

Ten years later, entering the White House as president, Biden understands a certain allergy to all things Afghan. Enthusiastic to address more immediate issues, internal and foreign, he aspires to stick to the area together and reduce the entire region, understand. There has long been a strong case for departure to Afghanistan. If Biden kept a small number of troops there, and also made the next three or four presidents, it would not be much good. But it probably won’t get worse either. Meanwhile, no American troops have been killed since February 2020.

Is it necessary to get out very quickly, completely, and without thinking? Biden was probably furious with those questions for hours. And now that Trump has made it a partisan issue, however loving, Republicans will push the questions as far as they can.

[ad_2]