Biden's Anticipated Foreign Policy (1 Viewer)

[The_Doc_Man]

Obviously, there are a substantial number of those in Afghanistan who wanted to bring Afghanistan into the 20th century.

I guess we could settle for that much if we could get it. Of course, the 21st century would have been nicer since we are there now.

It will be a true blood bath once the Taliban starts to impose strict sharia over the citizens of Afghanistan. Human rights violations will pop up to the point of nausea. Women will have no rights. Gays will have no rights. Christians and Jews will have no rights. And Biden will be the cause of it.

 

[Steve R.]

@Isaac; Tucker Carlson is extremely sarcastic. As a piece of graveyard humor, Tucker noted that the reason the Taliban won so easily was that the Afghan people wanted nothing to do with the "woke" US culture currently sweeping the US. He also briefly highlighted several programs that were being implemented by the US in Afghanistan in support to implementing "woke" policies there. Tucker concluded with the remark that in Afghanistan, the men were not ashamed of being men.

H'mm that gave me an additional thought. Are those advocating "woke" culture a US version of the Taliban?
Like the Taliban, the US "woke" culture advocates for an intolerant theocracy. Anyone not in agreement with the "woke" theocracy are subject to immediate "cancellation".

 

[CollaTech]

20 years of freedom has been broken. Are citizens happy to be free from US or it only created fear after US abandoned them? I pity the children the most. Lots of videos are circulating the social media and its heart breaking.

 

[Steve R.]

The Babylon Bee is having a field with the Taliban takeover.
Tucker last night made a humorous statement concerning US "woke" culture and the Taliban. Who came up with this angle first, I don't know. But it carries sad implications of what the the US is "selling" to foreign nations as something that they should want to adopt. Virtually every time Biden speaks, as President of the United States, he is condemning the US as a vile racist country. Why would any country/society want to look at the US for moral leadership when the leader of the US is condemning the US. China has already made this point on the international stage. The US should not be in the business of imposing "woke" culture over the world.

Taliban Enjoys Deep Belly Laugh Over Diversity Training Materials Left Behind By U.S. Military

KABUL—According to sources in Afghanistan, the Taliban was having a "deep belly laugh" over the diversity training materials left behind by the U.S. military previously stationed there. Taliban fighters captured books like Antiracist Baby, White Fragility, and The GayBCs and collectively cracked...

babylonbee.com

CNN Praises Taliban For Wearing Masks During Attack

KABUL—Approximately twelve minutes after U.S. troops withdrew from Afghanistan, Taliban fighters have completely taken over the entire country.

babylonbee.com

Study Finds 92% Of Taliban Are Happy They Voted For Biden

KABUL—According to a survey conducted by local media in Taliban-controlled Kabul, 92% of Taliban fighters are very thankful they decided to vote for Biden in the 2020 election.

babylonbee.com

 

[Isaac]

Up until now when I think of the 'bad' characteristics of Biden, I mostly thought about financial corruption, selling influence through Hunter, all the things we already know about...Basically, just another common criminal. I didn't think of him as much of a killer like, for example, Bill Clinton. But what he did in Afghanistan changes that.

What an awful human being.

 

[AccessBlaster]

It's weird how there are very few women aboard this plane, we're they not strong enough to push their way past the hords of young men? Could be a bad sign.

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[conception_native_0123]

Only eight months into Biden's term and it's one humanitarian crisis after another and still no accountability. Impeach this embarrassment.

Are you referring to the pull out in Afghanistan as one of them?

 

[conception_native_0123]

View attachment 93698

Speak of the devil. Whoever caused this is one

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Are you referring to the pull out in Afghanistan as one of them?

Yes, because of its mismanagement. He was right to get out. In fact, once we took down Bin Laden, we should have started drawing out everyone in whom we had any interest, removing the soldiers and war pilots last. But that isn't what happened. What actually happened is a debacle that looked just like the fall of Saigon back at the end of the Vietnam conflict.

 

[harpygaggle]

As to Biden, he would not repeat the mistakes of the past. Many wrongful decisions have made and I don't know what else may happen months from now. Is it still right to trust the government we are in?

 

[Steve R.]

Is it still right to trust the government we are in?

More complicated than that. Of course, being skeptical of the government is an absolute given. The "umbrella" problem is that we are living in a period of mass hysteria. A loose amalgamation of the French Revolution, McCarthyism (by the left), Orwell's "1984", and Trump Derangement syndrome. Furthermore, much of the media has become the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party and has successfully manipulated the gullible public.

To answer the question, the government (under Biden and Democratic Party control) cannot be trusted. Biden falsely claimed that Trump's agreement with the Taliban locked Biden into a bad "unmanageable" position, yet Biden had no trouble whatsoever overturning other Trump policies such as "remain in Mexico", the border wall, the Keystone pipeline, and sanctions related to Nord Stream 2. Biden cannot be trusted.

 

[conception_native_0123]

He was right to get out. In fact, once we took down Bin Laden, we should have started drawing out everyone in whom we had any interest, removing the soldiers and war pilots last

bin laden is not the only bad guy in the company richard.

 

[Steve R.]

 

[Isaac]

I think it does make at least some sense to put some stock in the concept of democracy-based nation-building, no matter how loathed that term is now, it's grounded in truth and common sense.

I think it makes less sense to avoid the nation building altogether (for the really problematic/dangerous ones, I mean--not just anyone)...........And, instead, wait for periodic catastrophic events, then take one one single person at the top, walk away and pretend that the 100,000 foot soldiers under that single person will be saints going forward.

The safest solution to extremely dangerous parts of the world is to help them get to a place where they have a normal, solid, unmovable reasonable form of government where all noncriminal human adults have a say in voting - which usually leads to being a decent global citizen, nation-wise.

It's weird to me how anyone can watch these 10's of 1000's of Taliban overtaking everywhere, beating and whipping everyone, and still claim that if we "just" could take out one guy at the top, that would somehow solve the problem.

People. Wake up. 10,000 more will take his place, Absent an authoritative government that prevents it. Bin Laden is not the only person in the Middle East capable of figuring out how to terrorize the rest of the world.

 

[AccessBlaster]

I think it does make at least some sense to put some stock in the concept of democracy-based nation-building, no matter how loathed that term is now, it's grounded in truth and common sense.

Can you point to a post-WWII example of successful nation-building?
Somalia
Haiti
Bosnia
Kosovo
Afghanistan

It's weird to me how anyone can watch these 10's of 1000's of Taliban overtaking everywhere, beating and whipping everyone, and still claim that if we "just" could take out one guy at the top, that would somehow solve the problem.

The mission was clear 20 years ago. It's NOW morphed into some fuzzy non-military police action that has lost public support on all sides of the political spectrum. If we are going to nation-build then be honest with the American public. Because the government is not honest we are dealing with multiple humanitarian issues simultaneously.

edit:
Nation Building = bring them to the USA because we suck at nation-building.

 

[Isaac]

Because the government is not honest we are dealing with multiple humanitarian issues simultaneously.

Because of that, humanitarian issues were caused? How do you think human rights and humanitarian concerns in Afghanistan would have fared over the past 20 years - that there wouldn't have been any, just because we weren't there and didn't know about them?

Aside from that question, I'd put Iraq on the list, and Afghanistan might be somewhat successful too - it's obviously unfair to point to the one guy at the end who screwed everything up and then say "see, this doesn't work".

Lastly, I don't see the issue as simply "what do we get at the end of the process". To be totally honest, I have to include the full reality of the situation - and the situation that would have been had no intervention ever been done at all (like the way we treat Africa, and you can see the results - full-on, unmitigated, totally unchecked slaughter of 10's of thousands).
So what is my point? My point is, you should also consider how many bad things WOULD have happened, had we never put any pressure on anyone during all these years.

Have we sometimes caused more harm than good? Probably, yes. But not considering how much evil and suffering would have taken place had we never intervened anywhere, isn't really acknowledging the whole picture.

As for expectations, I've always thought that yes, absolutely - too many people's expectations are way too rosy. Military action involves risk of death. Any politician who is saying, we're going to go into conflict in this country but don't expect anyone to be hurt, that's just stupid of them to do - and stupid of anyone to believe. When you sign up for the military, you're signing up to risk death and injury - period. Obviously we want to minimize it, but I'm suggesting that just because it's the 21st century, people have gone a little bit too far in acting like nothing could possibly happen to any American servicemembers because we think it's all just buttons and drones.

Simply put, if we weren't putting pressure on bad actors and making attempts, I believe -- in some cases -- much more harm would have been done, and I refuse to just ignore that in the calculation. Deterrence and harm reduction are real.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

bin laden is not the only bad guy in the company richard.

In fact, Adam, you are correct. But Bin Laden masterminded a physical attack on U.S. Soil. We got him for that. There was a sheik who directed an attack on a restaurant some time ago. We put him in Guantanamo. But Adam, in this, I have to agree with a lot of others I have seen in various web sites. Getting into a "police action" to shore up a corrupt nation's leaders who are nice to us only as long as they get our money is the wrong place to be. It is a shame that Afghanistan's prior government has collapse, but the French revolution and the American revolution have shown that a government is likely to last only if its people develop their own independence from a tyrannical or uncaring government. While third-party help is great, if the people as a whole don't want it, it ain't gonna happen. If the people as a whole want it but not enough to risk their own lives over it, it ain't gonna happen.

 

[Isaac]

But Bin Laden masterminded a physical attack on U.S. Soil. We got him for that

There are 10000 mini-Bin Laden's under him who feel exactly the same as big Bin Laden. I'd say I feel about .001% safer with a single one of them gone.

 

[AccessBlaster]

@Isaac we can agree on the concept of nation-building might be beneficial if managed correctly with a stated goal and exit strategy but sadly up until now, it's been very sketchy. Just one man's opinion, nothing earth-shattering