‘This Is Not Saigon. This Is Worse Than Saigon.’

[AU9377 5,364]

This is why these people, overall, cannot be trusted.  They are in this kind of mess after 20 years of hand holding and swimming in our money.  If the claim is that these people cannot govern themselves and that they must be colonial underlings for the safety of the world, then people should say that.  Even if we accept that method of containing them, doing so is not our responsibility alone.

Edited August 26, 2021 by AU9377

[AUFAN78 3,954]

12 hours ago, AUDub said:

In what regard does it dispel my notions about Bagram? Once again, you aren't offering rebuttals. You are handwaving.

You've heard snippets from the top members of our intelligence apparatus on the importance of BAFB. Didn't seem to comprehend it so I'll link to another. Key statement:  

“If you want to conduct an evacuation, you don’t do it from an airport that’s literally almost in the heart of the city,” Bill Roggio, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, tells National Review. “A military planner would know that as soon as things started going south in Kabul, and the Taliban was on the march, that that airport [Karzai International] would be flooded.”

“You can’t secure that airport properly,” he says.

That fact was made all too apparent to people around the world on Monday morning when they woke up to horrifying videos of Afghan civilians clinging to a departing U.S. military aircraft — and then falling several hundred feet from the aircraft to their deaths.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/08/why-did-the-united-states-abandon-bagram-airfield/

The bottom line is the original plan was dumped and we evacuated troops before civilians. We gave up stronghold (BAFB) for weaker space (KIA). Horrible mistake which resulted in failures we are witnessing real time.

13 hours ago, AUDub said:

As I said, there wasn't really a plan besides "everyone gone."

And as I demonstrated with video snippets from the top echelons of our intelligence apparatus, you were wrong. 

 

13 hours ago, AUDub said:

Proper reactions are part of a plan, and this is no different. Again, they're called contingencies and any well thought out plan should have them built in. If you have a rigid plan that immediately falls apart due to an unaccounted for circumstance, then the plan was junk.

We can argue with how bad things look until we're blue in the face, but we are doing just fine from a results perspective. A contingency worked. The plan held up. If we're not at 6 figures total evacuated already, we will be very soon, and that has come with a big fat 0 with regard American casualties so far.

As noted by top level officials in our intelligence apparatus, there was a plan and it was dropped by new admin. The current plan is simply to meet an arbitrarily set date. This was music to the Taliban's ears and they sat in wait. Now we are reacting to this mess we created. 

Things are worse than bad. We are not doing fine. This is chaos and unnecessary.

13 hours ago, AUDub said:

You need to cite your sources. This is an NBC article and you cut out some very important context. 

Whatever. Your article was a political opinion piece. The material I provided easily debunked that garbage.

[BJCrawford 1,568]

And now US marines have been killed. I’m sick to my stomach. Prayers for those families 

Edited August 26, 2021 by BJCrawford

[AUFAN78 3,954]

1 hour ago, BJCrawford said:

And now US marines have been killed. I’m sick to my stomach. Prayers for those families 

“is the perfect example of the generals just saluting, saying ‘yes, sir’ and ‘can do’ and not standing up and saying, ‘This is madness, and I can’t execute this because I’m putting the lives of Americans at risk, and you need to find someone else to do this.’”

[DKW 86 7,579]

Calling out the media for Slamming what may have been the most competent part of the Afghan War.

 

 

 

Edited August 26, 2021 by DKW 86

[AUDub 11,301]

13 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

“is the perfect example of the generals just saluting, saying ‘yes, sir’ and ‘can do’ and not standing up and saying, ‘This is madness, and I can’t execute this because I’m putting the lives of Americans at risk, and you need to find someone else to do this.’”

As if surging American troops back into Afghanistan doesn't "put the lives of Americans at risk"

Blood for the Blood God. Skulls for his Skull Throne. 

Edited August 26, 2021 by AUDub

[AUFAN78 3,954]

3 minutes ago, AUDub said:

As if surging American troops back into Afghanistan doesn't "put the lives of Americans at risk"

Blood for the Blood God. Skulls for his Skull Throne. 

No one suggested surging in this thread but you.

Listening to intelligence vs ignoring is putting lives at risk. And not just Americans, but our allies.

[AUDub 11,301]

1 minute ago, AUFAN78 said:

No one suggested surging in this thread but you.

Listening to intelligence vs ignoring is putting lives at risk. And not just Americans, but our allies.

We can't secure s*** with the personnel Trump drew us down to without a surge.

This is a zero sum game. What you want needed more troops. More troops means more deaths.

[AUDub 11,301]

And appealing to some vague concept of "intel" out of the Trump administration is stupid as hell.

Almost like the lessons of what he did with the Kurds never sank in. 

[AUFAN78 3,954]

9 minutes ago, AUDub said:

We can't secure s*** with the personnel Trump drew us down to without a surge.

This is a zero sum game. What you want needed more troops. More troops means more deaths.

Not accurate. We could have secured whatever we wanted. Don't discount this military with proper intel instruction.

Edited August 26, 2021 by AUFAN78

[AUFAN78 3,954]

4 minutes ago, AUDub said:

And appealing to some vague concept of "intel" out of the Trump administration is stupid as hell.

Almost like the lessons of what he did with the Kurds never sank in. 

You've proven you're out of your league here with cherries like that, so why don't you step aside and let adults converse about this tragedy that did not have to occur. ****ing go tell the parents of these killed today this is going well. DF

[AUDub 11,301]

2 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

No accurate. We could have secured whatever we wanted. Don't discount this military with proper intel instruction.

You really are this dumb. 800-850 suggested by Trump's last SECDEF is good for quick strikes, but if you think we could secure a perimeter around HKIA, let alone another airbase with even 3 times that number, you are a fool. 

[AUFAN78 3,954]

Just now, AUDub said:

You really are this dumb. 800-850 suggested by Trump's last SECDEF is good for quick strikes, but if you think we could secure a perimeter around HKIA, let alone another airbase with even 3 times that number, you are a fool. 

You are clueless.

[AU9377 5,364]

8 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Not accurate. We could have secured whatever we wanted. Don't discount this military with proper intel instruction.

The military has not changed.  The intel sources have not changed.

[AUFAN78 3,954]

Just now, AU9377 said:

The military has not changed.  The intel sources have not changed.

Wrong

[AUDub 11,301]

Just now, AUFAN78 said:

****n beliefs. I know you have no clue what you are talking about. You're a clown show at this point.

You seriously believe securing these cities would be as simple as securing Fort Knox. 

[AUFAN78 3,954]

2 minutes ago, AUDub said:

You seriously believe securing these cities would be as simple as securing Fort Knox. 

I am currently in the company of a man that help build BAFB and he reminds of that bases security success.

But that isn't the issue unless you are reacting to tragedy vs having a proactive plan.

[AUDub 11,301]

Blood for the Blood God 

 

[AUDub 11,301]

1 minute ago, AUFAN78 said:

I am currently in the company of a man that help build BAFB and he reminds of that bases security success.

But that isn't the issue unless you are reacting to tragedy vs having a proactive plan.

Yes yes yes I know. It's not like it's the 3rd or 4th time you've tried to ham handedly appeal to the authority of, you know, some guy.

[AUDub 11,301]

 

[AUFAN78 3,954]

Just now, AUDub said:

Yes yes yes I know. It's not like it's the 3rd or 4th time you've tried to ham handedly appeal to the authority of, you know, some guy.

Fortunate to have a local group of ex-logistics personnel.

 

[AuburnNTexas 7,236]

3 hours ago, AUDub said:

As if surging American troops back into Afghanistan doesn't "put the lives of Americans at risk"

Blood for the Blood God. Skulls for his Skull Throne. 

Of course it does especially inside an Airport in Kabul, that is the very point 78 has been trying to make and that I made a while back. You keep Bagram Airbase open the fact that it is far away makes it more defensible because you can use airpower if bad people approach. Kabul Airport is surrounded by innocent people which prevents you from using airpower, and for having an open perimeter where you can concentrate fire if needed. US airpower is not very useful inside a city unless you don't care about collateral damage (killing innocent people).  

At least two months before final planned evacuation date you contact all the Americans and give them certain dates and certain evacuation points where you can get them and bring them to Bagram airbase for flying out.  You give them a few dates where they can be picked up and you give them a final date.  The Afghan army did not disappear until American Air Power had left the country. You do the same type thing with Afghan nationals.  Pickup points required dates to be picked up.  Yes there would have been some that thought they could ride it out but no place near the numbers that we were faced with when the WH did not plan the evacuation. The lack of a planned exit strategy led to Americans and Afghan nationals being trapped with no ability to get to the airport and puts the soldiers inside the airport as a much higher risk because you have handcuffed them by placing them in an area where they can't take advantage of superior weapons and firepower.

The Kabul airport is an indefensible area with no clear field of fire because of the mass of people at the gates it makes our brave soldiers sitting ducks. What we are seeing now is do to the total lack of planning.  What we saw today means anybody defending the WH has a political agenda and is not looking at the facts on the ground.

[Grumps 3,706]

6 hours ago, AUDub said:

We can't secure s*** with the personnel Trump drew us down to without a surge.

This is a zero sum game. What you want needed more troops. More troops means more deaths.

 

6 hours ago, AUDub said:

And appealing to some vague concept of "intel" out of the Trump administration is stupid as hell.

Almost like the lessons of what he did with the Kurds never sank in. 

So are you saying that this is Trump's fault? Could Biden not have ordered a surge if necessary? Is there a such thing as Biden intel?

I am not bashing Biden, but I can't see this as having anything to do with Trump.

[SaturdayGT 719]

11 minutes ago, Grumps said:

 

So are you saying that this is Trump's fault? Could Biden not have ordered a surge if necessary? Is there a such thing as Biden intel?

I am not bashing Biden, but I can't see this as having anything to do with Trump.

..Oh its Trumps fault...if we don't have a clear idea about it now, there are brilliant minds at work who will make it so by the end of the week!!

[AUDub 11,301]

15 minutes ago, Grumps said:

So are you saying that this is Trump's fault? Could Biden not have ordered a surge if necessary? Is there a such thing as Biden intel?

I am not bashing Biden, but I can't see this as having anything to do with Trump.

Nope! 

Well to some degree. For one, I can appreciate that he got the ball rolling on ending this bull**** war. On the other hand, he did leave Biden something of a mess to figure out given how long he delayed the transition along with allowing Miller to wreck the SIV system.