The challenges ahead (Biden's America)

[N.E. Brigand]

A U.S. federal judge in Nevada has ruled that the immigration law that makes border reentry a felony is unconstitutional. The judge says that this law, which was passed in 1929 and reauthorized in 1952, was enacted and reenacted "with a discriminatory purpose."

Should the Dept. of Justice appeal this decision?

[N.E. Brigand]

In 2013, U.S. Secretary of Defense (and former CIA director) Leon Panetta said that the United States had come to "the last chapter of establishing a sovereign Afghanistan that can govern and secure itself for the future."

Now I'm not sure how long a book it was that Panetta thought that chapter would conclude. Did the story start in 2001, when the U.S. invaded? Or in 1994, when the Taliban came to power? Or in 1979, when the U.S.S.R. invaded? Or even before that? But picking a book at random from the shelf behind me (The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth), I find that its last chapter accounts for a bit less than 3% of the total length. Eight years represents 3% of more than two-and-a-half centuries.

I'm bearing that in mind as I see Panetta today criticizing Joe Biden with the claim that Biden "didn't really spend much time on the issue" of how the U.S. should withdraw.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I get your point, but I still think that what was said by Panetta (who was my congressman before he became Clinton's budget director, then Chief of Staff, and later CIA director and Defense Secretary under Obama) has some validity. It does not appear that the withdrawal was well thought-out.

(And in a strange coincidence, I just finished re-reading The Day of the Jackal the other day.)

[Inanna]

It was not.

R reminded me of the British empire’s absolutely horrific withdrawal from India. Partitioned the country, and left with no support provided for safety of the millions of people leaving their homes and walking to another home. None.

[N.E. Brigand]

In the five years from 2015 through 2019, ABC, CBS, and NBC devoted less than one hour of news coverage, combined, to Afghanistan. And the 2020 withdrawal deal between the U.S. and Taliban got a combined five minutes.

It's as if the story of the first 52 chapters of The Lord of the Rings were told in just one chapter, and then the plot of "The Black Gate Opens" was laid out over 52 chapters.

[N.E. Brigand]

Today a man claiming to have a bomb in his truck as he was parked next to the U.S. Capitol live-streamed his call for Joe Biden to resign. Fortunately, he was arrested without hurting anyone.

[N.E. Brigand]

Here is an exchange between President Biden and ABC's George Stephanopoulos:

Stephanopoulos: "What happens now in Afghanistan? Do you believe the Taliban have changed?"

Biden: "No.

Let me put it this way: I think they’re going through sort of an existential crisis about: Do they want to be recognized by the international community as being a legitimate government? I'm not sure they do. But look, they have---"

Stephanopoulos: "They care about their beliefs more."

Biden: "Well, they do, but they also care about whether they have food to eat, whether they have an income and can make any money and run an economy. They care about whether they can hold together the society that they, in fact, say they care so much about.

I'm not counting on any of that, but that is part of what I think is going on right now. In terms of--I'm not sure I would have predicted, George, nor would you or anyone else, that when we decided to leave, that they'd provide safe passage for Americans to get out."

And here's how ABC is promoting the interview using that exchange:

ABC News EXCLUSIVE:

Stephanopoulos: “Do you believe the Taliban have changed?”

Pres. Biden: “I think they’re going through sort of an existential crisis about do they want to be recognized by the int’l community as being a legitimate government.”

Does that presentation imply that Biden's "No" is actually a "Yes"?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Well, his no sort of is a yes, isn't it?

Of course the Taliban has changed. All things change over time. I'm not the same person I was when I started writing this post.

Have the Taliban changed in a way that will make a substantial difference to the people, and particularly the women and girls, of Afghanistan?

Probably not.

---------
I think it is also valid to ask whether Biden has changed. When he was Vice President, he was the main dissenting voice when Obama decided to ramp up the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan. He has been wanting to end U.S. involvement there for a long time. I think that the bumbling Trump agreement with the withdrawal was a convenient excuse for him act on that desire.

-------
Do I disagree that we needed to get out of Afghanistan? No, I don't think it is our business to determine the fate of other countries and it is now clear that we were propping up a government that had no ability to truly govern. And maybe it just could not have been done without causing so much chaos and misery. But it sure looks bad.

[N.E. Brigand]

Christopher Miller, who was Acting Secretary of Defense under Donald Trump from Nov. 2020 through Jan. 2021, said yesterday that the deal the Trump administration struck with the Taliban early in 2020 was just a ruse, and that had Trump won reelection, he wouldn't have followed through.

Not sure what to make of that, particularly in light of Trump having ordered Miller to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan before he left office.

[River]

Well he didn't win re-election so he continued the withdrawal.

The claim that it was all a ruse sounds clever until you consider this "ruse" required allowing the Taliban to rebuild itself. We released their leader along with 5000 other prisoners. The deal was these people wouldn't return to fighting but nothing happened when the Taliban reneged on that. I'm not sure I see the sense in letting an enemy rebuild strength in the name of a "ruse".

[N.E. Brigand]

On May 15, three months before the Taliban took over, the U.S. embassy in Kabul issued a security alert advising Americans in Afghanistan, in light of then then lately-announced plans for the withdrawal of American forces by early September, to "leave Afghanistan as soon as possible." Why were there still American civilians needing to be evacuated three months later?

- - - - - - - - - -
River, it's possible that Miller's claim that Trump's withdrawal deal was a "ruse" is based on the notion that Trump could have been talked out of leaving had he won.

[RoseMorninStar]

I watched a video about that.
There are 4 security warning levels (of increasing risk) and an unofficial 5th level.
Level 4 is 'Get out'. Unofficial Level 5 is 'Get out now no matter what'

On April 27th the Embassy told employees that if they didn't have to be there.. leave/work remotely. If one ever finds themselves in a country & they hear that, it's time to leave. (N.E. the May 15th link you posted is in reference to a reminder that the security alert was issued on April 27th)

June 28th it was put out more broadly telling people to leave.

August 7th a very blunt 'Get Out Now' notice was issued. A key element of this was that 'repatriation loans' were mentioned. This is the unofficial 5th level security alert. If you are ever in a country & repatriation loans are mentioned, GET OUT IMMEDIATELY. What this means is that the US will basically buy for your ticket for you because the situation is dire and likely to deteriorate quickly.

I had read that there were probably about 10,000 Americans in Afghanistan, the majority of whom probably didn't need to be there. People should pay attention to security alerts.

[Frelga]

Well he didn't win re-election so he continued the withdrawal.

The claim that it was all a ruse sounds clever until you consider this "ruse" required allowing the Taliban to rebuild itself. We released their leader along with 5000 other prisoners. The deal was these people wouldn't return to fighting but nothing happened when the Taliban reneged on that. I'm not sure I see the sense in letting an enemy rebuild strength in the name of a "ruse".

That would be a valid objection if their goal was anything other than undermining the Democrat administration regardless of cost to American lives and economy. Non-American lives aren't even on the radar.

[River]

River, it's possible that Miller's claim that Trump's withdrawal deal was a "ruse" is based on the notion that Trump could have been talked out of leaving had he won.

Sadly, this is believable. Trump isn't known for his attention span and his only guiding principle seems to be "What will get me applauded by my fan base right now?"

[N.E. Brigand]

A few commentators have been offering some useful historical reminders about the fact that the U.S. never made success in Afghanistan its top priority. If it was as important to succeed in Afghanistan as many in the media suddenly seem to believe, then they should be criticizing the U.S. for 20 years of putting other matters ahead of that goal. As Matt Yglesias says:

"We sacrificed troop levels in Afghanistan to invade Iraq, we derailed cooperation with Iran in Afghanistan to squeeze Iran on nukes, we derailed cooperation with Russia in Afghanistan to squeeze Russia on Ukraine.

Only partner left was Pakistan — who wanted the Taliban to win."

[N.E. Brigand]

A staffer for Congresswoman Ilhan Omar notes: "The U.S. has now evacuated more than four times the amount of refugees from Afghanistan [30,000] than we did from Saigon [7,000]." And that post from earlier today is already outdated, because the total evacuated from Afghanistan is now 37,000, or more than five times as many as were evacuated from Saigon.

Mind you, that's not the whole story. After Saigon fell and all U.S. personnel had departed, the U.S. subsequently admitted some 150,000 Vietnamese refugees. But then again, the evacuation in Kabul apparently is far from over.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

This is, potentially, a very BFD.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/24/politics ... index.html

[N.E. Brigand]

In December 2018, the Trump administration introduced its "Remain in Mexico" program, by which aliens who claim asylum at the southern U.S. border are returned to Mexico while their cases are considered. Previously such asylum applicants were allowed to remain in the U.S. while their ultimate fate was determined. In the year following this policy change, about 60,000 such applicants were sent to Mexico, of whom only 10,000 had their cases decided. There were concerns that these asylum seekers are being sent back to the very situations they were tring to escape. The program was challenged. In 2020, a federal court put some limitations on the program, and the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court upheld those limitations. The Trump administration appealed those rulings. Then earlier this year, the Biden administration terminated the program and asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the appeal.

But a few weeks ago, a federal judge ruled that the Biden administration must reinstate the program and continue to ship asylum seekers back to Mexico. And tonight, in a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court turned away the Biden administration's request for an emergency stay that would have blocked the lower court's order during appeal.

I like the question some people are asking: what if Mexico just says, "No, we won't take them back anymore?" Would the Supreme Court order the Biden administation to invade Mexico and force its government to comply?

[N.E. Brigand]

Last week, President Biden warned that there were concerns about the possibility of ISIS attacking people at the Kabul airport. Last night (U.S. eastern time), the U.S. issued a warning that an ISIS attack might be imminent and called for people to move away from areas near the airport gates. Sadly, today those concerns bore fruit today as terrorists launched an attack outside the airport that has killed at least 13 people (including some U.S. service members) and injured at least 52 people.

In the meantime, however, the U.S. evacuated a lot of people. Just three days ago, as I noted above, that number was 37,000. As of today it's nearly 90,000.

[N.E. Brigand]

H.R. McMaster, the retired general who served as Donald Trump's national security advisor in 2017-2018, says that today's attacks are "what happens when you surrender to a terrorist organization."

If that's true, then McMaster did a whole lot of surrendering when he served in the White House. During that time, there were multiple attacks in Kabul that killed hundreds of people.

What happened today stinks. What stinks even more was that this was regular life in Afghanistan for most of the past 20 years, and few Americans cared.