We are no longer a serious people
thepullrequest.com
We are no longer a serious people
1–10 of 20 posts
Re: We are no longer a serious people
#2Re: We are no longer a serious people
#3And yes, the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and on “terror” have clearly been mismanaged from the start in exactly the ways that critics predicted, but I don’t see meaningful differences in the way all administrations have bungled these things.
Re: We are no longer a serious people
#4American military members: 2,448 U.S. contractors: 3,846 Afghan military/police: 66,000 Other allied troops: 1,144 Afghan civilians: 47,245 Taliban/opposition fighters: 51,191 Aid workers: 444 Journalists: 72
src: https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-08-14/cos...
Re: We are no longer a serious people
#5Can someone explain to me the partisan tilt this coverage has had? Both parties seem to have wanted to get out of Afghanistan and this past few weeks is (at least per my understanding) the culmination of the plan the Trump administration had put into motion (signing the peace treaty with the Taliban, releasing their prisoners, etc). Is there something specific the Biden administration bungled? What would a better pla…
Alternative view here => https://thefederalist.com/2021/08/16/how-two-decades-of-lies...
"On this episode of The Federalist Radio Hour, Amber Smith, author, veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and deputy assistant to the Secretary of Defense during the Trump administration, joins Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to discuss how U.S. leaders spent two decades lying to taxpayers about the war in Afghanistan."
Re: We are no longer a serious people
#6Re: We are no longer a serious people
#7Hard to take this post seriously when it completely dismisses the substance of Blinken's responses as "a deer-in-the-headlights stare and canned remarks" without spending 2 seconds explaining what they even were. Blinken explained their rationales very calmly and clearly in that video, whether we like with them or not. That deserves consideration, and, if the rationale is wrong, a substantive rebuttal. Not a backhand…
Re: We are no longer a serious people
#8Hard to take this post seriously when it completely dismisses the substance of Blinken's responses as "a deer-in-the-headlights stare and canned remarks" without spending 2 seconds explaining what they even were. Blinken explained their rationales very calmly and clearly in that video, whether we like with them or not. That deserves consideration, and, if the rationale is wrong, a substantive rebuttal. Not a backhand…
Blinken on July 7: “We are staying, the embassy is staying, our programs are staying. If there is a significant deterioration in security...I don’t think it’s going to be something that happens from a Friday to a Monday.” https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1427314149319643139
Re: We are no longer a serious people
#9Hard to take this post seriously when it completely dismisses the substance of Blinken's responses as "a deer-in-the-headlights stare and canned remarks" without spending 2 seconds explaining what they even were. Blinken explained their rationales very calmly and clearly in that video, whether we like with them or not. That deserves consideration, and, if the rationale is wrong, a substantive rebuttal. Not a backhand…
Blinken on July 7: “We are staying, the embassy is staying, our programs are staying. If there is a significant deterioration in security...I don’t think it’s going to be something that happens from a Friday to a Monday.” https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1427314149319643139
> "If there is a significant deterioration in security -- that could well happen, we've discussed this before -- I don’t think it’s going to be something that happens from a Friday to a Monday."
Re: We are no longer a serious people
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blinken on July 7: “We are staying, the embassy is staying, our programs are staying. If there is a significant deterioration in security...I don’t think it’s going to be something that happens from a Friday to a Monday.” https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1427314149319643139
So the administration mispredicted something that was presumably obvious. You'd think the blog post about having serious discussions could actually explain that and attempt to have a serious discussion around it instead of mischaracterizing the interview and ignoring the content.