Afghanistan

[CarolinaBengalFanGuy]

Not going to lie when both sides of the media are condemning your actions you've really ****** it up. I'm still surprised the left sided media is hounding him about this.

[Belsnickel]

(08-22-2021, 08:43 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Any logical, sane person that's not suffering from dementia would have handled Afghanistan.  I still can't believe how bad he screwed this up.

Even a child would have known that things needed to be done differently:

One thing is certain, that meme is rooted in a child-like understanding of the situation.

(08-23-2021, 02:18 AM)CarolinaBengalFanGuy Wrote: Not going to lie when both sides of the media are condemning your actions you've really ****** it up. I'm still surprised the left sided media is hounding him about this.

I'm not surprised by this, and here is why. Who are the biggest losers in this country from the ending of our mission in Afghanistan? The military industrial complex. Now, we like to look at our media as left versus right, but their largest bias is the corporate one. Guess who all of these big corporate media owners have ties to? You guessed it! The military industrial complex. So all of these media outlets have their corporate overlords who are not happy with Biden actually fulfilling the agreement Trump made.

[Dill]

(08-22-2021, 12:27 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah, it's quite simple.  Name me a majority Muslim country in which women and homosexuals are treated even close to equal to men.  Once twenty second has elapsed then name the same types of countries in which that is not the case.  Compare the size of each list and get back to me.

You have routinely stated you have zero issue with comparing people to Nazis, now you've expanded to comparing Americans to the Taliban.  This is not an accusation, it is a fact.

Your analogy refutes itself, as do your Nazi comparisons.  It doesn't matter if some people share some facets of another ideology.  When making a comparison to extreme groups such as Islamic terrorists or Nazis you are engaging in hyperbole, unless those groups you are comparing have engaged in anything close to the same types of behavior, e.g. rounding up homosexuals and "undesired" ethnicities and engaging in violence against them.

I've repeatedly stated that such comparisons are hyperbolic, and intentionally so.  You engage in them to paint people you dislike as analogous to some of the worst groups of people in human history.  I know you're doing it, you know you're doing and everyone else knows your doing it.  I'd expect it from some freshly "enlightened" college sophomore, not a 70+ year old man.

1. Albania. Don’t know what you mean by types of country.

2. No analogy “refutes itself”. And I don’t “compare people to nazis”. Political scientists and historians compare political/social structures across many societies, including “extreme” ones. You are insisting comparisons can only be made on the “same types” of behavior. If you were correct, it would be impossible to identify, for example, developing authoritarian tendencies in a government like turkey’s, Hungary’s or even the US. There could be no applicable metric if such comparison were really, somehow just “hyperbole”.

3. Are you able to distinguish between social scientific analysis and demogogic smack? I’m asking the guy who says I support ISIS, and now accuses me of “painting people I dislike as analogous to the worst groups etc.”

You inserted a point external to my comparison/analogy and continue to address that external point, rather than the comparison actually made. Because the goal of the comparison is outside the kind of accusatory political smack you read into it, it appears you cannot really follow it, or can follow it and don’t want to go there. Hence the attack on my imagined intentions, as if what I’m doing were no different from you claiming I support ANTIFA, as if the guy with the most extreme accusations and insults is “right”.

The analogy cannot be refuted on its own terms, apparently.

[Dill]

(08-23-2021, 07:28 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: One thing is certain, that meme is rooted in a child-like understanding of the situation.


I'm not surprised by this, and here is why. Who are the biggest losers in this country from the ending of our mission in Afghanistan? The military industrial complex. Now, we like to look at our media as left versus right, but their largest bias is the corporate one. Guess who all of these big corporate media owners have ties to? You guessed it! The military industrial complex. So all of these media outlets have their corporate overlords who are not happy with Biden actually fulfilling the agreement Trump made.

Well, I would just say the “left” media are much more independent than the RWMM. The reporters who have questioning the Afghan mission for two decades don’t get their marching orders directly from the MIC, though their worldview shaped by American versions of liberalism—including the focus on human rights violations outside western conventions of legality in war.

[Dill]

(08-23-2021, 02:18 AM)CarolinaBengalFanGuy Wrote: Not going to lie when both sides of the media are condemning your actions you've really ****** it up. I'm still surprised the left sided media is hounding him about this.

Not surprising.

The”left” side is much more independent than the right.

Biden critics won’t lose their readers or their jobs.

[BmorePat87]

(08-22-2021, 08:43 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Any logical, sane person that's not suffering from dementia would have handled Afghanistan.  I still can't believe how bad he screwed this up.

Even a child would have known that things needed to be done differently:

I get that the Doha agreement was a complete mess and reducing our presence by 80% over 10 months without securing any guarantees from the Taliban was a terrible idea, but lay off Trump. He's no longer president. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-23-2021, 01:26 PM)Dill Wrote: 1. Albania. Don’t know what you mean by types of country.

Clearly you knew enough to list Albania.  I get why you stopped there though, the rest of the list would be rather depressing for you.

Quote:2. No analogy “refutes itself”. And I don’t “compare people to nazis”.

 
Not only have you done so, you've defending doing so.

Quote:Political scientists and historians compare political/social structures across many societies, including “extreme” ones. You are insisting comparisons can only be made on the “same types” of behavior. If you were correct, it would be impossible to identify, for example, developing authoritarian tendencies in a government like turkey’s, Hungary’s or even the US.   There could be no applicable metric if such comparison were really, somehow just “hyperbole”.

Comparisons are absolutely fine.  But when comparing groups to the worst kind of human scum, Taliban, Nazi's, ISIS, etc. one better ensure that the comparison is apt and not just on a few subjects.  The comparison itself is so inflammatory it should only be made in extreme circumstances.  But you've been told all of this before.

Quote:3. Are you able to distinguish between social scientific analysis and demogogic smack?  I’m asking the guy who says I support ISIS, and now accuses me of “painting people I dislike as analogous to the worst groups etc.”

I believe I apologized for that statement, which you throwing back at me multiple times since does not exactly speak well of your character.  Regardless, pointing out a time I did the same thing you are currently doing does not absolve you, it merely indicates your attempt to deflect.

Quote:You inserted a point external to my comparison/analogy and continue to address that external point, rather than the comparison actually made. Because the goal of the comparison is outside the kind of accusatory political smack you read into it, it appears you cannot really follow it, or can follow it and don’t want to go there.  Hence the attack on my imagined intentions, as if what I’m doing were no different from you claiming I support ANTIFA, as if the guy with the most extreme accusations and insults is “right”.

The analogy cannot be refuted on its own terms, apparently.

I'll make it even easier for you.  Name a Muslim majority country in which you could publish a picture of Muhammed and not have to fear for your safety.  Then compare that to reactions to Maplethorpe in this country.  Then ask yourself what would have happened to Maplethorpe if he had use Islamic imagery in his "art".

I get why this is uncomfortable for you.

[BFritz21]

(08-23-2021, 03:28 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I get that the Doha agreement was a complete mess and reducing our presence by 80% over 10 months without securing any guarantees from the Taliban was a terrible idea, but lay off Trump. He's no longer president. 

Typical Pat post with no substance and just ignoring Biden screwing this up badly and trying to Blame Trump when Trump would never have just up and left everything, creating a hell on Earth in the Middle East.

[Belsnickel]

(08-23-2021, 10:41 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:


Typical Pat post with no substance and just ignoring Biden screwing this up badly and trying to Blame Trump when Trump would never have just up and left everything, creating a hell on Earth in the Middle East.

Actually, that was the plan all along. Under Trump and under Biden. The things "left behind" were intended to be used by the ANA. The military our forces trained to use those items to be used against the Taliban to protect the interests of the Afghan government. However, the ANA rolled over immediately because they were demoralized by the Doha agreement. After the Doha agreement, corruption increased, supply lines were cut by personnel starting to be even more out for themselves. We left that equipment there for them to fight the Taliban, but they didn't have the will to do it.

[BFritz21]

(08-24-2021, 07:17 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Actually, that was the plan all along. Under Trump and under Biden. The things "left behind" were intended to be used by the ANA. The military our forces trained to use those items to be used against the Taliban to protect the interests of the Afghan government. However, the ANA rolled over immediately because they were demoralized by the Doha agreement. After the Doha agreement, corruption increased, supply lines were cut by personnel starting to be even more out for themselves. We left that equipment there for them to fight the Taliban, but they didn't have the will to do it.

Trump's plan was never just to pack up and withdrawal overnight, and especially not leaving billions of dollars worth of guns, vehicles, night vision equipment, and whatever else for the Taliban to take.

Situations change and, anyone that's been paying close attention to Biden, knows that he doesn't have the mental capacity to make decisions on important situations.  

The way Biden also left thousands of Americans stranded over there is also a disgrace.

[*Nately120*]

Biden blew it, but Trump also blew it by thinking he'd win a second term and had time to "withdraw the right way" in a few years.

Bush and Obama and Trump all coulda done it right, but they just kicked the can down the road 20 years and waited for some one who could screw up something as simple as stabilizing the middle east to get elected.

If you have a winning plan you shouldnt wait until you get fired to implement it.

[Dill]

(08-23-2021, 04:53 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Clearly you knew enough to list Albania.  I get why you stopped there though, the rest of the list would be rather depressing for you.
 
Not only have you done so, you've defending doing so.

Comparisons are absolutely fine.  But when comparing groups to the worst kind of human scum, Taliban, Nazi's, ISIS, etc. one better ensure that the comparison is apt and not just on a few subjects.  The comparison itself is so inflammatory it should only be made in extreme circumstances.  But you've been told all of this before.

I believe I apologized for that statement, which you throwing back at me multiple times since does not exactly speak well of your character.  Regardless, pointing out a time I did the same thing you are currently doing does not absolve you, it merely indicates your attempt to deflect.

I'll make it even easier for you.  Name a Muslim majority country in which you could publish a picture of Muhammed and not have to fear for your safety.  Then compare that to reactions to Maplethorpe in this country.  Then ask yourself what would have happened to Maplethorpe if he had use Islamic imagery in his "art".

I get why this is uncomfortable for you.

1. I "stopped" at Albania because you only asked me to list "a" country. And I still don't know what you mean by "types." The only countries where women and "homosexuals" are treated with near equality are the advanced industrial nations. 

Now you want me to "name a Muslim majority country in which you could publish a picture of Muhamed and not have to fear for your safety." Then compare that to "reactions to Maplethorpe." What I am "asking myself" is what is what point are you driving at. I am willing to grant that there are some Muslim groups who attack people for creating images of Mohammad. They do it in Western as well as "Muslim-majority" countries. I'm "uncomfortable" because I don't see any point in following this track beyond trying to use the actions of a small minority to accuse the entire religion. This just looks to me like more ethnocentric moral evaluation, with no attempt to understand why people behave the way they do--beyond blaming one religion. This doesn't refute my analogy to US groups who turn to religion to make sense of cultural challenges. 

2. Of course "comparisons are fine." Because it matters very much "if some people share some facets of another ideology" and those facets happen to be values, behaviors, and policies critical to development of authoritarian control.  Discussion of such is important to the maintenance of liberal democracy--especially now. And ruling out comparisons/analogies to authoritarian regimes as invalid in principle is a kind of censorship, an anxious censorship at that because of what such analogies might reveal. So that is why I defend in principle the right to make  social scientific/historical comparisons between the 3rd Reich and current US adminstrations or another. Doing that is not just another way of calling people "Nazis"--at least for people operating social scientific discourse for social scientific purposes. 

It is the use of terms like "human scum" that is "inherently inflammatory, not perfectly "apt" comparisons between groups who react to cultural challenges by strengthening religious indentity. 

3. I don't recall whether you have apologized for the ISIS remark. But I'd rather that you just stop doing that sort of thing altogether. I am not a supporter of ANTIFA or MS-13 either. I "throw it back at you" when you accuse me of "painting people I dislike as analogous to the worst groups" etc. I.e. when you are accusing me of doing what you do, when that is what I never do. A cross-cultural comparison of reactions to modernity is not just another way of using the Taliban to transfer your "scum" lable to some group of Americans. 

Again, the question is whether you can distinguish between analysis offered in the social scientific mode, which doesn't assign lables like "scum" and "animals" to human beings, or political demogoguery which frequently does. If you cannot make that distinction, then of course, analogies involving authoritarian political behaviors will just seem another kind of accusation--"inherently inflammatory."  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-24-2021, 03:28 PM)Dill Wrote: 1. I "stopped" at Albania because you only asked me to list "a" country. And I still don't know what you mean by "types." The only countries where women and "homosexuals" are treated with near equality are the advanced industrial nations.

Since you have conceded you cannot name another Muslim majority country in which those two groups are not oppressed we'll move on. 

Quote:Now you want me to "name a Muslim majority country in which you could publish a picture of Muhamed and not have to fear for your safety." Then compare that to "reactions to Maplethorpe." What I am "asking myself" is what is what point are you driving at. I am willing to grant that there are some Muslim groups who attack people for creating images of Mohammad. They do it in Western as well as "Muslim-majority" countries. I'm "uncomfortable" because I don't see any point in following this track beyond trying to use the actions of a small minority to accuse the entire religion. This just looks to me like more ethnocentric moral evaluation, with no attempt to understand why people behave the way they do--beyond blaming one religion. This doesn't refute my analogy to US groups who turn to religion to make sense of cultural challenges. 

Of course you know the point, hence your doing everything you can to avoid actually addressing my questions.  I blame Islam as it is currently practiced for this in the same way I blame Christianity as it was practiced when it was used to justify the slave trade and maltreatment of humans viewed as "lesser".  The type of behavior and rules that I've asked about can only exist in those nations because there aren't a sufficient number of people standing up and saying "no, this is not right".  Islam is used to justify this oppression, and violence in the case of drawing Muhammed, in the exact same way Christianity was used to justify the slave trade.  So, as long as Islam is allowed to be used in this fashion by a sizeable percentage of those who follow it I will continue to rightfully criticize it.  Your problem is you see valid criticism as a vicious attack.  Probably because actually acknowledging the valid criticism would be very painful for you.

Quote:2. Of course "comparisons are fine." Because it matters very much "if some people share some facets of another ideology" and those facets happen to be values, behaviors, and policies critical to development of authoritarian control.  Discussion of such is important to the maintenance of liberal democracy--especially now. And ruling out comparisons/analogies to authoritarian regimes as invalid in principle is a kind of censorship, an anxious censorship at that because of what such analogies might reveal. So that is why I defend in principle the right to make  social scientific/historical comparisons between the 3rd Reich and current US adminstrations or another. Doing that is not just another way of calling people "Nazis"--at least for people operating social scientific discourse for social scientific purposes. 

Exactly, you engage in Nazi comparisons and you've done so on several occasions. 

Quote:It is the use of terms like "human scum" that is "inherently inflammatory, not perfectly "apt" comparisons between groups who react to cultural challenges by strengthening religious indentity. 

Sorry, if you don't think Isis fighters were human scum then you've got far worse problems than can ever be addressed in this forum.  Josef Mengele was human scum and a person who sets prisoners on fire and engages in wholesale rape is as well.

Quote:3. I don't recall whether you have apologized for the ISIS remark. But I'd rather that you just stop doing that sort of thing altogether. I am not a supporter of ANTIFA or MS-13 either. I "throw it back at you" when you accuse me of "painting people I dislike as analogous to the worst groups" etc. I.e. when you are accusing me of doing what you do, when that is what I never do. A cross-cultural comparison of reactions to modernity is not just another way of using the Taliban to transfer your "scum" lable to some group of Americans. 

Odd then that you find the need to make the comparison at all.  What you are apparently deliberately ignoring is that comparisons of any kind to such extreme groups always, I repeat always, has the effect of making the groups analogous, of linking them together.  Whether you do this deliberately, as I strongly suspect, or out of extreme ignorance, the effect is the same.

Quote:Again, the question is whether you can distinguish between analysis offered in the social scientific mode, which doesn't assign lables like "scum" and "animals" to human beings, or political demogoguery which frequently does.

Quote:If you cannot make that distinction, then of course, analogies involving authoritarian political behaviors will just seem another kind of accusation--"inherently inflammatory."  

It's literally amazing to me the knots you have to tie yourself into to accept this as "logic".  You have an issue with labeling people as "scum" but have zero issue comparing Americans to the Taliban or Nazis.  I suppose I should be grateful in a way, your counter arguments on this topic only reinforce my points.  

[BmorePat87]

(08-23-2021, 10:41 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:


Typical Pat post with no substance and just ignoring Biden screwing this up badly and trying to Blame Trump when Trump would never have just up and left everything, creating a hell on Earth in the Middle East.

No substance? I referenced the agreement that guaranteed our withdrawal, the timeline for withdrawal of the bulk of our forces, and the failure to hold the Taliban to their end of the agreement before said withdrawal.

You then responded by saying that Biden is "screwing this up badly" without a specific reference to an action he took.

And, based on what he did in office and has said since leaving office, Trump absolutely would have had all of our troops out by his date of May 2021. The fact that he criticized Biden for not leaving before then and then bragged that Biden could not stop the withdrawal because Trump took most of the troops out of Afghanistan shoots holes in your baseless claim. 

[BFritz21]

(08-24-2021, 08:11 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No substance? I referenced the agreement that guaranteed our withdrawal, the timeline for withdrawal of the bulk of our forces, and the failure to hold the Taliban to their end of the agreement before said withdrawal.

You then responded by saying that Biden is "screwing this up badly" without a specific reference to an action he took.

And, based on what he did in office and has said since leaving office, Trump absolutely would have had all of our troops out by his date of May 2021. The fact that he criticized Biden for not leaving before then and then bragged that Biden could not stop the withdrawal because Trump took most of the troops out of Afghanistan shoots holes in your baseless claim. 

Once again, it's not that he pulled out, it's how he pulled out.

And things change.  You can't go along with something that royally screws us and their people just because it was agreed upon.  Biden lacks the ability of critical thinking.

[BmorePat87]

(08-24-2021, 08:18 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Once again, it's not that he pulled out, it's how he pulled out.

And things change.  You can't go along with something that royally screws us and their people just because it was agreed upon.  Biden lacks the ability of critical thinking.

What specifically about how he withdrew are you taking issue with? 

Also, Biden entered office with about 2,500 troops left in Afghanistan, down from nearly 14,000 troops 10 months before. Are you suggesting that he should have sent more troops to Afghanistan? 

[BFritz21]

(08-24-2021, 08:24 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: What specifically about how he withdrew are you taking issue with? 

Also, Biden entered office with about 2,500 troops left in Afghanistan, down from nearly 14,000 troops 10 months before. Are you suggesting that he should have sent more troops to Afghanistan? 

The fact that he left the country so unsecured that the Taliban took over right away.  The fact that he left billions of dollars worth of tanks, helicopters, weapons, etc., for the Taliban to just take over.  The fact that it's so unstable that women and girls are literally crying, screaming, and begging troops to stay because they know they'll be raped and sold into sex slavery.  

The fact that he had no plan because his mind isn't working anywhere near the level of how a world leader's should.

Have you noticed that even sites like CNN and other liberal/left media outlets are bashing Biden on this, too? 

[Belsnickel]

(08-24-2021, 02:44 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Trump's plan was never just to pack up and withdrawal overnight, and especially not leaving billions of dollars worth of guns, vehicles, night vision equipment, and whatever else for the Taliban to take.

Situations change and, anyone that's been paying close attention to Biden, knows that he doesn't have the mental capacity to make decisions on important situations.  

The way Biden also left thousands of Americans stranded over there is also a disgrace.

First, let me say I'm not defending Biden in this. He made plenty of missteps along the way with this. His announcement in April of his commitment to the withdrawal was a huge blow to the situation. However, him leaving the equipment behind, which is what you're focusing on, was not a screw up. It was intentional from the start. It was for the Afghan military and wasn't just being left behind.

All of that being said, your defense of Trump on this is ludicrous. And your accusation of Biden lacking critical thinking skills? Good grief if that ain't an example of "Takes one to know one," I don't know what is.

[Matt_Crimson]

(08-24-2021, 08:24 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Also, Biden entered office with about 2,500 troops left in Afghanistan, down from nearly 14,000 troops 10 months before. Are you suggesting that he should have sent more troops to Afghanistan? 

Well I mean, Biden is literally doing that right now though isn't he?

[BmorePat87]

(08-24-2021, 08:39 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: The fact that he left the country so unsecured that the Taliban took over right away. 

Trump was the one who reduced our troops from nearly 14k to 2.5k in 10 months. This was literally Trump's plan. You're mad at Trump but you're unable to actually be mad at Trump, so you're blaming Biden for everything Trump did. 

Quote: The fact that he left billions of dollars worth of tanks, helicopters, weapons, etc., for the Taliban to just take over.  

Matt covered that. We supplied the ANA to fight the Taliban. That was the plan. They collapsed. That falls on every single President from Bush to Obama to Trump to Biden. 

Quote:The fact that it's so unstable that women and girls are literally crying, screaming, and begging troops to stay because they know they'll be raped and sold into sex slavery.  

It's Biden fault that the Afghan government was too inept and corrupt to withstand the Taliban without our help? Again, that goes back to the start of the war.

Quote:The fact that he had no plan because his mind isn't working anywhere near the level of how a world leader's should.

This is a baseless statement. He executed the final stage of the exit plan that was 80% complete when he entered office. 

Quote:Have you noticed that even sites like CNN and other liberal/left media outlets are bashing Biden on this, too? 

No, I don't watch CNN.