4 ms·

Note the NYT's total absence of criticism of Biden for this disaster. Under a Trump leadership the headlines would primarily have been of the style, "As Trump t

by beaner 5y ago

Note the NYT's total absence of criticism of Biden for this disaster. Under a Trump leadership the headlines would primarily have been of the style, "As Trump team struggles to do anything competent, Afghanistan crumbles." Whereas in this case, the headlines are kept mostly factual. "President Ghani Flees as Insurgents Enter Capital." (NYT is not the article at hand but is relevant in its coverage of such stories for its cultural influence.) Don't mean to politicize it necessarily, but there's been some discussion here recently about editorialization, thinking for one's own when reading the news, and processing information from different perspectives to identify and compensate for biases. This is a really good opportunity to observe how it works.

aappleby 5y ago
biden was president for how many of those 20 years?
- beaner 5y ago
  He presided over the years responsible for the withdrawal and influenced the process, which is what matters.
  - selimthegrim 5y ago
    As President?
    - beaner 5y ago
      Yes, the year 2021.
  - Hamuko 5y ago
    I'm not sure if the withdrawal is the thing that matters most in a 20-year waste of time and money. Unless the idea is to stay in Afganistan forever.
    - beaner 5y ago
      I'm not sure that it matters most either. But it certainly matters somewhat. The point is that if the "other side" were in power at the time and executed the process exactly the same with the same results, the way it would be covered by our influential newsmedia would be very different. How and why it would be different is important to observe. Being able to see it allows you to interpret the world around you more intelligently, and make smarter decisions.
  - oblio 5y ago
    This logic is utterly ridiculous. Sunken cost fallacy: if you're making a mistake, don't keep making it because you've lost a ton already. Stop making the mistake. The person executing the withdrawal is not to blame.
    - beaner 5y ago
      No, it's perfectly reasonable. I don't disagree with you, or more accurately, I'm not even presenting an opinion on whether the US should have stayed or left. But given that leaving was the choice, and perhaps the rational choice, the act of leaving is itself something that requires management and competence. It is possible to be done in a way that minimizes or maximizes destruction, loss of human life, any remaining moral philosophy or disposition for democracy in the area, hope generally, etc. The US president has a direct influence on how the exit happens. The point I'm actually making though is that even if you are right, if the "other guy" were in power right now, the newsmedia would be presenting it very differently, and it's important to be aware of it and be able to see it when it happens.
      - oblio 5y ago
        The problem is, one of the most important roles of a politician is to be liked and to be influential, in short, to have friends. Ideally, to not be very divisive. Some wounds are self inflicted and I have little pity for them.
        AwaAwa 5y ago
        I'm not clear on what you mean by this as a response. Are you saying the President needs to be friends with journalists for them to be objective?
        oblio 5y ago
        I'm saying that if you make someone hate your guts, it will be very hard for them to be objective. And Trump didn't even need to be friends with them, just somewhat neutral. He just couldn't help himself. After an entire life with a flawed personality, as we say in Romania: "only the casket straightens the hunchback". Not even scientists are 100% objective, it's just a fact of life. At the end of day, we're all human (and also emotional).
- FridayoLeary 5y ago
  Biden is a complete fool for the way he pulled out. That much is undeniable. Who else is to blame and what the alternative should have been doesn't change that fact. He saw what happened in Iraq and ISIS, the moment the US pulled out from there. He was Vice President, even! This is a disaster and entirely predictable, if unavoidable.
  - Jcowell 5y ago
    Was there a way to pull out of the region that didn’t result in this ?
    - FridayoLeary 5y ago
      I don't know but to just waltz out the way he did is sheer idiocy.
justicezyx 5y ago
Why this is downvoted? US' withdrawal from China gave CCP and Mao an easy win. That already showcased the stupidity of a 4 year term presidency that lack the basic continuance in foreign policy. Cannot US diplomat learn something about how to build a decent government?
- oblio 5y ago
  Chiang Kai Shek and the nationalists were failing with or without US intervention.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> Note the NYT's total absence of criticism of Biden for this disaster. The disaster is of Bush’s making, Biden is just the one that stopped spending lives and treasure to kick the endgame down the road. Of the last four President, he is the least to blame (for exactly the reason that he will, in the immediate term, get the most blame, which is what the others were dodging without making positive progress toward a better result.
- beaner 5y ago
  Certainly it was a disaster for it ever to have begun. But that doesn't mean anyone subsequently responsible for managing it doesn't have responsibilities that can be executed competently or incompetently, subject to their own blame and criticism.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > Certainly it was a disaster for it ever to have begun. It was, arguably at least, an unfortunate necessity when it began. It had the capacity to have a positive outcome. It was an unrecoverable disaster when it was back-burnered so the US could wage a war of aggression in Iraq.
    - Jcowell 5y ago
      Was it ? What made it necessary and what were we trying to achieve ? And to add to that how , without abandoning our humanity would we have achieved that?
- coldcode 5y ago
  Bush, Obama, Trump all kept it going. Trump finally wanted a withdrawal which Biden is keeping. The implementation of the withdrawal wasn't all the great, but the problem is the US keeps thinking it can force democracy on people who either don't want it, or don't have any experience of it.
  - richardfey 5y ago
aerostable_slug 5y ago
The downvotes on this post illustrate the partisan politics that have invaded even HN. It's nearly certainly true that this poster is correct. The point isn't Biden vs. Trump, the point is the varying tone of the press coverage. See also: "overflow" vs. "children in cages" — I have seen this personally because I work with some of those contracts, and the terms used by the press changed when the administration changed. Nothing has changed about the conditions in those detention facilities (I would know), and more are being built/repurposed out of things like convention centers because illegal entries spiked when Biden took office. But if you were to read MSNBC you'd hear little about it, and what would be talked about would be anodyne (and Trump's fault). Again, it's not about the partisan politics, it's about observing editorialization in action.

by beaner 5y ago

aappleby 5y ago

biden was president for how many of those 20 years?

beaner 5y ago
He presided over the years responsible for the withdrawal and influenced the process, which is what matters.
- selimthegrim 5y ago
  As President?
  - beaner 5y ago
    Yes, the year 2021.
- Hamuko 5y ago
  I'm not sure if the withdrawal is the thing that matters most in a 20-year waste of time and money. Unless the idea is to stay in Afganistan forever.
  - beaner 5y ago
    I'm not sure that it matters most either. But it certainly matters somewhat. The point is that if the "other side" were in power at the time and executed the process exactly the same with the same results, the way it would be covered by our influential newsmedia would be very different. How and why it would be different is important to observe. Being able to see it allows you to interpret the world around you more intelligently, and make smarter decisions.
- oblio 5y ago
  This logic is utterly ridiculous. Sunken cost fallacy: if you're making a mistake, don't keep making it because you've lost a ton already. Stop making the mistake. The person executing the withdrawal is not to blame.
  - beaner 5y ago
    No, it's perfectly reasonable. I don't disagree with you, or more accurately, I'm not even presenting an opinion on whether the US should have stayed or left. But given that leaving was the choice, and perhaps the rational choice, the act of leaving is itself something that requires management and competence. It is possible to be done in a way that minimizes or maximizes destruction, loss of human life, any remaining moral philosophy or disposition for democracy in the area, hope generally, etc. The US president has a direct influence on how the exit happens. The point I'm actually making though is that even if you are right, if the "other guy" were in power right now, the newsmedia would be presenting it very differently, and it's important to be aware of it and be able to see it when it happens.
    - oblio 5y ago
      The problem is, one of the most important roles of a politician is to be liked and to be influential, in short, to have friends. Ideally, to not be very divisive. Some wounds are self inflicted and I have little pity for them.
      - AwaAwa 5y ago
        I'm not clear on what you mean by this as a response. Are you saying the President needs to be friends with journalists for them to be objective?
        oblio 5y ago
        I'm saying that if you make someone hate your guts, it will be very hard for them to be objective. And Trump didn't even need to be friends with them, just somewhat neutral. He just couldn't help himself. After an entire life with a flawed personality, as we say in Romania: "only the casket straightens the hunchback". Not even scientists are 100% objective, it's just a fact of life. At the end of day, we're all human (and also emotional).
FridayoLeary 5y ago
Biden is a complete fool for the way he pulled out. That much is undeniable. Who else is to blame and what the alternative should have been doesn't change that fact. He saw what happened in Iraq and ISIS, the moment the US pulled out from there. He was Vice President, even! This is a disaster and entirely predictable, if unavoidable.
- Jcowell 5y ago
  Was there a way to pull out of the region that didn’t result in this ?
  - FridayoLeary 5y ago
    I don't know but to just waltz out the way he did is sheer idiocy.

justicezyx 5y ago

Why this is downvoted? US' withdrawal from China gave CCP and Mao an easy win. That already showcased the stupidity of a 4 year term presidency that lack the basic continuance in foreign policy. Cannot US diplomat learn something about how to build a decent government?

oblio 5y ago
Chiang Kai Shek and the nationalists were failing with or without US intervention.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> Note the NYT's total absence of criticism of Biden for this disaster. The disaster is of Bush’s making, Biden is just the one that stopped spending lives and treasure to kick the endgame down the road. Of the last four President, he is the least to blame (for exactly the reason that he will, in the immediate term, get the most blame, which is what the others were dodging without making positive progress toward a better result.

beaner 5y ago
Certainly it was a disaster for it ever to have begun. But that doesn't mean anyone subsequently responsible for managing it doesn't have responsibilities that can be executed competently or incompetently, subject to their own blame and criticism.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Certainly it was a disaster for it ever to have begun. It was, arguably at least, an unfortunate necessity when it began. It had the capacity to have a positive outcome. It was an unrecoverable disaster when it was back-burnered so the US could wage a war of aggression in Iraq.
  - Jcowell 5y ago
    Was it ? What made it necessary and what were we trying to achieve ? And to add to that how , without abandoning our humanity would we have achieved that?
coldcode 5y ago
Bush, Obama, Trump all kept it going. Trump finally wanted a withdrawal which Biden is keeping. The implementation of the withdrawal wasn't all the great, but the problem is the US keeps thinking it can force democracy on people who either don't want it, or don't have any experience of it.
- richardfey 5y ago

aerostable_slug 5y ago

The downvotes on this post illustrate the partisan politics that have invaded even HN. It's nearly certainly true that this poster is correct. The point isn't Biden vs. Trump, the point is the varying tone of the press coverage. See also: "overflow" vs. "children in cages" — I have seen this personally because I work with some of those contracts, and the terms used by the press changed when the administration changed. Nothing has changed about the conditions in those detention facilities (I would know), and more are being built/repurposed out of things like convention centers because illegal entries spiked when Biden took office. But if you were to read MSNBC you'd hear little about it, and what would be talked about would be anodyne (and Trump's fault). Again, it's not about the partisan politics, it's about observing editorialization in action.