6 ms·

I would counter that a Trump like person would lead to less chance of war. Countries tend to toe the line better if there is a measuarble chance at retaliation.

I would counter that a Trump like person would lead to less chance of war. Countries tend to toe the line better if there is a measuarble chance at retaliation. A Biden like person who's demonstrated incompetance (Afghanistan pullout) and placation (weak stance on China relations) would lead to contries rolling the dice on whether we would retaliate or not. We'll see what happens with China and Taiwan or Russia and Ukraine. I would also counter that the response to alleged climate change could also spark conflicts which could lead to more encompassing war for example some greenie gets elected to power in Russia and decimates their ability to export energy (similar to current U.S. situation). That would leave many angry people in the cold in the E.U. and lead to unrest and potentially war. That's kind of out there but still within the realm.

tomc1985 5y ago
1) The afghanistan pullout is the country keeping a promise that Trump failed to keep that was made long before either Trump or Biden, and it would have been a quagmire to whoever had the guts to actually follow through on it 2) People keep repeating this weak-on-China meme but Biden seems a lot more hawkish on them than people seem to be giving him credit for
- roamerz 5y ago
  I don’t disagree with keeping the promise at all. Where he completely demonstrated his competence was in the implementation. I am an IT guy and I would have done a much better job. We’ll see on China. Proof is in action not talk.
  - peter422 5y ago
    You’d have done a better job? How so? You have expertise in strategic retreats after 20 years of war?
    - miked85 5y ago
      I don't think it takes a military strategic expert to say get civilians out first, then the military and equipment. If you can't take the equipment, destroy it.
      - throwaway946513 5y ago
        As far as I can remember - one thing that our military personnel are taught, especially in the field, is how to render equipment inoperable. Which in fact is one of the things we've done with left over equipment there. Source: family of veterans.
        miked85 5y ago
        The Taliban paraded driving US military vehicles through the streets, so I don't think we did that. I am sure it is normal procedure to disable equipment in this situation, but nothing about that exit was normal.
        tomc1985 5y ago
        Those vehicles were left behind by the Afghani armed forces and were no longer US assets. Of course, our failure to predict the afghani military's collapse is a huge error but that just proves that even world's best and most well-funded intelligence agency is not foolproof.
        roamerz 5y ago
        You can’t tell me with a straight face though that there wasn’t a report on someone’s desk that predicted exactly that - the Afghani military collapse. It was likely buried because it didn’t support whatever narrative was required at the time. So.. well funded? Absolutely and with a cherry on the top. Best? Nope. Way too infused with agendas and politics. No offense to the great people who work there.
        tomc1985 5y ago
    - roamerz 5y ago
      My point being that the bar was so low on the implementation that anyone with a shred of intellect could have done a better job. But for the sake of discussion I would have for starters left the military on site until the civilian component was safely out of the country. Don’t need a diploma in strategic retreats to see that.
    - yyyk 5y ago
      Every non ideological person would have done a better job. There wouldn't have been a hasty evacuation or the bombing in Kabul, if the army kept Bagram until the withdrawal was done, or if the US had accepted the Taliban's offer to retain Kabul until the withdrawal was done - and that's just the smallest of the tactical failures...
      - selimthegrim 5y ago
        Those are both poison pills. The army didn't want to be responsible for the security of the entire Kabul area and Bagram to Kabul is not a next door situation.
  - quesera 5y ago
    > I am an IT guy and I would have done a much better job. I'm sure you're a very nice and competent person, but that's a quote for the ages.
    - roamerz 5y ago
      Or - Dammit Jim I’m an IT guy not Military Strategist! Lol

tomc1985 5y ago

1) The afghanistan pullout is the country keeping a promise that Trump failed to keep that was made long before either Trump or Biden, and it would have been a quagmire to whoever had the guts to actually follow through on it 2) People keep repeating this weak-on-China meme but Biden seems a lot more hawkish on them than people seem to be giving him credit for

roamerz 5y ago
I don’t disagree with keeping the promise at all. Where he completely demonstrated his competence was in the implementation. I am an IT guy and I would have done a much better job. We’ll see on China. Proof is in action not talk.
- peter422 5y ago
  You’d have done a better job? How so? You have expertise in strategic retreats after 20 years of war?
  - miked85 5y ago
    I don't think it takes a military strategic expert to say get civilians out first, then the military and equipment. If you can't take the equipment, destroy it.
    - throwaway946513 5y ago
      As far as I can remember - one thing that our military personnel are taught, especially in the field, is how to render equipment inoperable. Which in fact is one of the things we've done with left over equipment there. Source: family of veterans.
      - miked85 5y ago
        The Taliban paraded driving US military vehicles through the streets, so I don't think we did that. I am sure it is normal procedure to disable equipment in this situation, but nothing about that exit was normal.
        tomc1985 5y ago
        Those vehicles were left behind by the Afghani armed forces and were no longer US assets. Of course, our failure to predict the afghani military's collapse is a huge error but that just proves that even world's best and most well-funded intelligence agency is not foolproof.
        roamerz 5y ago
        You can’t tell me with a straight face though that there wasn’t a report on someone’s desk that predicted exactly that - the Afghani military collapse. It was likely buried because it didn’t support whatever narrative was required at the time. So.. well funded? Absolutely and with a cherry on the top. Best? Nope. Way too infused with agendas and politics. No offense to the great people who work there.
        tomc1985 5y ago
  - roamerz 5y ago
    My point being that the bar was so low on the implementation that anyone with a shred of intellect could have done a better job. But for the sake of discussion I would have for starters left the military on site until the civilian component was safely out of the country. Don’t need a diploma in strategic retreats to see that.
  - yyyk 5y ago
    Every non ideological person would have done a better job. There wouldn't have been a hasty evacuation or the bombing in Kabul, if the army kept Bagram until the withdrawal was done, or if the US had accepted the Taliban's offer to retain Kabul until the withdrawal was done - and that's just the smallest of the tactical failures...
    - selimthegrim 5y ago
      Those are both poison pills. The army didn't want to be responsible for the security of the entire Kabul area and Bagram to Kabul is not a next door situation.
- quesera 5y ago
  > I am an IT guy and I would have done a much better job. I'm sure you're a very nice and competent person, but that's a quote for the ages.
  - roamerz 5y ago
    Or - Dammit Jim I’m an IT guy not Military Strategist! Lol