the Joe Biden white flag

Author: 949havoc

Posts

Total: 35
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
Joe Biden is waving a flag. It's completely white, and has nothing whatsoever to do with white supremacy; nothing to do with CRT, or BLM, or 1619 Project, or any of that. Not even that of American military might. That, at least, remains stained red, white and blue. No. Joe Biden's flag is the white flag of surrender. Joe Biden has effectively surrendered to the Taliban, leaving who knows how many American citizens abandoned. Some of them probably even voted for the figurehead of foreign policy failure of the past 50 years. Wave your flag, Joe. 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,037
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@949havoc
That was FOUR DAYS AGO!
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Greyparrot
It continues, as demonstrated by Biden just yesterday - 8/22
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,302
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@949havoc
That's what you would think if you were a Republican.

Such is divisive America.

Shouldn't have gone there in the first place.

G Dubya 2001....Enduring freedom.

Enduring freedom my arse.

Ensuing chaos more like.
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
I couldn't believe it when I heard Biden say that in that interview.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,037
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Sum1hugme
'Why didn't you just pick up the phone and call the survivors’ (of the Benghazi attack)?"

"What difference at this point does it make?"
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,037
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@zedvictor4
That's what you would think if you were a Republican

Biden knows Republicans and Boris Johnson won't remember past 4 days. Kinda like bad Milk.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,037
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@zedvictor4
"We didn't need to [withdraw]. We chose to do it. We did it in obedience to an imbecilic political slogan about ending 'the forever wars.'" 
"We did it with every jihadist group around the world cheering."

"[We need} a sense of rediscovery that we in the West represent values and interests worth being proud of and defending.
And that commitment to those values and interests needs to define our politics and not allow our politics to define our commitment."

-Tony Blair
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,295
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@949havoc
......Joe Biden is waving a flag. It's completely white,......

List of black flag { kills flys on contact spray Co. }  via Wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_flags


certain irregular Confederate Army


Jolly Roger, or skull and crossbones,

German U-boats were ordered to fly a black flag

Anarchist black flag...................I'd rather fight than switch tryton ciggerate commerical from 60's?...

" Ahmadiyya flag, first designed in the 1930s during the second Caliphate. Just as the black colour absorbs visible light, similarly the black colour symbolizes the absorption of spiritual light."

modern adherents of extremist jihadism.




oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@949havoc
Joe Biden's flag is the white flag of surrender.
This is false.

" A white flag signifies to all that an approaching negotiator is unarmed, with an intent to surrender or a desire to communicate. Persons carrying or waving a white flag are not to be fired upon, nor are they allowed to open fire."

Negotiations were completed and a Peace Agreement signed on Feb 29th, 2020.  Any signals by the US requesting communication preceded those acts. 

Joe Biden has effectively surrendered to the Taliban, leaving who knows how many American citizens abandoned.
Absurd.  The US State Dept has listed Afghanistan as an active war zone for more than 30 years and consistently advised all US citizens to stay the fuck out for all of those 30 years.  For those idiots who chose to ignore the govt's strong warnings, the State Dept. required all US citizens to register with the US Embassy is Afghanistan and check out again when leaving.  Every US citizen who followed govt. regulation and is not part of any US military mission has been offered a free ride home and is either evacuated or declined the offer.  The US has been telling US citizens to evacuate immediately since March 1st, 2020.  How many times does the government need to beg US citizens to leave an active warzone before it stops getting characterized as  "abandonment" of those who refuse to leave?
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,144
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@oromagi
Yes, The U.S. and the Taliban struck a deal that paves the way for eventual peace in Afghanistan. U.S. Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad and the head of the militant Islamist group, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, signed the potentially historic agreement Feb. 29, 2020 in Doha, Qatar, where the two sides spent months hashing out its details. Under the terms of the deal, the U.S. commits to withdrawing all of its military forces and supporting civilian personnel, as well as those of its allies, within 14 months. The drawdown process will begin with the U.S. reducing its troop levels to 8,600 in the first 135 days and pulling its forces from five bases.
The rest of its forces, according to the agreement, will leave "within the remaining nine and a half months."
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@oromagi
A white flag signifies to all that an approaching negotiator is unarmed, with an intent to surrender or a desire to communicate. Persons carrying or waving a white flag are not to be fired upon, nor are they allowed to open fire."
Let's look at all of that statement:

A white flag signifies to all that an approaching negotiator is unarmed, with an intent to surrender or a desire to communicate. Persons carrying or waving a white flag are not to be fired upon, nor are they allowed to open fire."

Do we accept all of the statement, or ignore the bolded underlined portion as an optional specific meaning of a white flag?

So, according to you, we can ignore stupid Americans? Am I missing something that I don't see that distinction as a dismissal of the fourth amendment?
So, it isn't discriminatory to ignore stupid Americans? Seems we educate today with the intent of growing that population.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@949havoc
-->@oromagi
" A white flag signifies to all that an approaching negotiator is unarmed, with an intent to surrender or a desire to communicate. Persons carrying or waving a white flag are not to be fired upon, nor are they allowed to open fire."
Let's look at all of that statement:

" A white flag signifies to all that an approaching negotiator is unarmed, with an intent to surrender or a desire to communicate. Persons carrying or waving a white flag are not to be fired upon, nor are they allowed to open fire."

Do we accept all of the statement, or ignore the bolded underlined portion as an optional specific meaning of a white flag?
Read my post more carefully.  Whether Trump's intention was surrender or negotiation (I'd say the latter), any such signal necessarily preceded peace negotiations  which began April 2019- two years before Biden.

So, according to you, we can ignore stupid Americans?
Not can, must.  There's a point where some Americans' willful stupidity is threatening the safety of useful, intelligent Americans.  If govt. is evacuating the coast before a hurricane, for example, officials should first make contact with everybody they can and then, as time allows, return to try to convince the stupid hangers on.  But at some point, the threat of imminent harm overtakes govt.'s good faith efforts to evacuate and we have to leave the stubborn stragglers to their destiny. 
To call that abandonment is unfair to the police and firefighters trying their best to evacuate. 

In the case of Afghanistan, CAT5 made landfall last week and Americans had a year and half's prior notice.  Govt. will still make a good faith effort to save American lives but to call the unsaved "abandoned" is false and dismissive of the govt. massive good faith efforts.

Am I missing something that I don't see that distinction as a dismissal of the fourth amendment?
What does the US rights vs unreasonable search & seizure have to do with anything?  Non-sequitur.

So, it isn't discriminatory to ignore stupid Americans?
Yes it is discriminatory, one of the most essential qualities of good government is summoning the courage to ignore the stupid people.

Seems we educate today with the intent of growing that population.
Non-sequitur.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,037
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.”

― Milton Friedman

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,037
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@949havoc
Taliban has given Biden 7 days to evacuate.

See you guys in a week!

"That was 4 days ago!"
dfss9788
dfss9788's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 152
1
2
2
dfss9788's avatar
dfss9788
1
2
2
Should have left that country a long time ago.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Trump 59 days ago:

"Afghanistan, where, by the way, I started the process. All the troops are coming back home. They couldn’t stop the process.

21 years is enough. Don’t we think? 21 years. They couldn’t stop the process. They wanted to, but it was very tough to stop the process when other things…yeah. Thank you. Thank you. It’s a shame. 21 years, by a government that wouldn’t last. The only way they last is if we’re there. What are we going to say? We’ll stay for another 21 years, then we’ll stay for another 50. The whole thing is ridiculous. So we’re bringing our troops back home from Iraq. We’re bringing troops come from Afghanistan. We brought them back home from Syria.”



thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,005
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@949havoc
Actually leaving Afghanistan was a rare act of political courage, and I didn't know Biden had it in him. The last two Presidents vowed to leave, but both failed to do so. The idea of building a liberal democracy out of Afghanistan was absurd on its face and in a sane world would've gotten anyone who suggested such a thing laughed out of the room. He gets an A for effort...but an F for execution. I have no idea what they were thinking as it has been obvious for months now that the Taliban was going to win, but there seemed to be absolutely zero plan for getting equipment and people out. The negative press he's getting on this is completely justified 
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,005
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@oromagi
How many times does the government need to beg US citizens to leave an active warzone before it stops getting characterized as  "abandonment" of those who refuse to leave?
I would guess that most of those US citizens have dual citizenship with the US and Afghanistan or some nearby country, and just don't want to leave. However given the giant clusterfuck that the withdraw became there are probably a few contractors and various oddballs mixed up in the drama
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@thett3
The idea of building a liberal democracy out of Afghanistan was absurd on its face and in a sane world would've gotten anyone who suggested such a thing laughed out of the room.
Agreed.  Also, not our job, according to many promises we've made to many countries.

F for execution.
Disagree.  The only important variable in the plan was the will of the Afghan government to lead.  "No will to lead whatsoever" was one extreme of that variable that was taken seriously considered by US Intelligence and the present scenario represents the best case execution in light of that regrettable but predictable circumstance.  I think our military was rather required and committed to relying on Afghan govt cover in the final weeks since that capacity at least was one of our stated missions for the last  two decades.  If we  did the Afghan Govt's defense for them right up until Aug 31st, then we would have had to leave all those SIVs- translators, intel, engineers in place with the Afghan Govt. right up to Aug 31st and would never have an opportunity to evac.  If we had evac'd all those competent SIVs out of the Afghan Govt before handing the war over to the Govt, we would have telegraphed our bad faith in the Afghans and then been blamed for precipitating collapse.  The way Biden threaded the needle was deft- pull out ahead of schedule so we have a window of a few weeks in which we can evac a rational number of high priority SIVs.  If we had moved much earlier, we'd be on the hook for taking on a lot more refugees.  If we had moved much later, we wouldn't have been able to evac the highly trained and capable refugees we want.  All that and zero US deaths so far?  I call that a B+ at least.
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,005
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@oromagi
It's true that the withdraw, after two decades, was always going to be challenging and probably would've resulted in a lot of negative press no matter who was in charge. I'm actually inclined to defend Biden on this, because I'm a firm opponent of these kinds of wars and after 20 years the divorce is always going to be messy. However it is also clear that the administration was caught completely unaware and did not expect the Afghan government to fold so quickly. But, by summer it was quite obvious which way the wind was blowing: https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1428173822046334981

I don't understand how any rational mind could look at that map and not clearly see the dominos starting to fall. Biden said on July 8th that the government of Afghanistan was not going to fall, but by that time the Taliban was spreading incredibly rapidly. The plan didn't anticipate the obvious happening: the Taliban takeover. When Kabul fell, workers at the embassy were frantically shredding classified documents. Why were they still there? Billions of dollars worth of military equipment was left behind. Certainly this was inevitable to some extent but there was no attempt to get any of it out, or destroy it. The administration was not at all prepared for the evacuations, and people have been stashed in hangers with insufficient (https://nypost.com/2021/08/24/afghan-evacuees-surrounded-by-feces-rats-in-overcrowded-qatar-airbase/). It is so beyond obvious that they didn't have a contingency plan for what happened

The only reason there haven't been US deaths is due to the decisions of the Taliban, not due to the actions of the US government. Stopping evacuations would be comically easy at this point, all it would take would be a few shots fired into the crowd outside the airport, and a few unfortunate souls being strung up along the major roads to put an immediate stop to it. 

On top of all that, I'm sure you can agree that from a PR perspective it has been a complete and utter disaster.

If we had moved much earlier, we'd be on the hook for taking on a lot more refugees.  If we had moved much later, we wouldn't have been able to evac the highly trained and capable refugees we want.  
Interesting take. I can't say I disagree but I'm so used to leftists wanting to pack this country with as many people as possible no matter what the circumstance. However given what you've seen, are you really so confident on the vetting process? I would bet that a lot of extremely unsavory characters are slipping through the cracks and will shortly be in the country.
Mesmer
Mesmer's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 516
3
2
4
Mesmer's avatar
Mesmer
3
2
4
Should have left that country a long time ago.
Yes.

All I see is a country that long since had a good reason to be there and has caused the region to generally hate America.

America is energy independent -- no need to be there for oil. The Soviet Union has been long since dissolved -- the Russian threat is a shell of its former self. Why is America still there then?

This isn't a Joe Biden problem, or whatever 'us-versus-them' tribalistic brainlet conception you want to spin on this. There's been a long chain of both Democrat and Republican presidents before him mucking up the US-Middle East relations with stupid inferences of that region. This stupid interference made Middle Easterners angry enough to cause things like 9/11. Then, America doubles down and interferes EVEN MORE in the Middle East, worsening relations even further and causing more terrorism. All of this keeps costing more and more money to have bases in the Middle East to try to 'stabilize' the region, as well as maintain counter-terrorism operations in America's homeland. This cycle keeps repeating until one side backs off, or there is a war which forces a side to back down.

Nobody should care that this is a bad look for Joe Biden because it's objectively best that America gets out of the Middle East. The Middle East will still hate America for some time, but at least this stops pouring gasoline on the Us-Middle East relations dumpster fire.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 565
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@thett3
Actually, just so we don't get confused and pool the whole middle east together, Afghanistan was indeed the single most open of all Islamic nations to the idea of democratic elections, scientific development (including biology which would entail evolution being admitted), economic welfare benefits for the poor and many other ideals of the western world but what happened was that exactly as the nation became open to it, it has nonstop fallen victim to Jihadists of a variety of kinds. It is truly saddening what the Islamic extremists have done to Afghan culture. It was not a brutal Sharia nation until Al Qaeda got involved.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,302
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
Tony Blair...Dubyas little puppy.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,300
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@949havoc
Democrats: I support war when Biden does it and oppose war when Biden pulls out.  I support minorities and am fine with bombing them.

Republicans: I support war when Trump does it and oppose it when Biden pulls out.  I am pro life and I am fine with more civilians dying.  I support cutting taxes unless those taxes go to war.

Me: I don't care who is in office; lets NOT bomb innocent civilians and waste trillions of tax dollars doing it.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@949havoc
all the people left, were signaled to months and months in advance that the United States was pulling out. They just did not give a date for strategic reasons. The ones left behind are just a victim of evolution
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,037
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Wylted
They probably trusted the government to take care of them.
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,005
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@RationalMadman
It can’t be forced though. Tying democracy to an invading foreign power is insanity. If Afghanistan becomes a democracy it has to come from the people themselves 
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 565
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@thett3
It did, they wanted it and enjoyed the start of it.
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
-->
@RationalMadman
Indeed. I watched a couple of old documentaries and I was pleasantly surprised at the amount of support for Ghani's government, in spite of its widespread corruption. Most of the support came from women, which is pretty obvious. I'm assuming the reason is that once you've tasted freedom, you can never want sharia back. I think it was only in 2019-2020 that Ghani came under fire for allowing conservative members to debate dress codes. He also had a tendency to turn a blind eye towards drugs and corruption. I'm still not sure how the Taliban won against approximately 17,000 US-trained Afghan commandos. It seems impossible for the Taliban to defeat all of them in a single week. The Taliban had no armored divisions, it should've followed that the Commandos would beat Taliban in any hand-to-hand combat. I don't understand how Afghan collapsed in under a week.