The Taliban [b]allowed[/b] their fellow terrorists to attack U.S. troops (and helpless civilians).
The f*cking a$$holes stopped women and children from getting to the Kabul airport, but suicide bombers? They didn't have a problem with THEM getting to the airport.
Taliban are mortal enemies with ISIS, having executed a bunch just days ago.
Taliban doesn鈥檛 have the manpower in place to guarantee security in the city. Neither do we. ANA did - but they鈥檙e gone.
This isn鈥檛 some Taliban plot, it hurts their image and prestige, and makes it harder for them to look legitimate in front of the Afghan tribes - who are also well-armed and trained-up at the expense of the ANA.
What this really shows is that Taliban has limited counter-intelligence capabilities.
Even aside from the fact that ISIS and the Taliban are enemies, it's important to note that this never would've happened if we hadn't fucking invaded Afghanistan.
@beckyromero [quote]That's your solution? A national surveillance state?[/quote]
Not really, just using the data we already collected to that point to prevent this kind of shit from happening moving forward.
[quote]Do you really think that one air marshal with a gun could have "easily" stop any of those four hijackings? Do you realize that on at least one plane hijackers took a hostage to force their way into the cockpit? They were determined to DIE in order to kill as many innocent people as possible. Do you really think they'd be deterred by one air marshal?[/quote]
The 9/11 hijackers were only armed with boxknives, whereas flight marshals are armed with guns. If there had been a flight marshal on any of the 9/11 flights, it would've been a slaughter, full stop, hostage or no hostage.
[quote]Most people didn't think the Japanese could attack Pearl Harbor.
Most people didn't think terrorists could use commercial airliners to attack skyscrapers, either[/quote]
Not really. Japan had long been known to have a powerful blue-water Navy. We only really thought they wouldn't attack because they didn't want to get destroyed in a massive Naval campaign. As for the 9/11 thing, it's not as if this was the first time this kind of thing had been attempted. People had hijacked planes successfully before and attempted to use them for kamikazi attacks. The 9/11 hijackers were an unusually motivated and to some extent, clever bunch, but barring that, nobody should've been surprised that it was possible.
[quote]The airline industry needs to hire you as an actuary. You're the type of person they'd want to argue on their behalf: "Well, sure we're going to have to pay out millions if one of our airliners crash. But it will cost more if we do these extra maintenance procedures."[/quote]
If the insurance company I was working for wanted to kill 71,000 people to save 3,000, you're damn right I would tell them that that's a shitty idea and I hope to God that they would listen. And look, if the idea of not expending money to save human life sounds cold for you, just take a second to imagine what we could've done with that same amount of money.
36,000 people die from car crashes per year. Imagine if we had spend that same 2.2 trillion dollars on upgrading our transportation infrastructure so we wouldn't have to risk our lives on the roadways so much anymore. 647,000 people die from heart disease every year. Imagine if we had spent that 2.2 trillion dollars upgrading our food system and investing in medical technology (such as artificial hearts) to save people from this sad demise.
I'm just saying, it only makes sense to protect human life by the most economically efficient methods available because like it or not, the gov't only has a finite amount of money to spend. This whole endless war thing ain't it, chief.
Stop it with Trump already. Biden owns this lock stock and barrel. He has shown no fear of challenging and changing every Trump policy he saw. He had plenty of time to look at this and he decided this was the way to do things. We will never know how it would have gone with Trump. We do know how Biden did it. It is an unmitigated disaster, for the Afghanis, the American citizens who worked and are trying to get out of there, and our military. It is going to get even worse.
All the Biden folks who yell...."Trump made Joe do this" are laughable. Do you really believe Biden works for Trump?
Becky: Taliban and ISIS are [u]not[/u] allies. They are competing militias. Mafia and Camorra. They kill each other.
When the Taliban opened prison doors in Kabul some weeks ago they [u]executed[/u] everybody they were able to identify as an ISIS fighter.
What we are seeing now is just a glimpse of the bleak future of Afghanistan: an endless civil war between competing militias and their warlords. Another Somalia. Another dying country.
13 brave soldiers dead because they tried to save lives 馃槩
@beckyromero The main aim of the airport slaughter was to showcase what ISIS-K is capable of doing. It was a demonstration, and the TALIBAN were helpless. [u]That[/u] was the purpose. It wasn't an attack on America, it was an attack on the TALIBAN.
[quote]"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"?[/quote] Yes, true, and it means the TALIBAN may soon be allies of the West against ISIS.
@QuixoticSoul You know everything fell apart when Biden pulled the troops out before the Americans and Afghan allies. It's crazy how you let Trump live in your head just like your little buddy on here who is always posting about Trump.
@ron122 Jan saw us with 2500 troops in Afghanistan, mostly support personnel. Biden only increased the numbers of combat troops in Afghanistan - now its 6000, with a higher proportion of trigger pullers.
Unsurprisingly, you have this entire situation backwards.
