Isn't it strange when panic lines up perfectly with pre-existing American policy aims. What's got me scratching my head is this coming from the BBC, an unlikely source for this sort of information.
"As violent as western police can get, it's hard to imagine even them freaking out after an explosion and opening fire into a crowd of people." Maybe. I suspect it's not uncommon. The Haymarket Massacre, e.g. In any case, thank for this powerful piece.
Remember the roaring 60s, the Golden Hippie Years, when it was safe to hitch-hiking or tracking from Europe through Turkey, Iran to Afghanistan to watch beautiful Kabul girls in Mini Skirts walk on the Street to go to schools or University ! Those were the Good Days and BEVOR the USA started meddling in Afghanistan !!
While human nature does not excuse the needless deaths and injuries, it does explain it. This was not some sort of Biden policy failure or even US military incompetence - other allied nations were involved. Inarguably, the counter attack was an over-reaction. To people who have never spent time in a combat zone, this story may seem inexplicable. To one who has, it is a typical panic reaction - shoot in the direction everyone else is shooting. Surprise attacks often result in friendly fire. That is part of the horror of war.
I believe Biden may have been sabotaged by 2nd and 3rd level officials who resisted the plan to withdraw, just as Trump was sabotaged for 4 years. It's either that or they believed the propaganda that Ghani would hold on for a few months. So those are the two reasons why there was no effort to get both US and European civilians out during these 6 mos. Either way, it's either insubordination or total incompetence in not believing your own internal intelligence agencies and believing media wishful thinking instead.
I think the simplest reason is that starting evacuations early would have tipped their hand that the government they'd spent 20 years building was a known farce. Thus the wall to wall lies. It's what presidents do.
Could be. Being blunt with Ghani that the policy was settled instead of "on the table," as Blinken told him in a leaked email, might have caused him to bolt and run at the time, which would have brought the same results earlier. However, being wishy washy convinced NATO allies that we weren't really leaving and they didn't get their people out, either.
Isn't it strange when panic lines up perfectly with pre-existing American policy aims. What's got me scratching my head is this coming from the BBC, an unlikely source for this sort of information.
A mystery --- 170 dead Afghans and 13 US soldiers...
Just how a suicide bomber, in densely packed crowd, can kill 183 people?
"As violent as western police can get, it's hard to imagine even them freaking out after an explosion and opening fire into a crowd of people." Maybe. I suspect it's not uncommon. The Haymarket Massacre, e.g. In any case, thank for this powerful piece.
We will never hear this story in the main stream media
Remember the roaring 60s, the Golden Hippie Years, when it was safe to hitch-hiking or tracking from Europe through Turkey, Iran to Afghanistan to watch beautiful Kabul girls in Mini Skirts walk on the Street to go to schools or University ! Those were the Good Days and BEVOR the USA started meddling in Afghanistan !!
Last paragraph: Amen sister
While human nature does not excuse the needless deaths and injuries, it does explain it. This was not some sort of Biden policy failure or even US military incompetence - other allied nations were involved. Inarguably, the counter attack was an over-reaction. To people who have never spent time in a combat zone, this story may seem inexplicable. To one who has, it is a typical panic reaction - shoot in the direction everyone else is shooting. Surprise attacks often result in friendly fire. That is part of the horror of war.
Drop the voting charade? Why, the peasants might just go for the pitchforks.
I believe Biden may have been sabotaged by 2nd and 3rd level officials who resisted the plan to withdraw, just as Trump was sabotaged for 4 years. It's either that or they believed the propaganda that Ghani would hold on for a few months. So those are the two reasons why there was no effort to get both US and European civilians out during these 6 mos. Either way, it's either insubordination or total incompetence in not believing your own internal intelligence agencies and believing media wishful thinking instead.
I think the simplest reason is that starting evacuations early would have tipped their hand that the government they'd spent 20 years building was a known farce. Thus the wall to wall lies. It's what presidents do.
Could be. Being blunt with Ghani that the policy was settled instead of "on the table," as Blinken told him in a leaked email, might have caused him to bolt and run at the time, which would have brought the same results earlier. However, being wishy washy convinced NATO allies that we weren't really leaving and they didn't get their people out, either.
Blinken is that particularly horrible type of person that Washington excels at churning out.