Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.
Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
The US military says it believes it has killed a planner for the Afghan branch of the Islamic State group in a drone strike in the east of the country.
The suspected member of the IS-K group was targeted in Nangarhar province.
IS-K said it had carried out an attack outside Kabul airport on Thursday that may have killed as many as 170 people, including 13 US troops.
A mass airlift has been under way at the airport since Taliban militants overran the capital this month.
In the past two weeks, more than 100,000 people are believed to have been evacuated, with the deadline set by the US for its forces to leave Afghanistan expiring on Tuesday.
The US drone strike is the first reported in Afghanistan since Thursday's blast.
Capt Bill Urban of Central Command said: "The unmanned airstrike occurred in the Nangarhar province of Afghanistan. Initial indications are that we killed the target. We know of no civilian casualties."
He described it as an "over-the-horizon counterterrorism operation".
A Reaper drone, launched from the Middle East, struck the militant while he was in a car with another IS member, killing them both, an official told Reuters news agency.
Most of IS-K's several thousand extremists are believed to be in hiding in the province, east of Kabul.
He was asked if he believed it was right for the Biden administration to stick with the August 31 deadline for removing American troops from the war-torn country.
'The bottom line is, our work is not done. We're going to have to go after ISIS. I'm glad the president said we're going to hunt them down and pay a price for what they did in killing our warriors. And we should,' Paneta said.
'We're going to have to go back in to get ISIS. We're probably going to have to go back in when Al Qaeda resurrects itself, as they will, with this Taliban. They've gave safe haven to Al Qaeda before, they'll probably do it again.'
He added: 'I understand that we're trying to get our troops out of there, but the bottom line is, we can leave a battlefield, but we can't leave the War on Terrorism, which still is a threat to our security.'
In other words Bolton & Esper were right to oppose the withdrawal. But that got them fired.
The US is going to have to keep going back in until it decides to tackle the real cause instead of continuing to treat the symptom..
Originally posted by Officer of EngineersView Post
No. Things would be still be a clusterfuck.
Right, what the civvies do not understand is that a withdrawal is way way more complicated than going in. None of us gets that and the media is not helping.
I heard technical critiques of how this withdrawal could have been better planned but they miss one important point.
Overall there was a dependency that the ANA would not fold.
So people say well what was the contingency in case ANA did fold.
We're seeing it now. The optics are bad but evacuations ARE WORKING. They had to reinforce by sending a few more troops.
What you are not seeing is American soldiers being paraded as hostage trophies. That would be failure.
Because then it would be clear they did not have a plan B.
They did. It's not pretty but its working.
The military has to make the best of a crap situation and some how they always do.
So all the critiques on withdrawal are looking at the wrong place.
Don't look at the withdrawal but the decision to withdraw. The political decision.
Feb 2020, Doha what Trump worked out. He had his pressures. Margin for victory is tight. COVID just started, election year and he just could not pass on this even to the point of disregarding competent advice so as to retain office. Biden's hands were tied after that decision was made. He had to go along. Amrullah's argument is Biden should have reneged since the terms of agreement were being violated by the other side. And we saw how the TB keeps to its word because no agreement entails the TB taking over the country while the allies were in the process of withdrawing !!
The argument is keeping a small number of troops there would not have made much difference costs wise and averted this disaster.
It does mean being posted there for an undetermined time. The Afghans didn't want the US out. The Paks did.
US forces in Germany, Korea, Japan and the ME not leaving any time soon.
Trump's counter is why should the US be net provider of security to its adversaries.
The United States, along with 97 other countries, announced Sunday that they had reached an agreement with the Taliban to allow them to continue to get Afghan allies out of the country after the Aug. 31 withdrawal deadline.
Why it matters: "We are all committed to ensuring that our citizens, nationals and residents, employees, Afghans who have worked with us and those who are at risk can continue to travel freely to destinations outside Afghanistan," the joint statement said.
"We have received assurances from the Taliban that all foreign nationals and any Afghan citizen with travel authorization from our countries will be allowed to proceed in a safe and orderly manner to points of departure and travel outside the country," the statement continued.
"We will continue issuing travel documentation to designated Afghans, and we have the clear expectation of and commitment from the Taliban that they can travel to our respective countries. We note the public statements of the Taliban confirming this understanding."
Sher Mohammed Abas Stanekzai, the Taliban's chief negotiator, said on Friday that the group would not stop people from departing.
Of note: National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said on Face the Nation that the U.S. has "considerable leverage" to "hold the Taliban to its commitments."
"The Taliban have communicated to us...that they're allowing for safe passage. We’re not just going to take their word for it," he added.
____________
“He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”
Germany ended evacuation flights on Thursday. The German military has evacuated 5,347 people, including more than 4,100 Afghans.
Germany previously said it had identified 10,000 people who needed to be evacuated, including Afghan local staff, journalists and human rights activists. About 300 German citizens remain in Afghanistan, a spokesman for the foreign office in Berlin said on Friday.
UNITED STATES
The U.S. military will continue evacuating people from Kabul airport until Aug. 31 if needed, but will prioritize the removal of U.S. troops and military equipment on the last couple of days, the Pentagon has said.
Washington has evacuated 5,400 U.S. citizens since Aug. 14, according to the U.S. government.
There were still about 350 U.S. citizens in Afghanistan trying to leave the country, a State Department spokesman said.
BRITAIN
Britain's last military flight left Kabul late on Saturday after evacuating more than 15,000 people in the two weeks since the Taliban took control of Afghanistan, the defence ministry said.
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
The UAE said on Thursday it had helped evacuate 36,500 people to date, including 8,500 coming to the UAE via its national carriers or airports.
QATAR
Qatar said on Thursday it had helped evacuate more than 40,000 people to Doha and "evacuation efforts will continue in the coming days in consultation with international partners".
Top 5
The show only works if there are allied troops to make it happen
U.S. troops—along with the 600 members of Afghan security forces currently onsite—will have to clear the runway, secure the airport perimeter, cram thousands of Afghans and U.S. citizens into planes, andprepare for the worst-case-scenario: Taliban attacks, which could easily bring air traffic in and out of the country to a standstill.
Yeah, and deservedly so. He knew it, felt it was worth it and did it anyway. That is honor. No sneaky snake Vindman, but a person who put it all on the line to say his peice.
Originally posted by Officer of EngineersView Post
For a BN Command, it surprises me that he didn't even ask what the risks and committements were to holding Bagram.
He is the Commander of Schools Battalion. In charge of the School of Infantry at Lejeune. Was on his way out and knew it. Posted another video stating that he was resigning and giving up his retirement and career.
He has less than 18 yrs in, Keeping his self from getting Courts Martialed. Wouldn't have made it to retire. Bet he's looking for Foxnews/OAN job and a book deal
Tweet
Comment