The withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan

[Jess77]

Well, you said Afghanis should be OK with the CIA running covert operations in their country.

I don't believe I said that. If I did, please show me where.

[Josh]

Well, you said Afghanis should be OK with the CIA running covert operations in their country.

I don't believe I said that. If I did, please show me where.

Why should the US have intelligence operatives all over the globe? Because it is the job of the government to keep its citizens safe and alliances with allies and intelligence operatives in every remote corner of the globe, help make that possible.

[Ken]

The Economist put together this graph of Afghan war deaths over the past several decades. Numbers are in the thousands. I would not have guessed that 2019 was the worst year year of the war, which probably reflects my USA-centric point of view. It isn't clear if this includes Taliban deaths or not. There isn't a specific category for them.

[Jess77]

Well, you said Afghanis should be OK with the CIA running covert operations in their country.

I don't believe I said that. If I did, please show me where.

Why should the US have intelligence operatives all over the globe? Because it is the job of the government to keep its citizens safe and alliances with allies and intelligence operatives in every remote corner of the globe, help make that possible.

Yes, but I never said that the Afghanis should be ok with that. I said from the standpoint of the US, it is what nations do. It is each individual nation's job to block that if they don't want to allow it.

[Josh]

I don't believe I said that. If I did, please show me where.

Why should the US have intelligence operatives all over the globe? Because it is the job of the government to keep its citizens safe and alliances with allies and intelligence operatives in every remote corner of the globe, help make that possible.

Yes, but I never said that the Afghanis should be ok with that. I said from the standpoint of the US, it is what nations do. It is each individual nation's job to block that if they don't want to allow it.

Every country has laws against spying, sedition, and foreign agents operating covertly. It should be obvious that doing such things is intrinsically immoral.

If one thinks it’s OK for the US to do that, it belies an inherent belief in American superiority.

[ken_sylvania]

The most recent news reports were that the US military used drones to remotely take out an ISIS car bomb that was headed to the airport. The subsequent explosions of the car bomb on the street killed innocent bystanders, mostly a nearby family who were getting into their own car.

I'm not sure what else the US military should have done. The ISIS suicide bomber who killed 170 at the airport was just wearing a suicide vest. This car bomb was many times larger and could have killed hundreds had it gotten through to the airport where there are crowds milling about. Sometimes in war there are no good choices, only less bad ones.

My fear in all of this is that the US no longer has intelligence in Afghanistan. The US was depending on the Taliban to provide them with intelligence. How do we know that these people the US took out were really a car bomb and not someone the Taliban just wanted to get rid of?

We know it was a car-bomb because of the secondary explosions of all the explosives packed into the car. As to what it's target was if not the airport? Who knows. Maybe a school, marketplace or a mosque? Those or the other kinds of things that they car bomb. But the airport where US troops and US allies were evacuating does seem the most logical target by far doesn't it?

Or maybe we don't know this after all. The New York Times reports that

In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No ISIS Bomb
U.S. officials said a Reaper drone followed a car for hours and then fired based on evidence it was carrying explosives. But in-depth video analysis and interviews at the site cast doubt on that account.

Times reporting has identified the driver as Zemari Ahmadi, a longtime worker for a U.S. aid group. The evidence suggests that his travels that day actually involved transporting colleagues to and from work. And an analysis of video feeds showed that what the military may have seen was Mr. Ahmadi and a colleague loading canisters of water into his trunk to bring home to his family.

While the U.S. military said the drone strike might have killed three civilians, Times reporting shows that it killed 10, including seven children, in a dense residential block.

The military has called this a "righteous strike."

Yahoo News article here without a paywall.

[Szdfan]

My fear in all of this is that the US no longer has intelligence in Afghanistan. The US was depending on the Taliban to provide them with intelligence. How do we know that these people the US took out were really a car bomb and not someone the Taliban just wanted to get rid of?

We know it was a car-bomb because of the secondary explosions of all the explosives packed into the car. As to what it's target was if not the airport? Who knows. Maybe a school, marketplace or a mosque? Those or the other kinds of things that they car bomb. But the airport where US troops and US allies were evacuating does seem the most logical target by far doesn't it?

Or maybe we don't know this after all. The New York Times reports that

In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No ISIS Bomb
U.S. officials said a Reaper drone followed a car for hours and then fired based on evidence it was carrying explosives. But in-depth video analysis and interviews at the site cast doubt on that account.

Times reporting has identified the driver as Zemari Ahmadi, a longtime worker for a U.S. aid group. The evidence suggests that his travels that day actually involved transporting colleagues to and from work. And an analysis of video feeds showed that what the military may have seen was Mr. Ahmadi and a colleague loading canisters of water into his trunk to bring home to his family.

While the U.S. military said the drone strike might have killed three civilians, Times reporting shows that it killed 10, including seven children, in a dense residential block.

The military has called this a "righteous strike."

Yahoo News article here without a paywall.

Washington Post reported something similar—

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investig ... o_nav=true

[Josh]

So the U.S. bombs a car of one of our “allies” they simultaneously claim is fearing for their life from the Taliban and needs to come to the U.S. as refugees.

Likewise, recent refugees have arrived with measles. Apparently they aren’t required to be vaccinated.

Haven’t heard a peep from the U.S. government about covid vaccinations for “refugees” either. Psaki acknowledged there is no requirement in a recent press conference, but refused to answer any more questions.

[ken_sylvania]

So the U.S. bombs a car of one of our “allies” they simultaneously claim is fearing for their life from the Taliban and needs to come to the U.S. as refugees.

With friends like this, who needs enemies?

[Josh]

They were trying to car-bomb American targets at the airport not the Taliban HQ. Or are you that trusting of the Taliban and their capabilities to think they can properly secure the evacuation zone and protect the lives of US soldiers and evacuees without US help? When we do wrap up and leave in short order it will be their problem.

I would also given greater than even odds that the Taliban and US military are currently cooperating on intelligence against ISIS and that Taliban might even be directing the US military where to strike.

It appears the car occupants were loading their car with jugs of water. Whilst I suspect the containers were more than 3.4 oz each, in violating of TSA regulations for preventing terrorism, drone-striking the entire car seems like an excessive enforcement activity.

We can all be very thankful none of us are targets of a foreign, global superpower that drone strikes us for going about our everyday lives. But perhaps we should lift up a national lament that we are part of a global superpower that does that very thing.