ADVERTISEMENT

Islamic State in Afghanistan

binsfeldcyhawk2

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 13, 2006
36,927
51,917
113
One of the Pentagon's top civilian officials revealed that assessment at a Senate hearing Tuesday morning, seemingly surprising some members on the dais at a time of widespread scrutiny into whether the Biden administration made the right decision to withdraw fully from its longest war zone.
"It's precisely that threat that we need to remain vigilant, and disrupt," Colin Kahl, the undersecretary of defense for policy, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday morning – the latest hearing into the calamitous U.S. pullout from Afghanistan. "We actually are fairly certain they have the intention to do so."
Kahl said the terrorist network, known as ISIS-K, ISKP or IS-Khorasan, among others, "could potentially" develop the capability to launch external attacks within six-12 months. Likewise al-Qaida, which maintains safe havens in Afghanistan now under control of its allies the Taliban, "could potentially" have that capability in one-two years, Kahl added, citing U.S. intelligence assessments.

Analysts believe the Islamic State group's Afghan presence represents perhaps the most potent foreign threat to America.
"Right now, ISIS-K is probably the most capable in terms of orchestrating a plot that could be a viable threat to the U.S. homeland," Colin Clarke, senior research fellow at private intelligence firm The Soufan Group, tells U.S. News. Other Islamic State group affiliates, including in West Africa and Central Africa, have momentum but are more focused on local issues.
Others believe the threat timeline ISIS-K presents is not unique.

 
One of the Pentagon's top civilian officials revealed that assessment at a Senate hearing Tuesday morning, seemingly surprising some members on the dais at a time of widespread scrutiny into whether the Biden administration made the right decision to withdraw fully from its longest war zone.
"It's precisely that threat that we need to remain vigilant, and disrupt," Colin Kahl, the undersecretary of defense for policy, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday morning – the latest hearing into the calamitous U.S. pullout from Afghanistan. "We actually are fairly certain they have the intention to do so."
Kahl said the terrorist network, known as ISIS-K, ISKP or IS-Khorasan, among others, "could potentially" develop the capability to launch external attacks within six-12 months. Likewise al-Qaida, which maintains safe havens in Afghanistan now under control of its allies the Taliban, "could potentially" have that capability in one-two years, Kahl added, citing U.S. intelligence assessments.

Analysts believe the Islamic State group's Afghan presence represents perhaps the most potent foreign threat to America.
"Right now, ISIS-K is probably the most capable in terms of orchestrating a plot that could be a viable threat to the U.S. homeland," Colin Clarke, senior research fellow at private intelligence firm The Soufan Group, tells U.S. News. Other Islamic State group affiliates, including in West Africa and Central Africa, have momentum but are more focused on local issues.
Others believe the threat timeline ISIS-K presents is not unique.

Ok?
 
This was a concern of mine but I don't know how we alleviate it without having our troops constantly in action and constantly fighting in Afghanistan.
Personally I think the Obama DOD got it right in 2014-16. Reduced troop numbers and transitioned to a counter terrorism/training mission. By 2016 we were at a sustainable level IMO. Of course Trump F’d that up with dealing with the Taliban and basically signaling to them and the Afghan government we were going to leave. Joe pressed with the deal and botched the withdrawal.

…..and here we are.

_120379523_acb5c004-49fa-4d0c-9e2f-1981a6baae27.png
 
President Biden's hand was forced and the correct decision made over sending in Brigades and full reengagement in a Civil War as per what President Biden previously advised with the stage for this mess set up in 2018-2020.
His hand wasn’t forced…he owns his decisions. We’ll see if they were the correct ones in the next few years.

Hopefully they were
 
Personally I think the Obama DOD got it right in 2014-16. Reduced troop numbers and transitioned to a counter terrorism/training mission. By 2016 we were at a sustainable level IMO.
What would you consider an unsustainable number of Pulse nightclub shootings?
 
  • Like
Reactions: artradley
I could sustain zero for a long time.

I think the calculus has to move beyond casualties measured in the battlefields abroad.
This policy incurs casualties at home. Our lives and our liberties.
None of the neocon dreams are worth trading away our lives and liberties in exchange for a panopticon state at home to maintain support for an empire abroad.
 
Yes it was. He was forced to reengage and send in thousands more troops or withdraw.

Why would he have had to send in thousands of troops to reengage?

The Afghan forces were doing the grunt work, and we were providing the intel and air support.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 86Hawkeye
Why would he have had to send in thousands of troops to reengage?

The Afghan forces were doing the grunt work, and we were providing the intel and air support.
Because that was the agreement. The fake lure of peace was because the Taliban pledged to not attack our forces IF we left on Trumps timetable which Biden already extended to try and get people out.
 
Because that was the agreement. The fake lure of peace was because the Taliban pledged to not attack our forces IF we left on Trumps timetable which Biden already extended to try and get people out.
And a real leader would have walked in and said


"That's the old guys shit, I'm the new guy, we have enough bombs to blow each and every grain of sand to the ****ing moon and you have been running for 20 years, so here is the way its actually going to work goat ****ers". Instead, we have slow Joe.
 
Man, if only there were some form of middle ground between 20 years and leaving under the cover of darkness when your own allies didn't even know what you are doing. If only...
Ah yes. It would have been a couple of months. Then just a few after that. Then only a year or so. Then a couple more after that. Then what’s another decade or so? If history has taught us anything, it’s that occupying Afghanistan is a viable long term strategy that only improved both Afghanistan and it’s occupiers. Good thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chishawk1425
And a real leader would have walked in and said


"That's the old guys shit, I'm the new guy, we have enough bombs to blow each and every grain of sand to the ****ing moon and you have been running for 20 years, so here is the way its actually going to work goat ****ers". Instead, we have slow Joe.
I always enjoy the masturbatory hard guy comic book fantasy world of right wingers. 😆
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chishawk1425
Ah yes. It would have been a couple of months. Then just a few after that. Then only a year or so. Then a couple more after that. Then what’s another decade or so? If history has taught us anything, it’s that occupying Afghanistan is a viable long term strategy that only improved both Afghanistan and it’s occupiers. Good thinking.
Tell me you have zero faith in Bidens ability to follow.through with something without telling my you have zero faith in bidens ability to follow through with something...



Weak leadership is what you just described.
 
They are a sovereign nation and that's what they want. We have no right to tell them how to govern themselves.
That's fair, I think if you were being honest though you would acknowledge there was much more that could be done from a relocation of people not wanting to be part of the new regime(with proper time for vetting) and acts of putting a structure in place with world powers so that it wasn't "China backs the taliban" 48 hours after we were watching dudes fall from planes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 86Hawkeye
And a real leader would have walked in and said


"That's the old guys shit, I'm the new guy, we have enough bombs to blow each and every grain of sand to the ****ing moon and you have been running for 20 years, so here is the way its actually going to work goat ****ers". Instead, we have slow Joe.
Once again we would have been fully reengaged in a Civil war on foreign soil with many more deaths and trillions spent and given to the neocons and their businesses for what? My God.
 
Once again we would have been fully reengaged in a Civil war on foreign soil with many more deaths and trillions spent and given to the neocons and their businesses for what? My God.
You can just say you don't have faith in Bidens ability to follow through you don't have to make hypothetical situations.
 
That's fair, I think if you were being honest though you would acknowledge there was much more that could be done from a relocation of people not wanting to be part of the new regime(with proper time for vetting) and acts of putting a structure in place with world powers so that it wasn't "China backs the taliban" 48 hours after we were watching dudes fall from planes.
Other than foreign nationals, who was going to leave? Afghan natives with thousands of years of family history aren't going anywhere. They will adapt as they always have.
 
JFC. This was the current and the past administrations fault. You are being the pisspants you make fun of.
I 100% agree that Trump and Bidwn own responsibility for the poor exit. What I don't agree with is the idea that Joe couldn't have done anything to change it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT