Politics

Come here to talk about topics that are not related to development, or even Kansas City.
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Politics

Post by im2kull »

DColeKC wrote: Sat Sep 03, 2022 12:39 pm I also voted for Biden, strictly out of fear thinking about what 4 more years of Trump would have looked like.

Do you agree with one of the statements above claiming Trump would have had the same horrific exit from Afghanistan?
I do not. I'm pretty confident it would have been a more deliberate, intentional exit that was not so hasty and ill planned. I also have no doubt that we wouldn't have been attacked in the same manner as we were under Biden. Biden hasn't exactly done anything to instill fear or a sense of retribution to anyone. We've seen Russia attack Ukraine and continue an unabated 9 month long war, we've seen Afghanistan fall, China encircle Taiwan, and N. Korea continue its missile program.. to the extent of actually launching several test ICBMs over the Pacific. To the contrary, we know how the world reacted under Trump and how much less rattling and provocation occurred. Especially after he green lit the Soleimani attack in a country to whom we didn't even consult with while attacking on their own soil. I think everyone knew we meant business after that. We acted like the big A-hole we have to act like to gain that respect and to avoid being blindsided by another country or terrorist org.
aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12625
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Politics

Post by aknowledgeableperson »

"We've seen Russia attack Ukraine and continue an unabated 9 month long war,"
" To the contrary, we know how the world reacted under Trump and how much less rattling and provocation occurred. Especially after he green lit the Soleimani attack"

I believe under Trump Russia would have still invaded Ukraine but it would have ended long ago with Russia taking over most if not all of that country. Biden had the relationship with European leaders which helped to unite most of Europe to help Ukraine whereas Trump didn't have the type of relationship with Europe's leaders and take the lead in helping Ukraine. Also helping Ukraine was not in line with his America First policy. The Soleimani attack was defended as being in America's interest due to prior Iranian actions and possible future actions involving American citizens and military personnel.





'
User avatar
DColeKC
Ambassador
Posts: 3729
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Politics

Post by DColeKC »

phuqueue wrote: Sat Sep 03, 2022 9:29 pm The Afghanistan cake was already baked years ago. America had twenty years to install an Afghan government that could stand on its own. It is a problem that long predates Biden, or Trump for that matter. Strongly doubt that Trump or anyone else would have handled the exit any better since the fundamental problem was that Afghanistan didn't have a government capable of operating without American support. The alternative option wasn't "handle the exit better," it was "stay in Afghanistan forever."
I'd 100% unite with someone I mostly disagree with on policies I support. I'm not and never had even on a team politically. I've even got shit on here several times for this "Playing both sides" thing.
This is my point though. You don't support the same policies, so you are not going to "unite." And that's fine, I'm not calling you out, I am using you and Link as concrete examples of why "unity" is a pipe dream. You can call Dems out for running on it if you want I guess but the whole "unity" thing just seems like an empty distraction. Politicians always run on nice-sounding messages that actually mean nothing and/or that they have no real intention of following through on.
I actually completely agree with you on the unity thing. We have never been and never will be United. Our form of government doesn't allow it.

On Afghanistan, I do think Trump would have dealt with the equipment situation and exit strategy a bit better but can't disagree that it's a long term issue spanning multiple administrations.
User avatar
DColeKC
Ambassador
Posts: 3729
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Politics

Post by DColeKC »

Fountains wrote: Sat Sep 03, 2022 11:45 pm I applaud Biden on Afghanistan that's one of those things wether we did it now or 30 years from now nothing would change. He could have held out to avoid political backlash but didn't. Unfortunately until recently it seemed to snow ball for him. Although it might not matter as the GOP continues to step on its dick.
Odd to applaud the death of Americans and leaving 7 BILLION dollars worth of equipment behind. It is one of the biggest, most embarrassing military blunders in our countries history. I'm sure the american people would have understood a simple message saying we would not be able to pullout in the originally proposed timeline due to the risk of American and other innocent lives being lost and needing more time to get equipment out of the hands of our enemies.
User avatar
DColeKC
Ambassador
Posts: 3729
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Politics

Post by DColeKC »

Fountains wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 12:49 pm
DColeKC wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 12:46 pm
Fountains wrote: Sat Sep 03, 2022 11:45 pm I applaud Biden on Afghanistan that's one of those things wether we did it now or 30 years from now nothing would change. He could have held out to avoid political backlash but didn't. Unfortunately until recently it seemed to snow ball for him. Although it might not matter as the GOP continues to step on its dick.
Odd to applaud the death of Americans and leaving 7 BILLION dollars worth of equipment behind. It is one of the biggest, most embarrassing military blunders in our countries history. I'm sure the american people would have understood a simple message saying we would not be able to pullout in the originally proposed timeline due to the risk of American and other innocent lives being lost and needing more time to get equipment out of the hands of our enemies.
Again people were going to die regardless there was no seamless transition wether it was last year or 30 years from now. Those who don't understand this don't understand the history of Afghanistan
I've got a fairly good understanding of the history, could also learn more. Doesn't mean any of us are experts in hypotheticals, so my claim Trump would have done better is just pissing in the wind. No different than you saying nothing would have been different.

I don't think there was anyway to get out of there clean as a whistle.
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Politics

Post by im2kull »

Fountains wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 12:49 pm
DColeKC wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 12:46 pm
Fountains wrote: Sat Sep 03, 2022 11:45 pm I applaud Biden on Afghanistan that's one of those things wether we did it now or 30 years from now nothing would change. He could have held out to avoid political backlash but didn't. Unfortunately until recently it seemed to snow ball for him. Although it might not matter as the GOP continues to step on its dick.
Odd to applaud the death of Americans and leaving 7 BILLION dollars worth of equipment behind. It is one of the biggest, most embarrassing military blunders in our countries history. I'm sure the american people would have understood a simple message saying we would not be able to pullout in the originally proposed timeline due to the risk of American and other innocent lives being lost and needing more time to get equipment out of the hands of our enemies.
Again people were going to die regardless there was no seamless transition wether it was last year or 30 years from now. Those who don't understand this don't understand the history of Afghanistan
American soldiers didn't have to die, and neither did Afghans clinging to our planes before falling to their deaths from hundreds and thousands of feet in the air. Leaving Afghanistan was inevitable, but to do it in such a careless manner was completely avoidable.
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Politics

Post by im2kull »

aknowledgeableperson wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:56 am I believe under Trump Russia would have still invaded Ukraine but it would have ended long ago with Russia taking over most if not all of that country.
What makes you believe that Russia would have invaded Ukraine under the Trump administration? Did they do so under his admin? Did they not push the issue under Biden because of Bidens many obvious weaknesses? Does the Kremlin view Biden as being weak, incompetent, and unlikely to launch a counter offensive to an invasion?
aknowledgeableperson wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:56 am Biden had the relationship with European leaders which helped to unite most of Europe to help Ukraine
No. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine is the SOLE reason for European unity with Ukraine at the moment. The US sat largely in the shadows at the start of the war. And, even now, the US plays a very neutered role, at least publicly. We have been reduced to an arms dealer, not a world leader and feared force to be directly reckoned with.
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Politics

Post by im2kull »

Fountains wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:24 pm
im2kull wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:23 pm
Fountains wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 12:49 pm

Again people were going to die regardless there was no seamless transition wether it was last year or 30 years from now. Those who don't understand this don't understand the history of Afghanistan
American soldiers didn't have to die, and neither did Afghans clinging to our planes before falling to their deaths from hundreds and thousands of feet in the air. Leaving Afghanistan was inevitable, but to do it in such a careless manner was completely avoidable.
How?
For real?

By drawing down our troops slowly and deliberately.
By removing war assets and equipment slowly and deliberately, instead of completely abandoning them.
By avoiding a last minute, extremely rushed, unannounced evacuation from Kabul.
By not leaving behind every person we had told we would evacuate before exiting, and burning every bridge we had built. WHY do you think there was a large crowd at the Airport? The crowd was THE folks we had promised to evacuate.
By having a proper plan, leadership, and communication in place. The fact that most Americans on the ground didn't even know what to do tells you everything you need to know about how bungled this was. The fact that we sent in soldiers from OTHER duty stations to CYA our evacuation also tells you everything you need to know.

What a shit show. Totally avoidable. We left Iraq multiple times without fucking things up. It's not rocket science. You keep politics out of it, unless you want this kind of thing to happen.
User avatar
grovester
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4560
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Politics

Post by grovester »

im2kull wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:34 pm
Fountains wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:24 pm
im2kull wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:23 pm

American soldiers didn't have to die, and neither did Afghans clinging to our planes before falling to their deaths from hundreds and thousands of feet in the air. Leaving Afghanistan was inevitable, but to do it in such a careless manner was completely avoidable.
How?
For real?

By drawing down our troops slowly and deliberately.
By removing war assets and equipment slowly and deliberately, instead of completely abandoning them.
By avoiding a last minute, extremely rushed, unannounced evacuation from Kabul.
By not leaving behind every person we had told we would evacuate before exiting, and burning every bridge we had built. WHY do you think there was a large crowd at the Airport? The crowd was THE folks we had promised to evacuate.
By having a proper plan, leadership, and communication in place. The fact that most Americans on the ground didn't even know what to do tells you everything you need to know about how bungled this was. The fact that we sent in soldiers from OTHER duty stations to CYA our evacuation also tells you everything you need to know.

What a shit show. Totally avoidable. We left Iraq multiple times without fucking things up. It's not rocket science. You keep politics out of it, unless you want this kind of thing to happen.
The problems is you can't slowly withdraw down to zero. At some point you reach a critical level of security and can't go below until you just leave.

We have also been drawing down and promising to leave for so long that many Afghans, and others for that matter, assumed we would change our minds.
User avatar
Anthony_Hugo98
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1932
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:50 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS

Re: Politics

Post by Anthony_Hugo98 »

Is no one going to even point out the fact that the centcom commander sent the order to close Bagram airbase in the middle of the night, two months before the total withdrawal. Meaning the only major airfield with which to perform air evacuations from the country was a smaller commercial airport…in the middle of the capital city…surrounded by hostile forces in literally every direction, with no established perimeter defense.

Considering bagram was pretty purpose built for defense and stand-off, the biggest fuck up was allowing centcom leadership to make that large a blunder and face no punishment.
User avatar
Highlander
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 10169
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Politics

Post by Highlander »

grovester wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 5:53 pm
im2kull wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:34 pm
Fountains wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:24 pm

How?
For real?

By drawing down our troops slowly and deliberately.
By removing war assets and equipment slowly and deliberately, instead of completely abandoning them.
By avoiding a last minute, extremely rushed, unannounced evacuation from Kabul.
By not leaving behind every person we had told we would evacuate before exiting, and burning every bridge we had built. WHY do you think there was a large crowd at the Airport? The crowd was THE folks we had promised to evacuate.
By having a proper plan, leadership, and communication in place. The fact that most Americans on the ground didn't even know what to do tells you everything you need to know about how bungled this was. The fact that we sent in soldiers from OTHER duty stations to CYA our evacuation also tells you everything you need to know.

What a shit show. Totally avoidable. We left Iraq multiple times without fucking things up. It's not rocket science. You keep politics out of it, unless you want this kind of thing to happen.
The problems is you can't slowly withdraw down to zero. At some point you reach a critical level of security and can't go below until you just leave.

We have also been drawing down and promising to leave for so long that many Afghans, and others for that matter, assumed we would change our minds.
People tend to forget that Trump had already drawn down our forces to 2500 troops before leaving office. That level of troops severely limited US options. Biden was pretty much faced with two scenarios; get out quickly or increase the level of troops. Holding Bagram for a protracted period time could only happen in the second scenario. The military estimated it would take 25,000 troops to do that and maintain communication links with Kabul and protect human assets there.

Trump would have faced the same dilemma. He was already chiding Biden for having past the deadline that his agreement with the Taliban had set. There's absolutely no reason to believe the scenario would have played out any different had Trump still been president. He got the agreement signed but the hard part was the execution and he did not have to deal with that.
aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12625
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Politics

Post by aknowledgeableperson »

im2kull wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:29 pm
aknowledgeableperson wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:56 am I believe under Trump Russia would have still invaded Ukraine but it would have ended long ago with Russia taking over most if not all of that country.
What makes you believe that Russia would have invaded Ukraine under the Trump administration? Did they do so under his admin? Did they not push the issue under Biden because of Bidens many obvious weaknesses? Does the Kremlin view Biden as being weak, incompetent, and unlikely to launch a counter offensive to an invasion?
aknowledgeableperson wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:56 am Biden had the relationship with European leaders which helped to uTransnistrianite most of Europe to help Ukraine
No. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine is the SOLE reason for European unity with Ukraine at the moment. The US sat largely in the shadows at the start of the war. And, even now, the US plays a very neutered role, at least publicly. We have been reduced to an arms dealer, not a world leader and feared force to be directly reckoned with.
Russia would have invaded Ukraine under Trump at this time because it was time to do it. Russian intelligence reported Ukraine's government was weak and the populace would welcome Russia and it's Russian backed new government. At the same time it wanted to annex two additional territories to Russia and it's supported anti-government forces were faltering against the government. Putin wasn't afraid of Trump, why would he? Trump didn't care about Ukraine. Trump even praised Putin as being savvy and genius for the invasion.
True, the west is using Ukraine as a proxy against Russia in this war and at this point no country will risk a wider war sending in troops to assist Ukraine. What's happening now is much like American involvement in WWII before Pearl Harbor. Trump definitely wouldn't have launched a counter offensive, Ukraine to Trump is much like the sacrificial lamb.
Zelenskyy is a big part of European unity but again only one part. Don't forget Biden's warning to Ukraine of a Russian invasion, sharing much of US intelligence about the matter. Plus making the effort to restore both to Nato's and the EU faith in the US after 4 years of Trump and his almost complete disregard of the two, especially with Trump's American First policy.
User avatar
grovester
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4560
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Politics

Post by grovester »

aknowledgeableperson wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 5:12 pm
im2kull wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:29 pm
aknowledgeableperson wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:56 am I believe under Trump Russia would have still invaded Ukraine but it would have ended long ago with Russia taking over most if not all of that country.
What makes you believe that Russia would have invaded Ukraine under the Trump administration? Did they do so under his admin? Did they not push the issue under Biden because of Bidens many obvious weaknesses? Does the Kremlin view Biden as being weak, incompetent, and unlikely to launch a counter offensive to an invasion?
aknowledgeableperson wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:56 am Biden had the relationship with European leaders which helped to uTransnistrianite most of Europe to help Ukraine
No. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine is the SOLE reason for European unity with Ukraine at the moment. The US sat largely in the shadows at the start of the war. And, even now, the US plays a very neutered role, at least publicly. We have been reduced to an arms dealer, not a world leader and feared force to be directly reckoned with.
Russia would have invaded Ukraine under Trump at this time because it was time to do it. Russian intelligence reported Ukraine's government was weak and the populace would welcome Russia and it's Russian backed new government. At the same time it wanted to annex two additional territories to Russia and it's supported anti-government forces were faltering against the government. Putin wasn't afraid of Trump, why would he? Trump didn't care about Ukraine. Trump even praised Putin as being savvy and genius for the invasion.
True, the west is using Ukraine as a proxy against Russia in this war and at this point no country will risk a wider war sending in troops to assist Ukraine. What's happening now is much like American involvement in WWII before Pearl Harbor. Trump definitely wouldn't have launched a counter offensive, Ukraine to Trump is much like the sacrificial lamb.
Zelenskyy is a big part of European unity but again only one part. Don't forget Biden's warning to Ukraine of a Russian invasion, sharing much of US intelligence about the matter. Plus making the effort to restore both to Nato's and the EU faith in the US after 4 years of Trump and his almost complete disregard of the two, especially with Trump's American First policy.
I don't think Putin would have invaded Ukraine while Trump was in office because Trump was already succeeding in undermining NATO by himself.

It was only after Trump lost that Putin went to plan B on NATO division, which conveniently would also burden Biden with another crisis to deal with, on top of covid, inflation, etc.

Biden is the big reason Ukraine is still around, any hesitation would have lost Germany, which would have doomed the whole unified response.
User avatar
DColeKC
Ambassador
Posts: 3729
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Politics

Post by DColeKC »

aknowledgeableperson wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 5:12 pm
im2kull wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:29 pm
aknowledgeableperson wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:56 am I believe under Trump Russia would have still invaded Ukraine but it would have ended long ago with Russia taking over most if not all of that country.
What makes you believe that Russia would have invaded Ukraine under the Trump administration? Did they do so under his admin? Did they not push the issue under Biden because of Bidens many obvious weaknesses? Does the Kremlin view Biden as being weak, incompetent, and unlikely to launch a counter offensive to an invasion?
aknowledgeableperson wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 1:56 am Biden had the relationship with European leaders which helped to uTransnistrianite most of Europe to help Ukraine
No. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine is the SOLE reason for European unity with Ukraine at the moment. The US sat largely in the shadows at the start of the war. And, even now, the US plays a very neutered role, at least publicly. We have been reduced to an arms dealer, not a world leader and feared force to be directly reckoned with.
Russia would have invaded Ukraine under Trump at this time because it was time to do it. Russian intelligence reported Ukraine's government was weak and the populace would welcome Russia and it's Russian backed new government. At the same time it wanted to annex two additional territories to Russia and it's supported anti-government forces were faltering against the government. Putin wasn't afraid of Trump, why would he? Trump didn't care about Ukraine. Trump even praised Putin as being savvy and genius for the invasion.
True, the west is using Ukraine as a proxy against Russia in this war and at this point no country will risk a wider war sending in troops to assist Ukraine. What's happening now is much like American involvement in WWII before Pearl Harbor. Trump definitely wouldn't have launched a counter offensive, Ukraine to Trump is much like the sacrificial lamb.
Zelenskyy is a big part of European unity but again only one part. Don't forget Biden's warning to Ukraine of a Russian invasion, sharing much of US intelligence about the matter. Plus making the effort to restore both to Nato's and the EU faith in the US after 4 years of Trump and his almost complete disregard of the two, especially with Trump's American First policy.
People who put together a billion dollar Ponzi scheme are often savvy and genius. Saying so doesn’t mean you support or agree with that they did.

Hard to hypothesize here on what Putin would have done with Trump in office.
longviewmo
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2009 12:58 am
Location: Manhattan, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Politics

Post by longviewmo »

DeSantis vs Newsom in 2024/2028?
aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12625
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Politics

Post by aknowledgeableperson »

longviewmo wrote: Mon Sep 19, 2022 7:17 am DeSantis vs Newsom in 2024/2028?
DeSantis only over Trump's dead body. And if Trump doesn't or can't run in 2024 the GOP will be in one hell of a mess.
User avatar
DColeKC
Ambassador
Posts: 3729
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Politics

Post by DColeKC »

aknowledgeableperson wrote: Mon Sep 19, 2022 11:51 am
longviewmo wrote: Mon Sep 19, 2022 7:17 am DeSantis vs Newsom in 2024/2028?
DeSantis only over Trump's dead body. And if Trump doesn't or can't run in 2024 the GOP will be in one hell of a mess.
DeSantis would be a great choice for the GOP. The grit and boldness of Trump but with the political smarts and savvy to not constantly get in trouble with the media. I like his chances up against anyone the Dems might run. Newsom would be a bad move for them.
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Politics

Post by im2kull »

DColeKC wrote: Mon Sep 19, 2022 1:01 pm Newsom would be a bad move for them.
+1

A governor who faces that much criticism and a recall in his own state is certaintly not a great face for a presidential run.

Then again.. The DNC did present Hillary twice (Literally such a terrible candidate that Trump was elected president).. soo....
User avatar
DColeKC
Ambassador
Posts: 3729
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: Politics

Post by DColeKC »

Fountains wrote: Mon Sep 19, 2022 3:06 pm DeSantis would stomp Biden
Agreed.
Link2
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 12:04 pm

Re: Politics

Post by Link2 »

The most recent polling I could find has Biden (+5) and Harris (+3) leading DeSantis in hypothetical matchups.

I would not read too much into a recall effort in a state such as California. Launching a recall there is easier than in almost any state, and every governor since 1960 has faced at least one. To place it on the ballot this past time, the supporters needed just under 1.5 million signatures -- in a state with over 30 million residents of voting age. I think they got approximately 1.7 million maybe.
Post Reply