Trump’s Queen Sacrifice in His Great Game with His Successor

reedak

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2014
Messages
777
1. There is a difference between peace and retreat. The Trump administration’s agreement with the Taliban represents a full retreat. It’s an agreement that most Republicans would deplore if a Democrat president made the deal, and they’d be right to be angry.

Let’s begin with the elephant in the room. There is no meaningful argument that the fate of Afghanistan is somehow irrelevant to our national security. The War in Afghanistan was no “war of choice.” On 9/11 our nation suffered its worst attack since Pearl Harbor. It suffered its worst attack on an American city since the British burned Washington D.C. on August 24, 1814, and the Taliban were intimately involved. That attack came from an enemy operating with the permission and under the protection of the same Taliban the Trump administration deals with today.

....there is no hope for peace when your opponent intends to continue the fight, and the hope for peace diminishes further still when the proposed peace agreement diminishes allies and strengthens your enemies.

If you read the peace agreement itself, you’ll note immediately that it gives the Taliban a series of concrete, measurable gifts. First, there’s an immediate allied withdrawal – down to 8,600 American troops (and proportionate numbers of allied troops) within 135 days. The remainder of American and allied forces will leave within 14 months.

At the same time, the United States will immediately and substantially reinforce the Taliban by seeking the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners by March 20. Even worse, the United States further agreed to a goal of “releasing all remaining prisoners over the course of the subsequent three months.” It will do this at the same time that it commits to the “goal” of removing sanctions from members of the Taliban that include travel bans, asset freezes, and an arms embargo.

The combination of the planned American retreat and the planned prisoner release would represent a substantial change in the balance of forces in Afghanistan. This would come without any agreement by the Taliban to cease hostilities against our allies.

At this point, the deal looks worse than a simple withdrawal. America can leave all on its own without also agreeing to seek the release of Taliban prisoners. It can leave all on its own without promising to ease sanctions. So why agree to the additional concessions?

America is making these concrete concessions in exchange for unenforceable promises from an untrustworthy enemy. The Taliban promise that they will not allow its members or members of al-Qaeda to use Afghan soil to threaten American national security. The promise to “send a clear message” that those who threaten the United States “have no place in Afghanistan.” Yet the agreement released to the public provides no verification or enforcement provisions for these assurances, and once America is out of Afghanistan, our ability to enforce those promises absent a new, substantial military buildup will be limited to nonexistent......

A war-weary American public should resist the Trump administration’s retreat. It should not tolerate any agreement that reinforces and strengthens the Taliban. There are things that are worse than “endless war,” and if we doubt that truth, there is a memorial in downtown Manhattan that should remind us that mortal threats can emerge even from the farthest reaches of the earth.

Source: https://time.com/5794643/trumps-disgraceful-peace-deal-taliban/

2(a) Americans are tired of “endless war” in Afghanistan, but there is absolutely no way for US troops to make an honourable exit from Afghanistan, just as in the Vietnam War. Why didn't the stalwart aides and confidants of the self-declared "Messiah" ex-president (who was called a ***** by his former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson) resist his disgraceful peace deal with the Taliban?

If he really wanted to get Americans out of Afghanistan, he could have done it within his term of office. Instead, in a prime-time address before a crowd of US troops in August 2017, he vowed the US would "fight to win" in Afghanistan, extending the 16-year campaign there with a promise to beef up the American military presence while ratcheting up pressure on other countries in the region to help turn the tide.

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/21/politics/trump-afghanistan-speech/index.html

(b) In July 2019 the "Me First" ex-president claimed he could win the war in Afghanistan "in a week", but he did not want to kill 10 million people.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-says-could-win-war-in-afghanistan-in-a-week-2019-7

Then in late February 2020, "the Art of the Deal" ex-president suddenly made a quick about-turn by brokering a "historic peace agreement" with the Taliban.

(c) There were indications in early 2020 that the self-declared “Messiah” ex-president was apprehensive about his reelection prospects because the pandemic shut down the country and halted all in-person campaigning. One of the contributing factors of his success in the 2016 presidential election was his inborn talent for rabble-rousing. The raging pandemic prevented all candidates from holding mass rallies. His Tulsa rally was a flop.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/21/opinions/trump-rally-tulsa-oklahoma-covid-19-ghitis/index.html

(d) His disgraceful peace deal looked suspicious as it "gave the Taliban a series of concrete, measurable gifts" while his chances of reelection were slipping away. The timing of his troop withdrawal was even more suspicious as he scheduled it in such a way that the responsibility of implementing it fell on the shoulders of the next president.

In a statement released April 18, 2021, the "Me First" ex-president hailed getting out of Afghanistan as a "wonderful and positive thing to do,"....

"I planned to withdraw on May 1st (2021), and we should keep as close to that schedule as possible," Trump said in a statement that has since been deleted from his official website. Seem like the revisionist history bug is catching in GOP circles.

Trump has repeatedly patted himself on the back for his expert deal-making skills with the Taliban. If getting out of Afghanistan is such a "wonderful and positive thing to do", why didn't the "Me First" ex-president take all the credit by withdrawing all American and allied forces by 2020? Instead he was so generous that he let Biden "inherit" his deal by "locking" him (Biden) into a timeline (May 1st 2021) for withdrawal. "Inheritance" is for children, not political rivals or bitter enemies.

https://www.alternet.org/2021/08/trump-peace-deal-taliban/
 
Werbung:
(e) Why should the 101% faithful Trump disciple accept the "inheritance" like an obedient son from his predecessor without any question? Was the self-declared Messiah ex-president behaving ruthlessly and craftily like a stepfather in "locking" his successor into a timeline for troop withdrawal?

In defending his foreign policy disaster, Biden said: "I will not mislead the American people by claiming that just a little more time in Afghanistan will make all the difference." In actuality, "just a little more time in Afghanistan will make all the difference" not only for Biden but more importantly, for America's reputation and credibility around the world.

Using the game of chess as an analogy, Trump's 2021 troop withdrawal is neither "checkmate" nor "zugzwang" for his successor. It is just a "check" for the 101% faithful Trump disciple who seems to be bending over backwards to appease the Republicans and Trump followers for their full cooperation. The White House incumbent could easily get out of the "check" or "terrible situation" by renegotiating with the Taliban to reschedule the troop withdrawal for May 1st 2025. By then, the next president will most likely be a follower or family member of the "Me First" ex-president or even Trump himself!

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/04/9736...nistan-leaves-biden-with-a-terrible-situation

(f) In defending his foreign policy disaster, Biden said: "....I would rather take all that criticism than pass this decision on to another president of the United States, yet another one, a fifth one. Because it’s the right one, it’s the right decision for our people. The right one for our brave service members who risked their lives serving our nation. And it’s the right one for America."

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/16/us/politics/biden-taliban-afghanistan-speech.html

So this is how the White House incumbent tried to transform his historical dunce cap into a wizard's hat or a badge of honour. It is reminiscent of the Chinese saying, 我不入地狱谁入地狱 which literally means "If I don't enter Hell, who will?" Roughly translated, it means “If I don't do it, who will?" or "Sacrificing oneself in order to save others."

The White House incumbent may even be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for "rather taking all that criticism than pass this decision on to another president of the United States, yet another one, a fifth one." Whatever happens, one outcome is certain: "The Trump-Biden withdrawal has forever damaged America’s reputation and credibility. It is a national humiliation, and an unfolding humanitarian and human rights catastrophe." :)

Additional Reference:

https://gop.com/research/the-consequences-of-bidens-foreign-policy-disaster-rsr/

https://www.thebulwark.com/how-the-afghanistan-debacle-harms-u-s-interests/

https://www.foxnews.com/media/sean-hannity-biden-destroyed-america-credibility-afghanistan-taliban

https://walls-work.org/biden-caused-the-worst-foreign-policy-disaster-in-decades-newswars/

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/...republicans-sound-alarm-on-taliban-deal-trump

https://www.conservativecardinal.com/bidens-foreign-policy-is-a-disaster/

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/13/biden-yemen-afghanistan-foreign-policy-disasters/

https://www.dailywire.com/news/opinion-i-told-you-biden-would-be-a-foreign-policy-disaster

https://americahq.org/2021/08/16/bi...st-foreign-policy-disaster-in-modern-history/

https://lidblog.com/biden-foreign-policy-disaster/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...oreign-policy-team-failed-america/8145997002/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Trump_Tulsa_rally

https://www.alternet.org/2019/09/tr...h-toll-in-afghanistan-is-rising-dramatically/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump:_The_Art_of_the_Deal

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/trump-*****-tillerson-publicly-confirms.html

https://slate.com/news-and-politics...ex-tillerson-called-donald-trump-a-*****.html
 
.
relaxing-outside-smiley-emoticon[1].gif
.

You're not expecting some kind o' standing-ovation for your cut 'n paste skills, are you????
.
 
1. There is a difference between peace and retreat. The Trump administration’s agreement with the Taliban represents a full retreat. It’s an agreement that most Republicans would deplore if a Democrat president made the deal, and they’d be right to be angry.

Let’s begin with the elephant in the room. There is no meaningful argument that the fate of Afghanistan is somehow irrelevant to our national security. The War in Afghanistan was no “war of choice.” On 9/11 our nation suffered its worst attack since Pearl Harbor. It suffered its worst attack on an American city since the British burned Washington D.C. on August 24, 1814, and the Taliban were intimately involved. That attack came from an enemy operating with the permission and under the protection of the same Taliban the Trump administration deals with today.

....there is no hope for peace when your opponent intends to continue the fight, and the hope for peace diminishes further still when the proposed peace agreement diminishes allies and strengthens your enemies.

If you read the peace agreement itself, you’ll note immediately that it gives the Taliban a series of concrete, measurable gifts. First, there’s an immediate allied withdrawal – down to 8,600 American troops (and proportionate numbers of allied troops) within 135 days. The remainder of American and allied forces will leave within 14 months.

At the same time, the United States will immediately and substantially reinforce the Taliban by seeking the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners by March 20. Even worse, the United States further agreed to a goal of “releasing all remaining prisoners over the course of the subsequent three months.” It will do this at the same time that it commits to the “goal” of removing sanctions from members of the Taliban that include travel bans, asset freezes, and an arms embargo.

The combination of the planned American retreat and the planned prisoner release would represent a substantial change in the balance of forces in Afghanistan. This would come without any agreement by the Taliban to cease hostilities against our allies.

At this point, the deal looks worse than a simple withdrawal. America can leave all on its own without also agreeing to seek the release of Taliban prisoners. It can leave all on its own without promising to ease sanctions. So why agree to the additional concessions?

America is making these concrete concessions in exchange for unenforceable promises from an untrustworthy enemy. The Taliban promise that they will not allow its members or members of al-Qaeda to use Afghan soil to threaten American national security. The promise to “send a clear message” that those who threaten the United States “have no place in Afghanistan.” Yet the agreement released to the public provides no verification or enforcement provisions for these assurances, and once America is out of Afghanistan, our ability to enforce those promises absent a new, substantial military buildup will be limited to nonexistent......

A war-weary American public should resist the Trump administration’s retreat. It should not tolerate any agreement that reinforces and strengthens the Taliban. There are things that are worse than “endless war,” and if we doubt that truth, there is a memorial in downtown Manhattan that should remind us that mortal threats can emerge even from the farthest reaches of the earth.

Source: https://time.com/5794643/trumps-disgraceful-peace-deal-taliban/

2(a) Americans are tired of “endless war” in Afghanistan, but there is absolutely no way for US troops to make an honourable exit from Afghanistan, just as in the Vietnam War. Why didn't the stalwart aides and confidants of the self-declared "Messiah" ex-president (who was called a ***** by his former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson) resist his disgraceful peace deal with the Taliban?

If he really wanted to get Americans out of Afghanistan, he could have done it within his term of office. Instead, in a prime-time address before a crowd of US troops in August 2017, he vowed the US would "fight to win" in Afghanistan, extending the 16-year campaign there with a promise to beef up the American military presence while ratcheting up pressure on other countries in the region to help turn the tide.

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/21/politics/trump-afghanistan-speech/index.html

(b) In July 2019 the "Me First" ex-president claimed he could win the war in Afghanistan "in a week", but he did not want to kill 10 million people.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-says-could-win-war-in-afghanistan-in-a-week-2019-7

Then in late February 2020, "the Art of the Deal" ex-president suddenly made a quick about-turn by brokering a "historic peace agreement" with the Taliban.

(c) There were indications in early 2020 that the self-declared “Messiah” ex-president was apprehensive about his reelection prospects because the pandemic shut down the country and halted all in-person campaigning. One of the contributing factors of his success in the 2016 presidential election was his inborn talent for rabble-rousing. The raging pandemic prevented all candidates from holding mass rallies. His Tulsa rally was a flop.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/21/opinions/trump-rally-tulsa-oklahoma-covid-19-ghitis/index.html

(d) His disgraceful peace deal looked suspicious as it "gave the Taliban a series of concrete, measurable gifts" while his chances of reelection were slipping away. The timing of his troop withdrawal was even more suspicious as he scheduled it in such a way that the responsibility of implementing it fell on the shoulders of the next president.

In a statement released April 18, 2021, the "Me First" ex-president hailed getting out of Afghanistan as a "wonderful and positive thing to do,"....

"I planned to withdraw on May 1st (2021), and we should keep as close to that schedule as possible," Trump said in a statement that has since been deleted from his official website. Seem like the revisionist history bug is catching in GOP circles.

Trump has repeatedly patted himself on the back for his expert deal-making skills with the Taliban. If getting out of Afghanistan is such a "wonderful and positive thing to do", why didn't the "Me First" ex-president take all the credit by withdrawing all American and allied forces by 2020? Instead he was so generous that he let Biden "inherit" his deal by "locking" him (Biden) into a timeline (May 1st 2021) for withdrawal. "Inheritance" is for children, not political rivals or bitter enemies.

https://www.alternet.org/2021/08/trump-peace-deal-taliban/
How sad that Biden botched the Afghanistan withdrawal just days after this OP was posted.
 
Coal is a dangerous pollutant and its main use should be in processing iron into steel.
I have never seen where Obama said he would bankrupt coal. Coal is shutting down in Appalachia because the coal deposits have been mined out. Much of the coal mined in the US goes to China, and this will end as more and more solar, wind and hydroelectric and geothermal energy plants replace these exports.

Coal DESERVES to be bankrupted. It causes thousands of deaths from lung diseases ever year.
 
Coal is a dangerous pollutant and its main use should be in processing iron into steel.
I have never seen where Obama said he would bankrupt coal. Coal is shutting down in Appalachia because the coal deposits have been mined out. Much of the coal mined in the US goes to China, and this will end as more and more solar, wind and hydroelectric and geothermal energy plants replace these exports.

Coal DESERVES to be bankrupted. It causes thousands of deaths from lung diseases ever year.
Perhaps you never saw Obama promising to bankrupt coal in America if elected. You should step outside the leftist news bubble occasionally to get a better exposure to more news and unabridged facts.

www.youtube.com › watchObama's Promise the Bankrupt the Coal Industry - YouTube


1763655542329.webp
 
That was not Obama saying that he was going to do anything against the coal industry.
It was a totally sane Obama simply stating his view of the future.

And it is taking place RIGHT NOW. The production of coal in Appalachia has declined every year since he said it.

You don't know the facts, and you keep telling lies.


You are no good at logic, you dumbassed fundie. Just give it up already.
 
That was not Obama saying that he was going to do anything against the coal industry.
It was a totally sane Obama simply stating his view of the future.

And it is taking place RIGHT NOW. The production of coal in Appalachia has declined every year since he said it.

You don't know the facts, and you keep telling lies.


You are no good at logic, you dumbassed fundie. Just give it up already.
Obama was so stupid that he promised to bankrupt coal companies in the middle of one of the worst recessions ever to hit the US.






Uttered in 2008, still haunting Obama​

120405_barack_obama_2008_ap_605.jpg

There are some statements that Obama might want to rewind. | REUTERS
By Erica Martinson04/05/2012 11:37 PM EDT


Here’s one line that President Barack Obama might want to rewind: “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

That quip from a January 2008 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board is making the rounds in conservative circles — even Mitt Romney referred to it last month – and it likely won’t go away anytime soon.

“If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them,” Obama said, responding to a question about his cap-and-trade plan. He later added, “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”
 
That is precisely what SHOULD happen. Burning coal poisons the atmosphere, you stupid, ignorant shit!

It won't serve any purpose to burn coal other than making a few mine operators rich at the expense of the lungs of the citizens.
 
That is precisely what SHOULD happen. Burning coal poisons the atmosphere, you stupid, ignorant shit!

It won't serve any purpose to burn coal other than making a few mine operators rich at the expense of the lungs of the citizens.

https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrFD65xbh9p_wEAKKgPxQt.;_ylu=Y29sbwNiZjEEcG9zAzQEdnRpZAMEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1764877169/RO=10/RU=http://coaleducation.org/q&a/10_reasons_why_coal.htm/RK=2/RS=e4KfFqLknu4CJAzncdF1JQOc200-

10 reasons why coal is a good energy source:



10 reasons why coal is a good energy source:
1. Cheapest source of energy. It is by far cheaper than nuclear, natural gas, oil. Hydro usually will be slightly cheaper. However, problems with hydro include: no new facilities because of public outcry when river valleys are dammed; and, peak demand time problems (rivers running dry in the dead of summer when peak air conditioning is needed and rivers are frozen in the dead of winter when peak heating is needed).
2.
Coal also provides a stable source of energy (no Arab oil embargoes, no sudden scarcity like you experience with natural gas) and there is a very plentiful supply both in the U.S. and in other foreign countries.
3.
Coal is nothing more than ancient wood which has been under pressure for millions of years. It is not sinister as you may have been led to believe.
4.
Coal provides many jobs. Unlike other forms of energy (nuclear, natural gas, oil, hydroelectric), coal provides many jobs in removing coal from the earth, transporting it to the utility, burning it, and properly disposing of coal ash.
5.
Coal is American made. We do not have to import this product into this country.
6.
Coal can be mined and burned with little environmental impact. There has been tremendous strides in environmental responsibility with mining coal and burning coal. However, there still is pressure of global warming. If we burn less fossil fuels, what, as a practical matter, is our energy alternative? Nuclear? Hydro? Solar (there is no practical way to provide the massive amounts of electricity needed to run our country through solar energy---it is viewed as impractical at this time)?
7. Coal mining reclamation can give the surface landowner many more options for developing his land. In the mountainous terrain, a mining process call mountaintop removal can create very valuable and useable level land for the surface owner. The surface owner not only gets his land developed, he usually is paid 50 cents a ton for the inconvenience of the use of his surface. Surface mining cannot occur without the specific consent of the surface owner. If the surface owner is lucky enough to own the coal rights, he's looking at another $2.00 a ton for royalty payments. In 1977 the federal Surface Mining Law was passed that required coal operators to reclaim the land in an equal, if not better, condition that existed prior to mining. We're doing an excellent job with our reclamation efforts. I would suggest that you go to http://www.osmre.gov/. This is the web site of the federal agency that oversees coal mining from an environmental standpoint.

8. The prudent us of coal will allow the U. S. the time needed to develop viable alternative energy sources---primarily solar technology and fuel from grain---without any negative impact on our national economy.
9.
Coal provides 56% of the electricity used in the nation each day. It provides 95% of Kentucky's electricity. Electrical rates in Kentucky are the second lowest in the nation---because of coal.
10.
Coal is good for Kentucky's economy. The Kentucky coal industry brought $3.1 billion into Kentucky from out-of-state during Fiscal Year 1996-97 through coal sales to customers in 29 other states and 15 foreign countries. In Kentucky, it paid over $800 million in direct wages, directly employing over 19,000 persons and indirectly providing an additional 60,000 jobs. In addition to all the normal business taxes, the coal industry in Kentucky paid an additional $160 million in severance taxes to the state.
 
It still poisons the atmosphere.

And no, coal does NOT supply 56% of the energy. Here is the facts about that:

image (2).webp
 

Attachments

  • unplugthe USA.webp
    unplugthe USA.webp
    51 KB · Views: 0
It still poisons the atmosphere.

And no, coal does NOT supply 56% of the energy. Here is the facts about that:

View attachment 26518
Fumes Fumigate

Hydrocarbon emissions kill viruses. The Lethal Lockdown caused all the cronyvirus deaths.

The GreenHeads base their feelings on a mindless and primitive superstition. It is the same kind of Nature Worship that is practiced by useless savages. Trustfundee Treehuggers are a degenerate generation, the inevitable result of allowing hereditary wealth, political power, and social influence.
 
Werbung:
Fumes Fumigate

Hydrocarbon emissions kill viruses. The Lethal Lockdown caused all the cronyvirus deaths.

The GreenHeads base their feelings on a mindless and primitive superstition. It is the same kind of Nature Worship that is practiced by useless savages. Trustfundee Treehuggers are a degenerate generation, the inevitable result of allowing hereditary wealth, political power, and social influence.
Climategate alarmists just lost Bill Gates who recently admitted global warming is a hoax.


Bill Gates makes major climate change reversal after years of doomerism: ‘People will be able to live and thrive’​

By
Chris Nesi
Published Oct. 28, 2025, 11:26 a.m. ET
 
Back
Top