DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Afghanistan Con't

According to this article that was written when they were proud of the drone strike, the order went all the way up the chain. Biden authorized, Secretary Austin ordered the strike.

https://apnews.com/article/asia-pacific-...25025527e421226

This is a very bad look for the country.

Right now, it looks like the CENTCOM Commander McKenzie is publicly falling on his sword for this debacle. I wonder if they decide which defense contractor boards he will be sitting on before or after his resignation?

This is not the first time this happened. I watched a 911 documentary that included war in Afghanastan. Drone strikes killing civilians is not uncommon. They showed video of children in coffins. They said this is why people join the Taliban. We killed their innocent families. They think we are the terrorists.

It's bad, but again, hardly the worst and definitely not the first time. Anybody familiar with drone warfare can tell you that. That said, this ultimately falls on Biden. Bad intel, crossed wires, whatever you want to call it; Biden gave the nod. This general is admirable because he's falling on the sword for Biden, but like Biden said, the buck stops with him.

For you GOPers, I know it's an odd thing for a POTUS to say, but we are now in a take responsibility for your actions "Dem Admin"... They will accept responsibility while down playing it... It was bad, but NOTHING will come of it because nobody is going to take a POTUS down for Afghan civilian deaths... or the last three would have been taken down long ago.

I agree. I don't think there was a deliberate action to strike aid workers and children.

No doubt someone made a wrong decision based in intel that was clearly faulty.

No doubt it happened on this Presidents watch and he is the one who gets to hold the shingle. He is the Commander in Chief.

I can almost guarantee that they knew the intel was garbage based on the story. Unless you can explain to me what type of technology allows you to see that explosives are inside a car from 20,000 feet, then there is almost no way they could have had good intel in this situation and presumably someone in the DoD should be experienced to know this very obvious fact.

They knew that they had no intel, but didn't care. They were trying to create a story and accidentally blew up children. Then the story wouldn't go away.

Just look at how fast the news came out in almost every media outlet to manufacture the story. That doesn't happen unless there is a concerted effort to get the story out.

Look at how they tried to make up a story about a giant secondary explosion even when it was clearly apparent to even amateurs that there was no giant second explosion. Why would they lie about that?

It looks like a disinformation operation because it is a disinformation operation.

By giving people the benefit of the doubt and calling it "bad intel", you are potentially excusing truly reprehensible decisions before you know the truth or have seen any of the intel for yourself. People that have already lied to you about the story do not deserve for you to give them the benefit of the doubt.

It certainly is bad. At the same time it pales in comparison to the bad intel that caused us to enter a war in Iraq. Think of all the people that died in a war based on intel that made the claim Iraq possessed tons of WMD's. That Sadam had the potential for nuclear weapons development.

Estimates I've seen say between 180 and 210 thousand Iraqi citizens and thousands of U.S. soldiers were killed not to mention wounded.