AZ_Bear said:

---

We admittedly knew. I don't have the sound bite but Biden repeatedly has said publicly that they believed the Taliban would take over within a couple months, that it was just a matter of time. And privately, the Afghanistan president was expressing how portly things were going, how quickly they were losing.

Biden was just stubborn and decided not to put more troops in (until he had to send at least some), and to make it a race. The red flags were there. It was stubbornness and arrogance that led to unacceptable results.

I can't believe the media is already easing up and giving him a pass.

---

Why can't you believe it? This is how an Obama or a biden gets elected (and rampant fraud).

They will convince some and many on this very bird that Biden Obama was a military genius

Quote:

---

Italy's Carabinieri Were the Perfect Force for the Kabul Evacuation

The soldier-policemen of this hybrid outfit went outside the wire to bring thousands to safety.



Some 5,000 Afghans rescued, plus Italians and citizens of allied countries: a spectacular achievement by Italy during the evacuation from Hamid Karzai International Airport. To handle the extraordinarily complex and dangerous task, Rome had dispatched some of its very best soldiers and Carabinieri. Other countries can learn from Italy's green-and-blue Carabinieria hybrid police-and-military force because the world will see plenty more of these highly complex and dangerous situations short of war.

"We were in Afghanistan from Day 1," Brig. Gen. Stefano Iasson told me. "And when it was decided the allied forces would leave, it was clear that we'd help with the evacuation as well."

Iasson commands the Carabinieri's 2nd Mobile Brigade, an elite unit that the Italian government habitually calls upon for particularly dangerous assignments abroad. Members of the 2nd Mobile Brigade are regularly deployed in unstable locations such as Tripoli, Mogadishu, and Beirut, or to guard Italy's embassies in particularly perilous capitals such as Islamabad and Caracas.

The Carabinieri at Kabul airport came from the 2nd Mobile Brigade's 1st Paratrooper Regiment, Tuscania. With virtually no use of force, but with plenty of ingenuity, these young men some of whom were on their sixth deployment to Afghanistan worked out a simple but effective scheme that was crucial in identifying to-be-rescued Afghans.

"They went out around in the areas outside the airport, including outside Abbey Gate, to find these people, including children and old women," Iasson said. "The reason they were able to find so many is in this state of general confusion was that they had worked out a scheme. Those needing to be evacuated had been instructed by us to dress in a certain way so we could recognize them, and the Carabinieri communicated with them using Whatsapp, and found their locations via Google Maps. It was a simple and creative method. But the Carabinieri doing this were extremely skilled."

But the big advantage the Carabinieri had is that they have skills in crowd control. Other special forces don't have those skills."

---

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/09/italys-carabinieri-were-perfect-force-kabul-evacuation/185111/

Rawhide said:

---

jupiter said:

---

Quote:

---

Give away 80B in Military equipment- who the heck does that?

---

We didn't "gift them" 80 billion in military equipment they were the spoils of war... the Army that we spent 20 years building simply evaporated. You can't fight for people who won't fight for themselves. Creating Democracies that could support/fight for themselves was the Bush Doctrine. I actually think this is still the right way to fight terrorism, only problem is we tried doing it with mostly carrots/sticks from the top down rather than with carrots/sticks from the bottom up.

---

Too bad no one had the the faintest idea of actually destroying the equipment when it was obvious the taliban was on the march and the afghan president took off running

---

Why not destroy it now? We know why. Biden the hologram just like Obama the Thin Man. They live arming the enemy

Freedomb3ar said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

jupiter said:

---

Quote:

---

Give away 80B in Military equipment- who the heck does that?

---

We didn't "gift them" 80 billion in military equipment they were the spoils of war... the Army that we spent 20 years building simply evaporated. You can't fight for people who won't fight for themselves. Creating Democracies that could support/fight for themselves was the Bush Doctrine. I actually think this is still the right way to fight terrorism, only problem is we tried doing it with mostly carrots/sticks from the top down rather than with carrots/sticks from the bottom up.

---

Too bad no one had the the faintest idea of actually destroying the equipment when it was obvious the taliban was on the march and the afghan president took off running

---

Why not destroy it now? We know why. Biden the hologram just like Obama the Thin Man. They live arming the enemy

---

I agree... they should be droning the equipment to smithereens

Rawhide said:

---

Freedomb3ar said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

jupiter said:

---

Quote:

---

Give away 80B in Military equipment- who the heck does that?

---

We didn't "gift them" 80 billion in military equipment they were the spoils of war... the Army that we spent 20 years building simply evaporated. You can't fight for people who won't fight for themselves. Creating Democracies that could support/fight for themselves was the Bush Doctrine. I actually think this is still the right way to fight terrorism, only problem is we tried doing it with mostly carrots/sticks from the top down rather than with carrots/sticks from the bottom up.

---

Too bad no one had the the faintest idea of actually destroying the equipment when it was obvious the taliban was on the march and the afghan president took off running

---

Why not destroy it now? We know why. Biden the hologram just like Obama the Thin Man. They live arming the enemy

---

I agree... they should be droning the equipment to smithereens

---

Because we don't want to incentivize the Taliban to respond by taking Amcits hostage, or worse.

whiterock said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Freedomb3ar said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

jupiter said:

---

Quote:

---

Give away 80B in Military equipment- who the heck does that?

---

We didn't "gift them" 80 billion in military equipment they were the spoils of war... the Army that we spent 20 years building simply evaporated. You can't fight for people who won't fight for themselves. Creating Democracies that could support/fight for themselves was the Bush Doctrine. I actually think this is still the right way to fight terrorism, only problem is we tried doing it with mostly carrots/sticks from the top down rather than with carrots/sticks from the bottom up.

---

Too bad no one had the the faintest idea of actually destroying the equipment when it was obvious the taliban was on the march and the afghan president took off running

---

Why not destroy it now? We know why. Biden the hologram just like Obama the Thin Man. They live arming the enemy

---

I agree... they should be droning the equipment to smithereens

---

Because we don't want to incentivize the Taliban to respond by taking Amcits hostage, or worse.

---

If we are refraining from disarming terrorists due to the fact they will kill Americans near them, it's already a hostage situation.

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Freedomb3ar said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

jupiter said:

---

Quote:

---

Give away 80B in Military equipment- who the heck does that?

---

We didn't "gift them" 80 billion in military equipment they were the spoils of war... the Army that we spent 20 years building simply evaporated. You can't fight for people who won't fight for themselves. Creating Democracies that could support/fight for themselves was the Bush Doctrine. I actually think this is still the right way to fight terrorism, only problem is we tried doing it with mostly carrots/sticks from the top down rather than with carrots/sticks from the bottom up.

---

Too bad no one had the the faintest idea of actually destroying the equipment when it was obvious the taliban was on the march and the afghan president took off running

---

Why not destroy it now? We know why. Biden the hologram just like Obama the Thin Man. They live arming the enemy

---

I agree... they should be droning the equipment to smithereens

---

Because we don't want to incentivize the Taliban to respond by taking Amcits hostage, or worse.

---

If we are refraining from disarming terrorists due to the fact they will kill Americans near them, it's already a hostage situation.

---

The equipment is there, visible, and "touchable."

The Amcits, hopefully, can be extracted in a few weeks.

Then we can "touch" all the hardware we desire.

whiterock said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Freedomb3ar said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

jupiter said:

---

Quote:

---

Give away 80B in Military equipment- who the heck does that?

---

We didn't "gift them" 80 billion in military equipment they were the spoils of war... the Army that we spent 20 years building simply evaporated. You can't fight for people who won't fight for themselves. Creating Democracies that could support/fight for themselves was the Bush Doctrine. I actually think this is still the right way to fight terrorism, only problem is we tried doing it with mostly carrots/sticks from the top down rather than with carrots/sticks from the bottom up.

---

Too bad no one had the the faintest idea of actually destroying the equipment when it was obvious the taliban was on the march and the afghan president took off running

---

Why not destroy it now? We know why. Biden the hologram just like Obama the Thin Man. They live arming the enemy

---

I agree... they should be droning the equipment to smithereens

---

Because we don't want to incentivize the Taliban to respond by taking Amcits hostage, or worse.

---

If we are refraining from disarming terrorists due to the fact they will kill Americans near them, it's already a hostage situation.

---

The equipment is there, visible, and "touchable."

The Amcits, hopefully, can be extracted in a few weeks.

Then we can "touch" all the hardware we desire.

---

I sure hope so.

whiterock said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Freedomb3ar said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

jupiter said:

---

Quote:

---

Give away 80B in Military equipment- who the heck does that?

---

We didn't "gift them" 80 billion in military equipment they were the spoils of war... the Army that we spent 20 years building simply evaporated. You can't fight for people who won't fight for themselves. Creating Democracies that could support/fight for themselves was the Bush Doctrine. I actually think this is still the right way to fight terrorism, only problem is we tried doing it with mostly carrots/sticks from the top down rather than with carrots/sticks from the bottom up.

---

Too bad no one had the the faintest idea of actually destroying the equipment when it was obvious the taliban was on the march and the afghan president took off running

---

Why not destroy it now? We know why. Biden the hologram just like Obama the Thin Man. They live arming the enemy

---

I agree... they should be droning the equipment to smithereens

---

Because we don't want to incentivize the Taliban to respond by taking Amcits hostage, or worse.

---

If we are refraining from disarming terrorists due to the fact they will kill Americans near them, it's already a hostage situation.

---

The equipment is there, visible, and "touchable."

The Amcits, hopefully, can be extracted in a few weeks.

Then we can "touch" all the hardware we desire.

---

Because we can trust the Talban not to move them, right?

Oldbear83 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Freedomb3ar said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

jupiter said:

---

Quote:

---

Give away 80B in Military equipment- who the heck does that?

---

We didn't "gift them" 80 billion in military equipment they were the spoils of war... the Army that we spent 20 years building simply evaporated. You can't fight for people who won't fight for themselves. Creating Democracies that could support/fight for themselves was the Bush Doctrine. I actually think this is still the right way to fight terrorism, only problem is we tried doing it with mostly carrots/sticks from the top down rather than with carrots/sticks from the bottom up.

---

Too bad no one had the the faintest idea of actually destroying the equipment when it was obvious the taliban was on the march and the afghan president took off running

---

Why not destroy it now? We know why. Biden the hologram just like Obama the Thin Man. They live arming the enemy

---

I agree... they should be droning the equipment to smithereens

---

Because we don't want to incentivize the Taliban to respond by taking Amcits hostage, or worse.

---

If we are refraining from disarming terrorists due to the fact they will kill Americans near them, it's already a hostage situation.

---

The equipment is there, visible, and "touchable."

The Amcits, hopefully, can be extracted in a few weeks.

Then we can "touch" all the hardware we desire.

---

Because we can trust the Talban not to move them, right?

---

There aren't enough garages in Afghanistan to hide them all.

I did see a report that a lot of humvees and MRAPs & such were being transported to Iran. That would make sense. Military equipment, small arms & ammo, and so forth are liquid assets. New regimes always need quick cash to consolidate power. Would make total sense that anything that could be driven to another country would get sold if possible. That's not desirable but then none of that stuff is going to be used in a terrorist attack. Yeah, we could destroy it in Iran, too, but then that's spending a lot of money to destroy a lot of money, which comes with a larger set of policy complications, so it's probably just a pile of bitter pills we're going to have to swallow. And nobody involved has a supply chain to replace water pumps & radiators, so all of it is subject to rapid depreciation.

We want the Taliban regime to quickly consolidate and demonstrate that it has learned that it is an existential error to allow terrorist groups to use Afghani soil to conduct terrorism against US interests. We will see a ton of horrible reports about retribution against former regime elements, women, children, etc....and we will see lots of guys who should have gotten lost at Gitmo get government jobs. We don't care about any of that. What we care about is that the Taliban is human enough to put holding onto power ahead of pushing global jihad. That's not terribly wishful thinking. Look at how those last two weeks went. The Taliban could have overrun that base and made a mess of bodies that would break all records.

Lost in the criminally mismanaged withdrawal by this administration is a powerful lesson that no world leader can afford to ignore - the USA is the biggest, baddest mofo to ever stride the world stage and we can take you apart limb by limb if you rattle our cage. I do not think the Taliban is going to revert to status quo ante 9/11/2001. They know we can run them back to the hills and keep them there indefinitely, if we wish. $60b a year is peanuts to us. We can spend it if we want to, for a century. That is reality and it is going to attenuate behavior.

And it's not like Afghanistan is an easy place for anyone to control. If they get out of hand, we have options to make life harder for them that do not involve U.S. troops on the ground...... The play here is to take our lumps and focus on the future. Yes, we can destroy what we need to destroy, but first the citizens and SIV issues have to be dealt with. And China is the real threat. We did need to get the hell out of Afghanistan. Unfortunately, ol' Corn Pop screwed the pooch on the way out.

whiterock: "the USA is the biggest, baddest mofo to ever stride the world stage "

Sorry but no. In ancient times, the Roman Empire enjoyed that reputation, but once the Emperor replaced citizens with mercenaries the decline set in.

Then The Mongols held that title under Genghis Khan. But after Genghis passed, his successors could not maintain the same power.

Fast forward to the 19th Century, and Horatio Nelson made the British Navy feared around the globe. That lasted until WW1.

The US became a superpower in WW2, but lost a lot of respect following the Vietnam War, in many ways similar to the current debacle in Afghanistan. Like now, the problem was not material but will. Not only did political leadership fail, that political decay degraded the quality of flag officers. Even though Reagan rebuilt the military in both doctrinal and moral ways, it was not until 1991 that the US regained hyperpower status.

It is stunning to consider the damage done to the US military since then, however. We could not win in Somalia or other African ventures, we have not stopped China's expansion in Southeast Asia nor Russia's acquisition of Ukraine, and our generals prattle on about social justice without a clue about the main purpose of our military's existence.

It will take another Reagan to rebuild us into a credible threat. We may well lose Taiwan and parts of Africa and South America before that happens.

None of that is true. We could have stopped all of those. And we could have won in any theater. However what is winning? We could have occupied Afghanistan forever with fewer than 5,000 troops but is that a win?

Two major changes; post Vietnam the public has no stomach for what is needed to win at times and we care far too much about optics and politics.

There is no better fighting force on the planet. No one has the technical ability and equipment we do. No one has better trained soldiers than we do. No one. Period. End of discussion.

nein51: "None of that is true."

All of that is true. But you are correct that the essential part is will. We could have won any war in which we found ourselves, but too often we committed our troops without a cogent plan, including exit strategy.

I never said we had to stay in Afghanistan forever. Then again, we maintain bases around the world to advance our interests, and Afghanistan was effectively under control for that purpose, should we have chosen to keep it.

But there is leaving and there is running away. Standard rules for retreat were ignored, and even common sense was ignored:

You pull your military out after you have your civilians out;

You leave a base after you have destroyed or removed all weapons or material you don't want the enemy to take;

You don't leave without understanding the calendar and situation - Afghanistan has a 'war season' of June through October, which was why Trump set a May deadline for getting out. Biden should either have followed that, or if he felt it was not possible to get things done by then, he should have waited until winter to get out safely.

I could go on, but the scary thing here is that the decision was not made just by the President, but in discussion with his top generals, any of whom could and should have offered alternatives which were not only better for protecting American lives, but also better for protecting the President's image and public support.

"But we didn't "lose". We chose to leave."

Choosing to leave is not how we lost. Abandoning our own citizens and billions of dollars of material, that defines losing here.


"The problem is that there is no way to win there."

The problem is that we never properly defined winning. Bush was naive to think we could nation-build in Afghanistan, but going in was the right thing to do. A lot of people forgot - or never knew - just how many terrorist groups were founded and trained in Afghanistan.

Bush was also naive to imagine that the President who followed him, almost certainly a Democrat given how our political patterns go, would see things the same way he did. He was also naive to forget how quickly things can change, as Afghanistan evidenced between 1976 and 1981, and from 2001 to 2005.

The whole War on Terror was a bizarre take on Reality. While the need to destroy not only such groups but the option of using them for asymmetrical warfare is obvious, ignoring regional culture and social trends in the Middle East was foolish indeed. I am not saying, at all, that we should be in the business of supporting monsters like Saddam Hussein, just because order can be a good thing, but we must be aware of the effect of our decisions in realistic actions.

nein51 said:

---

I am more than willing to stipulate that leaving Afghanistan basically could not have gone worse (I can think of 1-2 scenarios that are worse like a plane full of civilians shot down).

But we didn't "lose". We chose to leave. We didn't get run out of town. We could have stayed and the Taliban would not have been able to reestablish themselves there. We could have held the entire country with a very minimal amount of troops if we so desired.

The problem is that there is no way to win there. There are various levels of losing but no winning. We never ever should have stayed there and, as much as I like him, that part is on GWB.

We would have been better off to strike OBL and leave. We netted the same result but it cost us 20 years and billions of dollars.

---

Yes to all of this. We had OBL locked up in Tora Bora and for some reason decided to "negotiate" rather than obliterate. OBL sneaked away and it took us years to find OBL and dispense justice. We let him get away under Bush so it is sort of fitting that another President gets the credit of killing OBL.

Oldbear83 said:

---

"But we didn't "lose". We chose to leave."

Choosing to leave is not how we lost. Abandoning our own citizens and billions of dollars of material, that defines losing here.


"The problem is that there is no way to win there."

The problem is that we never properly defined winning. Bush was naive to think we could nation-build in Afghanistan, but going in was the right thing to do. A lot of people forgot - or never knew - just how many terrorist groups were founded and trained in Afghanistan.

Bush was also naive to imagine that the President who followed him, almost certainly a Democrat given how our political patterns go, would see things the same way he did. He was also naive to forget how quickly things can change, as Afghanistan evidenced between 1976 and 1981, and from 2001 to 2005.

The whole War on Terror was a bizarre take on Reality. While the need to destroy not only such groups but the option of using them for asymmetrical warfare is obvious, ignoring regional culture and social trends in the Middle East was foolish indeed. I am not saying, at all, that we should be in the business of supporting monsters like Saddam Hussein, just because order can be a good thing, but we must be aware of the effect of our decisions in realistic actions.

---

Surprise, you and I agree on something.

Seems like a big story. I'd like to see some more media coverage to see if this is true.

STUCK ON PLANES: @RepMcCaul says Americans and Afghan interpreters have been held hostage by the Taliban for days at the Mazar-i-Sharif International Airport in Afghanistan. #FoxNewsSunday pic.twitter.com/2gJfxNTIfJ

— FoxNewsSunday (@FoxNewsSunday) September 5, 2021

CBS confirms

An email from the State Department to members of congress -- and viewed by CBS -- acknowledged that charter flights are still on the ground at the Mazar-i-Sharif airstrip and have permission to land in Doha "if and when the Taliban agrees to takeoff. 2/

— Ruffini (@EenaRuffini) September 5, 2021

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"But we didn't "lose". We chose to leave."

Choosing to leave is not how we lost. Abandoning our own citizens and billions of dollars of material, that defines losing here.


"The problem is that there is no way to win there."

The problem is that we never properly defined winning. Bush was naive to think we could nation-build in Afghanistan, but going in was the right thing to do. A lot of people forgot - or never knew - just how many terrorist groups were founded and trained in Afghanistan.

Bush was also naive to imagine that the President who followed him, almost certainly a Democrat given how our political patterns go, would see things the same way he did. He was also naive to forget how quickly things can change, as Afghanistan evidenced between 1976 and 1981, and from 2001 to 2005.

The whole War on Terror was a bizarre take on Reality. While the need to destroy not only such groups but the option of using them for asymmetrical warfare is obvious, ignoring regional culture and social trends in the Middle East was foolish indeed. I am not saying, at all, that we should be in the business of supporting monsters like Saddam Hussein, just because order can be a good thing, but we must be aware of the effect of our decisions in realistic actions.

---

Surprise, you and I agree on something.

---

Indeed we do. I just wish our view was shared by the leaders in D.C.

Never forgive. Never forget. To the top of the page.

Jacques Strap said:

---

Seems like a big story. I'd like to see some more media coverage to see if this is true.

STUCK ON PLANES: @RepMcCaul says Americans and Afghan interpreters have been held hostage by the Taliban for days at the Mazar-i-Sharif International Airport in Afghanistan. #FoxNewsSunday pic.twitter.com/2gJfxNTIfJ

— FoxNewsSunday (@FoxNewsSunday) September 5, 2021

CBS confirms

An email from the State Department to members of congress -- and viewed by CBS -- acknowledged that charter flights are still on the ground at the Mazar-i-Sharif airstrip and have permission to land in Doha "if and when the Taliban agrees to takeoff. 2/

— Ruffini (@EenaRuffini) September 5, 2021

---

CNN has been following up with questions to the State Department - and Administration, and as they said: Crickets so far from the Administration.

TexasScientist said:

---

Jacques Strap said:

---

Seems like a big story. I'd like to see some more media coverage to see if this is true.

STUCK ON PLANES: @RepMcCaul says Americans and Afghan interpreters have been held hostage by the Taliban for days at the Mazar-i-Sharif International Airport in Afghanistan. #FoxNewsSunday pic.twitter.com/2gJfxNTIfJ

— FoxNewsSunday (@FoxNewsSunday) September 5, 2021

CBS confirms

An email from the State Department to members of congress -- and viewed by CBS -- acknowledged that charter flights are still on the ground at the Mazar-i-Sharif airstrip and have permission to land in Doha "if and when the Taliban agrees to takeoff. 2/

— Ruffini (@EenaRuffini) September 5, 2021

---

CNN has been following up with questions to the State Department - and Administration, and as they said: Crickets so far from the Administration.

---

the Biden admin is doing the ignore it and it will go away thing and the media is helping to some degree.. it is maddening!

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Jacques Strap said:

---

Seems like a big story. I'd like to see some more media coverage to see if this is true.

STUCK ON PLANES: @RepMcCaul says Americans and Afghan interpreters have been held hostage by the Taliban for days at the Mazar-i-Sharif International Airport in Afghanistan. #FoxNewsSunday pic.twitter.com/2gJfxNTIfJ

— FoxNewsSunday (@FoxNewsSunday) September 5, 2021

CBS confirms

An email from the State Department to members of congress -- and viewed by CBS -- acknowledged that charter flights are still on the ground at the Mazar-i-Sharif airstrip and have permission to land in Doha "if and when the Taliban agrees to takeoff. 2/

— Ruffini (@EenaRuffini) September 5, 2021

---

CNN has been following up with questions to the State Department - and Administration, and as they said: Crickets so far from the Administration.

---

the Biden admin is doing the ignore it and it will go away thing and the media is helping to some degree.. it is maddening!

---

I think you're right about Biden. So far the media has kept the issue the forefront, especially after yesterday's revelation about citizens being held for ransom.

TexasScientist said:

---

Bill Clinton had a chance to get him before 9/11 and declined.

---

didn't want to "risk injury" to the Crown Prince of Dubai

trey3216 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Bill Clinton had a chance to get him before 9/11 and declined.

---

didn't want to "risk injury" to the Crown Prince of Dubai

---

Clinton had a chance to get him before that, via arrest & deport. We didn't have a warrant, indictment, etc....so declined. Was very frustrating.

whiterock said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Bill Clinton had a chance to get him before 9/11 and declined.

---

didn't want to "risk injury" to the Crown Prince of Dubai

---

Clinton had a chance to get him before that, via arrest & deport. We didn't have a warrant, indictment, etc....so declined. Was very frustrating.

---

Correct.

Biden State Dept Says It Has No Resources To Rescue Trapped Flights In Afghanistan

Individuals associated with an organization handling the flights said that the State Department is the only obstacle to the chartered planes leaving the airport, but sources close to the situation told The Daily Wire Sunday that while the State Department is not negotiating landing zones, the Taliban is also making significant demands, effectively creating a "hostage situation" on the ground in Afghanistan.

A State Department official, however, told the Washington Free Beacon that the State Department's hands are tied and that they have no resources on the ground to assist or even to provide reliable information on the passengers.

"We do not have personnel on the ground, we do not have air assets in the country, we do not control the airspacewhether over Afghanistan or elsewhere in the region," the official told the Free Beacon. "We understand the concern that many people are feeling as they try to facilitate further charter and other passage out of Afghanistan."

A source told The Daily Wire that the Taliban appears to be requesting "tens of millions."

#BREAKING can confirm that 11 flights, 8 chartered by Glen Beck, are being held by the Taliban and include over 100 Americans. No pax on planes. No hostages. All pax are safe away from airport. https://t.co/nbnYRtouSf

— Naveed Jamali (@NaveedAJamali) September 6, 2021

Never forgive! Never forget!!!

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Jacques Strap said:

---

Seems like a big story. I'd like to see some more media coverage to see if this is true.

STUCK ON PLANES: @RepMcCaul says Americans and Afghan interpreters have been held hostage by the Taliban for days at the Mazar-i-Sharif International Airport in Afghanistan. #FoxNewsSunday pic.twitter.com/2gJfxNTIfJ

— FoxNewsSunday (@FoxNewsSunday) September 5, 2021

CBS confirms

An email from the State Department to members of congress -- and viewed by CBS -- acknowledged that charter flights are still on the ground at the Mazar-i-Sharif airstrip and have permission to land in Doha "if and when the Taliban agrees to takeoff. 2/

— Ruffini (@EenaRuffini) September 5, 2021

---

CNN has been following up with questions to the State Department - and Administration, and as they said: Crickets so far from the Administration.

---

the Biden admin is doing the ignore it and it will go away thing and the media is helping to some degree.. it is maddening!

---

I think you're right about Biden. So far the media has kept the issue the forefront, especially after yesterday's revelation about citizens being held for ransom.

---

The media has kept the issue at hand but they've gone out of their way to dissolve Biden of any wrongdoing.

Doc Holliday said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Jacques Strap said:

---

Seems like a big story. I'd like to see some more media coverage to see if this is true.

STUCK ON PLANES: @RepMcCaul says Americans and Afghan interpreters have been held hostage by the Taliban for days at the Mazar-i-Sharif International Airport in Afghanistan. #FoxNewsSunday pic.twitter.com/2gJfxNTIfJ

— FoxNewsSunday (@FoxNewsSunday) September 5, 2021

CBS confirms

An email from the State Department to members of congress -- and viewed by CBS -- acknowledged that charter flights are still on the ground at the Mazar-i-Sharif airstrip and have permission to land in Doha "if and when the Taliban agrees to takeoff. 2/

— Ruffini (@EenaRuffini) September 5, 2021

---

CNN has been following up with questions to the State Department - and Administration, and as they said: Crickets so far from the Administration.

---

the Biden admin is doing the ignore it and it will go away thing and the media is helping to some degree.. it is maddening!

---

I think you're right about Biden. So far the media has kept the issue the forefront, especially after yesterday's revelation about citizens being held for ransom.

---

The media has kept the issue at hand but they've gone out of their way to dissolve Biden of any wrongdoing.

---

IDK - I've seen some pretty harsh commentary and interviews that put the Biden administration on the spot. The administration has been grilled over what the military advised about withdrawal, maintaining a foot print during withdrawal, prematurely closing Bagram, and stranded Americans and SIV Afghanistans trying to get out. Evnen today about how State Dept. is claiming credit for getting an American and her children out over the border, when it was a private charitable organization that did it, with State Department refusing to assist, and even hindering them, until they actually made it to the boder. Then they stepped up to claim credit.