host:host: ts morning the

washington journal bconclude the annual holidayuthors week series. this morning we are joined by jerry don leavy, the told story of fines fiasco and th american warriors what the end.

afghanistan withdrawal, receiving these awards. 2.5 years in's the evaction from kabul. wh is the significance of that in your min >> the subtitle of our book has two parts. biden' fiasco which i think everyone saw play out on their levisis. inhe american warriors fought to the end. a big part of fighting this book was to honor the servicemembers who fought in afghanistan for 20 years but specifically those who went into a chaotic and dangerous situation at kabul airport to evacuate americans and our afghan allies and we were tryg to honor those and keep the spotlight on this issue.

slowly but surely, the crewmembers who helpe evacuate americans are getting the recognition that they deserve and it is our hope that all of the servicemembers who went into that very dangerous situation while the taliban was providing security outside, while isis was threatening suicide bombings and unfortunately carried out a deadly one, we hope that they will get the recognition ty deserve as well. host: do you think those service members, whether it be the air force members, the army officers and servicemen who were guarding the wall, d they not get tir recognition in the months after the pullout and if so,hy? guest: an entire chapter of our book is dedicated to the 13 u.s. service membs who lost their lives in that deadly abdicate bombing attack by a man who was

a nicesterrorist who was freed from the airbase wch the u.s. had abandoneduly. the te them it freed him in thdays lding up to the bombing, president biden has not said the names of the 13 u.s. seice members ou loud or, and that is frustrating to a lot of those family members tt we talked to for the book wh don't think at there service members. the recognition and credit that they deserve. so part of our goal with the book was to honor those 13 u.s. service members. many servimembers who were wounded, se of them grievous. and al to put the spotlight on the 200 and is who werkilled in that dead terrorist attack. host: november021 u.s. centr

command could and thait cap e tactical level without degrading the mission to maximize the number of evacuees at the is that correct? guest: our book lays out a very, very strong case that the terrorist attack was not inevitable, and i could just go through that very briefly. the terrost i mentioned carried out that attack, the bideadministration is declined to say hisame publicly, but that is who carrd out this attack. here is how we know that. we know that from multiple different sources, some of which i can't really getnto, but it is beyond any doubt that he was that suide bomber. he has been captured in the joint operation byndian intelligence and the cia back in

2017 and the strength to carry out a terrorist attackn delhi, actually. he was imprisoned, the were couple of prisons on e airbase, he was imprisoned for a number of years and he was talin when they were sweeping across afghanistan. we abandoned bagram in july. the taliban captured bagram arnd august 15 and free thousands of terrorists, taliban members, memrs of al qaeda and probably well over 1000 members of isis-k. the simple fact is that the united states had held onto the airbase it would have been smart for many reasons, but one of them is that the terrorists who carried out that attack would still have been behind bars. on top of that, once the taliban took over kabul, we were then relying on them to provide

security outside of kabul airport. thmarine sergeant has testified that he believed that he had in his sights a suspect who met the description of the suicide bomber but wasn't given permission to take the shot. on top of that, we found testimonial evidence of people on the ground that the u.s. military had asked the taliban to raise an isis location in the cattle to do so and because of our book, general frank mckenzie actually has said that there were multiple instances, probably at least 10 were the u.s. asked the taliban to raid isis-k locations around the airport and the taliban would sometimes say no. so ts is who we were relying on to provide security, an enemy of the united states, a group that had harbored al qaeda

before, during, and after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and then that same group would sometimes refuse to go after isis-k locations, so they freaked t suicide bomber from prison and they wouldn't go after all the locations we asked them to. i think that theesult of that was the bombing on august 25. post: that bookgain, the americanhere tpoint to the end. it is our topic in this hour of the shington journal. who is james? guest: great guy, good friend of mine. he is an afghan war veteran, u.s. army captain whdid it for an stamped, essential for the book. great friend. host: and what is your day job now? guest: right now i am an investigator on the house foreign affairs committee. i will just note that i am here

in my personal capacity is the author of the book in t here on behalf of the comttee, but my main focus is afghanistan, the withdrawal, the taliban takeover. the purpose ofhe investigation is to give accountability. there has been no accountability for the disast that happened in august, 2021. president biden portable have a proper pn, thatow to get americans out, without have to get allies out, without a proper plan, how to keep the afghan military on the field fighting the taliban. that resulted taliban takeover. if the decision to withdraw in the middle of the afgh fighting, september 11, 20 21 as the withdrawal date, that is not a strategic decisn, that seems like a politicalne.

anthe consequences ohis decision was that by septembe , 20 21, the 20th annivsary of 9/11, the talibanack charge of afghanistan. the purpose was accountability, transparency, and most importantly, to make sure that this st of thing nev happens again. host: the phone numb if you want to join the conversation, i will start with a specialine we have afghan war veteran. (202) 748-8003 we will there as often as we have calls from veterans. otherwise, phoneines, republicans, (202)48-8001. democrats, (2) 748-8000. there is a pretty faus pictu of the man known as the last man out of afghanistan, army major general chris donahu there is a picture of him boarding t plane, leaving kabul airport. what should people know about m? guest: he played an essential

le in in not just afghanistan over the years, during the evacuation he wa actually the one that the u.s. military had with the taliban during the evacuaon. so imptant thing here, and important guide. and i mentioned, the taliban, while they were providing security, this was a decision that steed from a meeting that happened between taliban leaders and general mckenzie shortly before the television entirely lockednto kabul, according to testimony and public statements. thtaliban figure asked the u.s. if they wanted to secure kabul, if the u.s. mitary

wanted to, and general mckenzie said that was not what he was here to do, that is not. ends so the taliban came in and we were forced to have control of only a small airport he tried to evacuate their people. emily saw the taliban do was they would turn americans away, there are reports of them eating americans. servicemembers have spok about how the taliban would beat up our afghan allies outside the gates and even kill afghans within sight of the marines. so thatroup, taliban is now in charge of afghanistan. the world has become a more dangerous place because of it. host: how many u. citizens were in afghanistan after the u.s. departure in september of 2021? guest: it's an iortant

question, and the question that as you can see, the biden administration has been a bit shaky on clearly many hundreds. it is important to keep in mind that in august021, after the taliban had takenver, president biden went on natial television and promptly said the u.s. military would t leave until every american got out. that is the promise that he made to the amerin people. and it is a promise that was not cap. because in the u.s. military left, there were still hundreds of americanseftehind, to say nothing of the fact that there were tens of thousands of afghan lies lefbehind. hundredsf whom have now been killed by taliban. host: thomas in oxford, georgia, mine for indendent, you are on. caller hi, howre you guest: i'm goodhappy new year.

ller: happy new yea the troop withdrawal, 2500 five days before den took office, done by christopher mille who was acting secretary of defense at the time really frustrated the biden administration. and also, he said bagram was abandoned. that was anotherrder by acting secretary miller to withdraw by july 21. st: let's take those points up. gut: on the second point, th u.s. was still in control of bagram at thndf 20202when president biden took or.

so it was president biden's order in april 21 that resued in s. troops going from rough 2550 order to go down to zero in e middle of the afghan fighting by september 112021. but president trump did draw down u.s. troops to 2500, so that was roughly the figure that president biden him into office th. his military commaers to him to go from 2500 down to zero, to a full, condition was withdrawal, as mility mmanders told president biden that that would be a disaster. president biden decided to put that in vice aside and to do it yway, and what we saw with the

taliban takeover. keep in mind that e full withdrawal order issued by president biden meant the withdrawal oall the u.s. troops in a variety oflaces in afanistan helping to enable the afghan military, essential for functioning of the afghan litary that had been built ound u. support. but the u.s. withdrawal also meant the pulling of u.s. logistics, advisers, contractors, all of whom are believed the lifeblood of the afghan military in its fight against e taliban. guest: talk abt the doha agreement. guest: the doha agreement was an agreement struck between the trump administration led by the negotiator between the u.s. and the taliban, d in our book, we make it pretty clear that this

is a flawed agreement,o say the least. but there were conditions in this agreement. this is not just an agreement with the u.s. some conditions as well among those being break ties with terrorist groups. specificallyl qaeda. in the taliban never did that. they still haven't done that. it was a flawed agreement, but the conditions the taliban was supposed to follow were not being met, and president biden decided to withdraw all of our troops anyway. obviously, resulted that was a taliban takeover. >> life republicans, you are on the cherry done the. >> tha you. i needed to insert a couple of my theories into this fiasco

-- did not create scenarios which would include the capitulation of the aft can army in such a rapid fashion. i have theory that there were embeds throught the afghan my because that was evident with the suicide bombing that occurred with afghans -- tell a man military. with a possibly some threats to the afghan military in general out if you do not throw down your arms, there will retribution agnst your family? i know that the thres could probably have such a complete capitulation in ch a short nner.

the issue is when i want to addresalso. it wasituated perfectlyn the round top. tons of open area. you could have had checkpoints upon checkpoints to get these people out, and with a better outcome. host let's pick up those two points bagram and then inside the afghan national army. >> aery good question, iill think t second one first. giving up bob from was a disastrous decision for a lot of different reasons. one that i mentioned obviously was vibram was the homto a couple ofrisons that contained al qaeda, taliban, isis-k. d when the u.s. left,t was left in the handsf the afghan

military, and the afghan military was overrun by the taliban. the taliban took over, fritos prisoners and one of them carried out the bombin but bagram was also an extremely strategic base. it would have been a much safer, much better place tdo a noncombatant evacuation from, so that is an important point. it's also very unlikely u.s. had held onto bagram that the taliban uld have been able to overrun the area and make its way to kabul. host: what was the theory on the ground at the time to use that airport and not keepg bagram? guest: president biden made the decision to go down to zero, and going do to zero limited the ability of u.s. military to hold

onto the strategic areas and strategic basis. and so part of his order meant putting us in a position where they had just a small airport. and if i could really quickly get to the other that he made about tanks, there were predictions. i think that the u.s. intelligence community and the broader telligence apparatus did not do a very good job in 2021. i think the state department was more rosy about this and the cia was, but there were warnings that were being de about what the impact of president biden decision would be, and this warnings were being made before he made it. so you have warnings published in west point publications that the relative strength of the afghan military versus the taliban, especially if the u.s. withdrew support, some warnings

about the taliban actually being a lot strongerhan people were giving the credit for. you have a special inspector general for afghanistan warning about this contractor issue and saying if the u.s. military leaves can these contractors leave, you will be pulling out essential support the afghan military needs. you also have the long war journal, part of the foundation for defense of democracy. you had them doing a district map throughout the spring and summer showing the taliban's rapid dances and warning that the taliban was on the margin that the afghan military and afghan government were in real trouble and that he collapses going to happen a lot faster than the biden administration was waiting for. while the u.s. government failed in a lot of ways, there were warnings tt this would be the

result and those warnings were just ignored. host: the co-authors of that book. jerry is with usor about the next half hour take those calls. salvori in salem, massacsetts. democrat, good morni. ller: yes, sir. the question in mind, how long do you think it would have taken to subdue afghastan? we could be there another hundred years anit would never happen. i'm so happy that we get out of the eless war after vietnam and all that, which i partook in, and it was feckless. this book to be about biden and all this, it is ridiculous. guest: so in our book, we don't

take a specific stance on what the long-term u.s. policy should have been in afghanistan. our book is about the decisions in 2021, and the way that this withdrawal was done. whether you think that the u.s. should have stayed to ensure that the taliban was kept at bay, obviously the taliban harbored al qaeda before, during, and after the 9/11 attacks and youth to harbor them after they took over as we saw with the terrorist go to a safe house in kabul in 2022 and having a drone strike there. whether you thought that the u.s. should stay where you thought that the u.s. should leave, it is about the way the withdrawal was done. in the way this withdrawal was done in the middle of the afghan fighting season with a political

instead of a strategic withdrawal on the 20 anniversary of 9/11, without doing the things necessary to make sure that would be able to get all the americans out, gather all of our afghan allies out and give the afghan military what it needed to continue to take the fight to the taliban even as we left host: this is august 31, 20 21 announcing the u.s. withdw from afghanistan. i take responsibility for the decision. some say we should have started mass evacuations sooner. and couldn't this have been done in a more orderly manner? i respectfully disagree. imagine we had begun evacuations in june or july. bringing thousands of american troops and evacuating more than

120,000 people in the mdle of the civil war. there still would have been a rush to the airport. a breakdown of confidence and control of the government, and it still would have been very cold and dangerous. the bottom line is there is no evacuation from the end of the war that you can round without complexities, challenges, and threats the face. none. to those who say we should have stayed indefinitely, for years on end, they asked why don't we just keep doing what we were doing? why do we have to change anything? the fact is, everything had changed. my predecessor had made a deal with the taliban. i came into office and we face a deadline, may 1. tell a was coming.

we faced one of two choices. follow the agreement of the previous administration and extend it to have more time for people to get out, or sending thousands more troops and escalate the war. for those asking for a third decade of war in afghanistan, i ask what is the vital national interests? in my view, we only have one. to make sure afghanistan can never be used again to launch an attack on our homeland remember why we went to afghanistan in the first place? because we were attacked by osama bin laden and al qaeda on september 11, 2001. and they were based in afghanistan. we delivered justice to bin

laden on may 2, 2011. over a decade ago. al qaeda was decimated. host: the presidentrom two and a half years a. guest: he said a few different things tre thawere interesting. he talks about al qaeda there. in 2021 and since, he's de various comments about aqaeda being gone om afghanistan, which is simply not true. the alliance beten thealiban and al qaeda in anniston continues and remains, and e liban is sheering al qaeda and qaeda leaders. he's likely making payments to them. we see al qaeda's leader was osama bin laden's number two you sheltered in a safe house belonging to a long time taliban top leader in government today.

he also de a point a lot, there were conditions that the telegram was simply not meeting. it wasn't really meeting any of the conditions but the one that i continue to harp on is breaking newties with al qaeda which the taliban has ver done. one of the point was that what happened in august 21 was sort of inevitable andhat wh happened during the evacuation, there is nothing tt could have been done better. i would suggest that pele falling from planes, having to rely on the taliban for six ready outside ofhe, these thingt

inevitable. this was about choices. while president biden was, thest inevitable. this was about choices. while president biden was certainly not dealt a great hand in afghanistan, there were choices that he made along the way that made this worse. and so the purpose of the book was to point out those mistakes and do hope that the u.s. learned from it so the sort of mistakes don'happengain. host: roger, independent, thanks for waiting. caller: thank you, can you hear me? host:es, sir. caer: first of all, this is the first time i've beeable to get through in about 20 years. so while i agree with your contention that this was a

failure by the biden administration, i see that you failed t mention in yourook, it was the tmp administrion that set up the withdraw. but they didn't ha a plan. or did they have a plan for the withdrawal you know that trump left the white house wiout meing with the biden dish ration and going over any of his plans, but you failed to mention that your book. it seems like you ly havone point of view. host le's give jer a chance to respond and elaborate a bit more on the may deadline. guest: i encourage you to buy the book bause wdo have an tire chapter on the doha agreement. we thoug it waimportant to understand the context of 2021.

like i mentioned, it was a flaw agreement absolutely and president trump did not make the decision that president biden di president trump did reduce trips down to 2100 but it was president biden that made the decion to go dow to zero, and to do a full withdrawal. and to go along with anlement of the deal ha -- doha agreement without the taliban following through on its commitmentits commitment to engage any meaningful negotiations the afghan government and various otherommitments not to tack provincial capitals and all the various things, the telegram inot following any of these price of the agreeme, but present biden decided to go to zero anyway in spite of

his military comnders telling himhat to go from 2500 to zero would be a disaster and a disaster is exactly will be got. host: what was the most number of troops we hadn over 20 years in afghanistan? guest: at one point we had ny, many tens of thousands. the highest waduring the obama administration during president obama's surge that he di during the obama administration, they came down substantially again. president trump early in his term introduced more tros before lering them significantly by the end ohis adminirations well. host you have a bapark on the number of afghantan wa veterans there are in this country? guest: there are hundredof thsands.

part of the purpose of our book if you look athe dedication, this was a 20 year war. we make that very clear in the book. therwas 20 years of figing, 20 years of dying. a lot of american servicemembers giving their lives in this war that happened because of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on al qaeda and because the taliban continued to protect and shield al qaeda. we do our best to honor those 20 years and is u.s. service members. we also thought it was important to have a specific focus on those you a service to went in at the end into an impossible situation, the situation that i think it's very fair to say that president biden them in a very dangerous situation with otello and at the gates come with

isis-k roaming outside the gates and 13 u.s. service members lost their lives. 13 new families to do and thousands of gold star families from throughout the 20 year. host: a phone number r afghan war veterans to call in during the segment, (202) 748-8003. otherwise, phone lines as usual. lifer democrats, william, georgia, good mornin caller: good morning. you keep talking about context and you do mention the agreement set up i trump, the withdrawal of troops under trump to 2500, but you brush over that and say it is all on joe biden because had we not gone from 2500 down to zero, and we never did go to

zero, obviously if you withdrawal you would have zero troops, but we were there for 20 years. and the number we had with 100,000 troops. so the premise that you have here, that 2500 troops could do what 100,000 tros couldn't do is absurd. guest: sure. to note again, bagram airba, a very strategic base, the base that had these terrorists, including the one who carried out the anti-gate attack, a base that was important for keeping the afghan military fhting d functioning, a strategic asset that the u.s. had for the region as well, it still had a u.s. military presence when presidt trump left office. it was president biden and his go to zero order that resulted in a full withdrawal of u.s.

troops and exposure of all u.s. bases in afghanistan, including bagram which would have been a much safer and more stragic place and would have also helped with keeping the taliban at bay, or at least keeping the taliban away from kabul. with 2500 troops, obviously it is not a very large number but the afghan military was continuing to fight and hold the television at bay with those 2500 troops helping support them, and keep in mind that also meant while u.s. troops were there, u.s. and inrnational contractors were able to be there and to help the afghan military. president biden's decision to go to zero also meant that nato would get dragged along into

that as well. at the time, early 2021, nato's military presence wa significantly larger than the u.s. military presence, of the u.s. going to zero meant those nato troops and enablers for the afghan military also left. so the afghan military had been built around u.s. and nato support, and without support being pulled very quickly in rapid fashi without proper supplementing on the way out the door, it resulted in the ahan military falling back and rapid taliban advancesnto august 2021. post: long beach, california, lying for republicans. caller: the bloody irony of u.s. foreign policy is in 1979 at of carter administration, russia invaded afghanistan and the

united states responded by sending military advisors and troops to afghanistan, and they worked with the taliban and they elevated the taliban. they said they were the warriors from god and they were going to throw out the russians. well, maybe they did and instea they installed themselves, but this is kind of the result of the u.s. constant battle with russia and the concept of communism versus docracy. that fighting has in his rhetoricrequency when he references his foreign-policy. biden said he was going to withdraw them by a specific date with disregard for how would would be done, and it resulted in you writing a book about the needless bloodshed of u.s. troops and afghan lives.

so 'm looking at this history and thus far as biden quoting what he had to do to go into afghanistan to get osama bin laden, wasn't he found in pakistan, a country that received millions in ornate from the united states? so here is my comment, because u.s. foreign policy has a very poor history in humanitarian terms when you look at the korean war, the vietnam war, or in afghanistan, the war on terror. it has all resulted in losses for the united states. there no victori in here. and unnecessary loss of human life on both sides. host: let's let him take some of that up. guest: i'm not going to try to relitigate the cold war. one thing that i would note that the taliban emerged in the 1990's, so after the soviets had

been forced out of afghanistan, but we know at the taliban movement emerged. after the soviets were defeated in afghanistan, they left. that gave al qaeda and osama bin laden the space to plan the 9/11 tacks. and after 9/11, the taliban refused to hand over osama bin laden, and its al qaeda leadership. and thus the war in afghanistan. it is absolutely true that osama bin laden was in pakistan, and the pakistani role in afghanistan, fairly nefarious.

they were major backers of taliban, and gave safe haven to the taliban to operate, answer the taliban's survival over 20 years of war was in part due to the safe haven at pakian gave them. in terms of fallout from u.s. foreign policy, one thing that i will load and sething that we have two chapters on generic books is that the taliban takeover of afghanistan, it wasn't just bad for afghanistan, the taliban taking over, al qaeda getting protection, our afghan allies often times getting hunted down by the talibanallies being left hind,

women's rights being crushed. any sort of freedom that had been built up over 20 years getting crushed, but we live anymore dangerous world now and you can be that some of that comes from what happened in afghanistan. we make a very strong case that the u.s.-nato chaos that ensued in august 2021 and the taliban takeover was likely a factor in vladir putin's decision to invade ukraine. obviously putin has wanted to invade ukraine for a very long time, was very likely looking for what he would just see as his best moment in the chaos nato and the u.s. looking like they were in disarray likely contributed to his decision to launch this massive war on the

europeans. on top of that, the chinese mmunist already has sort of added the disaster in afghanistan to their propaganda toolkit against taiwan. mediately after the taliban takeover, the communist party labeled this a couple moment and used it as an opportunity to threaten taiwan to say look at what happened in afghanistan. look at how the u.s. treated partners. that is what is waiting for you if you try to resist. and so we do live, i think, any more dangerous world today. the taban takeover clearly inspir jihadist groups around the world. they celebrated almost universally the telemann takeover. and obviously you seen has' disgusting and

devastating attack in israel. not everything bad that has happened has happened because of afghanistan, but it has contributed to a more dangerous world that we live in tod. host: the book again, "kabul: the untold story of biden's fiasco of the amican warriors who fought to the end." a striking image on the cover of your book, what is that? guest: that is a rendering, and artist rendering that we chose for our cover. i think that it depicts very well sort of the mood and the feeling and the environment at kabul airport as the u.s. attempted to evacuate americans and afghan allies with the taliban right outside the gates, and with isis=k trying to carry

out a terrorist attack. it sort of depicts the a bbygate attack and what that would like the u.s. service members who were on the ground during that attack. 13-year-old service members losing their lives in that terrorist attack. dozens of thnded so of thevouy wounded th lifel, life aering in, anen of course, 200 innocent afghans losing their lives as well. a 20 year war, that was the third day for u.s. troops in afghanistan over that entire 20 year war, and so we really try in our book to highlight the

stories of t 13 service members. we have an entire chapter on the 13 service members fund giving their families an opportunity to talk about those svice members and to put a highlight on this final americans who lostheir lives in this 20 year war. host: this is glenda in dallas, texas, democrat, good morning. caller: how are you this morning? post: doing well, ahead. caller: i havewo issues that would like clarity on from the guest this morning, and theris reason why a former president to pull military o of, bring them out of afghastan. clarity on why he decided to do at and as well, why the is no clarity on why he decided to

ta the american troops out from supporting the curd at the time. those are two major things that donald tru did concerning our foreign poly that i would like for our guest to respd to. ho: thanks for the questn. >> obviously just from president pump -- trumps public statements, he did publicly for u.s. troops to leave afghanistan and entered into the doha agreent with the taliban, and he brought u. troops down to 2500 by the end ofis presiden. but the agreement with the taliban, the doha agreement had conditions to get to a full u.s. withdrawal. in the taliban was not meeting those conditions.

so obviously the doha agreement was a law agreeme. but it was not a condion this agreement. it was not just an agreement with u.s. decides to leave and the taliban doesn't have to do anything. the taliban had to be very specific, certain things, including severing ties with terrorist groups like al qaeda, ensuring that they would not threaten u.s. interest or u.s. homeland, and the taliban never did that. the taliban's alliance with al qaeda remained on the open when trust was president, when biden was president. it remains the case today more than two decades after the 9/11 attacks. and while president trump may have wanted to bring all u.s. troops home, he did not go to zero during his presidency. he left 2500 u.s. troops and i

was president biden who made the decision condition list with -- can distant -- conditionless withdrawal and bring those troops home, to pull u.s. troops, adsors and contracto right in the middle ofhe afghan fighting season. host: the 13 soldiers who died, marine corps lance corporal, green core sergeant nicole g, green core staff sergeant gerren taylor, age 31. hunter lopez, age 22. lance corporal ryan mccallum, age 20. marine corps lance corporal dylan -- come age 20. marine corps lance corporal --, marine corps corporal david william taylor. marine corps sergeant johnny rosario. marine corps corporal --.

marine corps lance corporal jerrod schmidt, and navy hospital corpsman max --. how much have you had a chance interact with the families of those fallen amecans? guest: first off, thank you very much for doing that, for reading. i think any of the familyatter to watch the show appreciate that because a big purpose of this book was to keep the memories of those 13 u.s. service members alive as well as all the other u.s. service who lost their lives in afghanistan. when writing the book, i had the privilege and the honor to talk to a bunch of th goldstar families and it's tough. i can't imagine what they went through and what they are still going throh. but i appreciate their willingness to speak with me and

speak publicly about who those service members were. a lot of these were very young service members, a lot of them probably don't even remember 9/11 terrorist attacks. guest: exactly right, that was the oldest guy. i had the pleasure of speaking with darren hoover's parents, and a number of pents of the 13 u.s. service members. they wanted children stories to be told, and they also want answers about how this would be able to happen, and they want accountability for why a 20 year war ended this way, why the u.s. was pigeonholed into a tiny

airport surrounded by an enemy that we had fought for 2 years, y isis terrorists would be able to carry out a deadly boing that killed their 13 sons and daughters, that grievously wounded dozens of american service members, and killed the 200 afghans. i'm glad that you reaname there. host: i know you said you cld ay for the pas:00 a.m washington, d.c., independent, go ahead. >> thank you for taking my cal a loof those situations that are going on today could be a result of this whole allowed from afghanistan. i'm wondering if biden, looking at the whole world view, he had to know that russia was on the move against ukraine.

he knew they threatened taiwan and its neighbor and imine if we were from afghanistan, and those in the middle east, he had to make tough decisions. it wasn't pretty. it caused the death of innocents , but he is probably looking at the broadepictur guest:hat you just articulated very well is rt of the argument that the bin administration sometimes has made, that being in afghanistan, that leaving afghanian freed them up to deal with other chalnges. i think that a problem with the argument that e biden administration makess

obviously losing a 20 year war r is strategically not a good thing. the talin being in arge of afghanistan dangerous. erasing some of the effects of that with the pakistani taliban being in carrying out devastating attacks. in terms of the argument that leaving afghanistan allow them to betterocus on other threats, i thinke make a pretty clear case that president biden's decision to leave afghanistan e way that he did and the debacle that itas was lily one of the factors that encouraged vladimir putin to invade ukraine. he has long been looking for an excuse to do so, but him looking at the state of the u.s. was

what he needed to get over th edge and to unch this, which has made the world a more dangerous place. the fact that president biden did very little to deter that russian invasion on top of the fact that the debacle in afghanistan helped to encourage hito invadekraine, we are looking at more dangerous world, a more dangerous russia. ho: thank you for waiting ca. caller: yes, i can appreciate people doing books and everything, but the focus that we had, over 14,000 who volunteered. i haveothing but asked -- t

respect for them. we lied our way in the last part of . but see america has been doing bad things for a long time. 220 -- therwere procedures that he went through. these people arod the world are looking r an excuse to fight. they will fight americans just beuse. host: using t word debacle

use the term yes go. why fiasco? guest: because it was a fiasco. what happened in 2021, the go to zero oer, pulling out.s. troops in a condition this withdrawal, not forcing the taliban to -- in doing so, in the middle of the season, the fighting season basically kicks off in the early spring. the figing slowed down quite a bit in the winter months. fighting really kicks off through the spring and summer.

setting september 11 as a political withdrawal date rather than thiabout this more pulling the support from the afghan military when they needed it and not having a proper plan. in phed down to just a tiny airpt and relying othe taliban to conduct our evuation was the definition of a fiasco. host: that is the tive word in that sentence there, the fiasco is the one that mps out. you knew what the title was going to be whenou wrote it? guest: fiasco is theorld -- is the word at we used from day one. not to give us too much credit,

but we saw the writing on the wall. we saw that this was going to be a debacle and a disaster, and it was. the taliban taking overcome the chaos at the airport, a dangerous situation that they were put in during the situation. fiasco is the only word for it. host: the untold story of biden's fiasco.