host:host: this morning the

washington journal be concde the annual holiday authors week series. this morning we are joined by jerry don leavy, the untold story of fines fiasco d the american warriors what the end. afghanistan withdrawal, receiving these awards. 2.5 years in's the evacuation from kabul. what is e significance of that in your mind? >> the subtitle of our book has two parts. biden's fiasco which i think

everyone saw play out on their televisions. in the 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 tse who went into a chaotic and dangerous situation at kabul airport to evacuate americans and our afghan allies and we were trying to honor those and keep the spotlight on this issue. slowly but surely, the ewmembers whoelped evacuate americans are getting the recognion 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 threening icide bombings and unfortunately carried out deadly one, we hope tt they will get the recognion they deserve as well. host: do you think those service

members, whether it be their force members, the army officers and servicemen who were guardi the wall, did they not get their recognition in the months after the pullout and if so, why? gues an entire chapter of our book is dedicated to the 13 u.s. service members who lost their lives in that deadly abdicate bombing attack by aan who was a nicest terrorist who was freed from the airbase which the u.s. had abandoned july. the tell them it freed him in the days leading up to the bombing, president biden has not said the names of the 13 u.s. service members out loud or, and that is frustrating to a lot of those family memrs that we talked to for the book who don't

think that 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 servicemembers who were wounded, some of them grievously. and also to t the spotlight on the 200 and is who were killed in that deadly terrorist attack. host: november 2021 u.s. central command could and that it cap the tactical level without degrading the mission to maximize the numr of evacuees at the is th 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 terrorist i mentioned carried out that attack, the

biden administration is declined to say his name publicly, but that is who carried out this attack. here is how we know that. we know that from multiple different sources, some of which i can't really get into, but it is beyond any doubt that he was that suicide bomber. he has been captured in the joint operation by india intelligence and the cia back in 17 and the strength to carry out a terrorist attack in delhi, actually. he was imprisoned, there were a couple of prisons on the airbase, he was imprisoned for a number of years and he was taliban wn they were sweeping across afgnistan. we abandoned bagram in july. the taliban captured bagram around august 15 and free thousandof terrorists, taliban

member members of al qaeda and probably well over 100member of isis-k. the simple fact is that the united stes had held ontthe airbase it would have been smart fomany reasons, but one of them is that the teorists who carried out that attack would still have been behind bars. top of that, once the taliban took over kabul, we werthen relying on them to provide security outside of kabul airport. the marine sergeant has testified that he belved that he had in his sights a suspect who met the descption 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 aisis location in the

cattle to doo and because of our book, general fnk mckenzie actually has said that there were multiple instaes, probably at let 10 we the u.s. asked t taliban to raid isis-k locations around the airport and the taliban would sometimesay no. so this is who we were relng on to provide security, enemy of t unite states, a group that had harbored al qaeda before, during, and afterhe 9/11 terrorist attacks, and then thatame group would sometimes refuse to go aftsis-k locations,o they freaked the suicide bomber from prison and they wouldn't go aer allhe locations we asked them to. i think th the result of that was thbombing on august 25. post: that book again, the american where to point to the end. it is our topic in this hour of

the washington journal. who is james? guest: great guy, good friend of mine. he is an afghan war veteran, u.s. army captain who did 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 inot here on behalf of the committee, but my main focus is afghanistan, the withdrawal, the taliban takeover. the purpose of the investigation is to give accountability. there has been no accountability for the disaster that happened in august, 2021. president biden portable have a proper plan, that how 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 afghan fighting, september 11, 20 21 as the withdrawal date, that is not a strategic decision, that seems like a political o. d the consequees of his decision was that by september 11, 20 21, the 20thnniversary of 9/11, the talibacin charge of afghanistan. the purpose was accountability, transparency, and most importantly, to make sure that this sort of thing never happens again. host: the phone number if you want to join the conversation, i will start with a special line we have afghan war veteran. (202) 748-8003. we will go there as often as we

have calls from veterans. otherwise, phone lines, republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. the is a pretty famous picture of the man known as the last man out of afghanistan, army major general chris donahue. theris a picture oim ardinghe plane, leaving kabul airport. what should people know about him? guest: he played an essential role in in not just afghanistan over the years, during the evacuation he was actually the onthat the u.s. military had with the taliban during the evaction. so important thing here, and important guide. and i mentioned, the taliban, while they were providin security, ts was a decision

that stemmed from a meeting that happened between taliban leaders angeneral mckenzie shortly before the television entirely lock into kabul, according testimony and public statements. e taliban figure asked the u.s.f they wanted to secure kabul, if the u.s. litary 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 htried to evacuate eir people. emily saw the taliban do was they would turn americans away, there are reports of them eating americans. servicemembers have spen about how the taliban would beat up

our afghan allies outside the gates and even kilafghans within sight of the marines. so that group, taliban is now in charge of afghanistan. the world has become a more dangerous place because of it. host: how many u.s. citizens were in afghanistan after the u.s. departure in september of 2021? guest: it's an important 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 iaugust 2021, after the taliban had taken over, president biden went on national television and promptly said the u.s. military would not leave until every american got out. that is the promise that he made to the american people. and it is a promise that was not cap.

because in the u.s. military left, there were still hundreds of americans left behind, to say nothing of the fact that there were tens of thousands of afghan allies left behind. hundreds of whom have now been killed b taliban. host: thomas in oxford, georgia, mine for independent, you are on. caller: hi, how are you? guest: i'm good, happy new year. caller happy new year. the troop withdrawal, 2500 five days before biden took office, done by christopher miller who was acting secretary of defense at the time really frustrated the biden administration. and also, he said bagram was

abandoned. that was another order by acting secretary miller to withdraw by july 21. host: let's take those points up. guest: on the second point, the u.s. was still in control of bagram at the end of 202021 when president biden took over. so it was president biden's order in april 2021 that resulted iu.s. troops going from roughly 2550 order to go down to zero in the mile of the afghan fighting by september 11, 2021. but president trump did draw down u.s. troops to 2500, so that was roughly the figure that

president ben him into office with. his military commanders told him to go from 2500 down to zero, to do a full, condition was withdrawal, as military commanders told president biden that that would be a disaster. president biden decided to put that in vice aside and to do it anyway, and what we saw with the taliban takeover. keep in mind that the full withdrawal order issued by president biden meant the withdrawal of all the u.s. troops in a variety of places in afghanistan helping to enable the afghan military, essential for functioning of the afghan military that had been built around u.s. support. but the u.s. withdrawal also meant the pullinof u.s. logistics, advisers,

contractors, all of whom are believed the lifeblood of the afghan military in its fight against the taliban. guest: tk about the doha agreement. guest: the doha agreement was an agreement struck beten the trump administrion led by the negotiator between the u.s. and the talan, and in our book, we make it pretty clear tha this is a flawed agreent, to say the least. but there were conditis 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. specifally al qaeda. in the taliban never did that. they still have'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 o troops anyy. obvisly, resulted that was a taliban taover. >> life republicans, you are on the cherry done the. >> thank 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 a they that there were embeds throughout the afghan army because that was evident th the suicide bombing that occurred with afghans -- tell a

man military. with a possibly some threats to the afghan milary in general about if you do not throw down your arms, there will be retribution against your family? i know that the threats could probably have such a complete capitulation in such a short manner. the issue is when i want to address also. it was situated perfectly on 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.

>> a very good question, i will think the 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 home to a couple of prisons that contained al qaeda, taliban,sis-k. and when the u.s. left, it was left in the hands of thafghan military, and the afghan military was overrun by the taliban. the taliban took over, fritos prisoners and one of them carried out the bombing. but bagram was also an extremely strategic base. it would have been a much safer, much better pla to do a noncombatant evacuation from, so that is an important point. it's also very unlikely u.s. had held onto bagram that the

taliban would 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 nokeeping bagram? guest: president biden made the decision to go down to zero, and gog down to zero limited the ability of u.s. mitary to hold onto the strategic areas and strategic basis. and so part of his order meant putting us in position where they had just a small airpor and if i could really quickly get to the other that he made about tanks,here were predictions. i think at the u.s. intelligence community and the brder intelligence 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 ing made about what the impact of president biden decision woulde, and this warnings were being made before he made it. so youave warnings published west point publications that th relative strength of the afghan mitary versus the taliban, especially if the u.s. withdrew support, some warnings about the taliban actually being a lot stnger than people were giving the credit for. you have a special inspector general for ahanistan warning about this contractor issue and saying if the u.s. miliry 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 toughout the spring and summer showing the taliban's rapid dances and warng that the taliban was on the marg that the afghan military and afan government were in real ouble 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 lotf ways, there were warnings that this would be the result and those warnings were just ignored. host: the co-authors of that book. jerry is with us for about the next half hour take those calls. salvatori in salem, massachusetts. democrat, good morning. caller: yes, sir. the question in my mind, how longo you think it would have taken to subdue afghanistan?

we could be there another hundred years and it would never happen. i'm so happy that we get out of the useless 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 ridiculo. 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 lee, 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 anniversa of 9/11, without doing the things nessary 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 talib even as we left host: this is august 31, 20 21 announcing the u.s. withdraw

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 if we had begun evacuations in june or july. bringing thousands of american troops and evacuating more than 120,000 people in the middle 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 colexities, 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 anged. 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 moreime for people to get o, 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 remembe 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 predent from two and a half years ago. guest: he said a few different things there that were interesting. he talks about al qaeda there. in 2021 and since, he's made various comments about al qaeda being gone from afghanistan, which is simply not true.

the alliance between the taliban and al qaeda in anniston continues and remains, and the talibais sheltering al qaeda and al qaeda leaders. he's likely making payments to them. we see al qaeda's leader was osama bin laden's number twoou sheltered in a safe house belonging to a long time taliban top leader in government today. he also made 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 news ties with al qaeda

which the taliban has never done. one of the point was that what happened in august 2021 was sort of inevitable and that what happened during the evacuation, there is nothing that could have been done better. i would suggest that people falling from planes, having to rely on the taliban for six ready outside of the, these thit 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 th 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't happen again. host: roger, independent, thanks for waiting. caller: thank you, can you hear me? host: yes, sir. caller: first of all, this is the first time i've been able 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 to mention in your book, it was the trump administration that set up the withdraw. but they didn't have a pn. or did they have a plan for the withdrawal? you know that trump left the white house without meeting with the biden dish ration andoing over any of his plans, but you

failed to mention that in your book. it seems like you only have one point of view. host: let's give jerry a chance to respond and elaborate a bit more on the may deadline. guest: i encourage you to buy the bookecause we do have an entire chapter on the doha agreement. we thought it was important to understand the context of 2021. like i mentioned, it was a flawed agreement absolutely and president trump did not make the decision that president biden did. president trump did reduce trips down to 2100 but it was president biden that made the decision tgo down to zero, and to do a full withdrawal. and to go along with an element of the deal ha -- doha agreement

without the taliban following through on its commitment, its commitment to engage any meaningful negotiations the afghan government and various other commitments not to attack provincial capitals and all these various things, the telegram is not following any of these price of the agreement, but president biden decided to go to zero anyway in spite of his military commandertelling him that to go from 2500 to zero uld be a disaster and a disaster is actly will be t. host: what was the most number of troops we had in over 20 years in afghanistan? guest: at one point we had many, many tens of thousands. the highest was during the obama administration during president obama's surge that he did.

during the obama administration, they came down substantially again. president trump early in his term introduced more troops before lowering them significantly by the end of his administrati as well. host: you have a ballpark on the mber of afghanistan war veterans there are in this country? guest: there are hundreds of thousands. part of the purpose of our book if you look at the dedication, this was a 20 year war. we make that very clear in the book. there was 20 years of fighting, 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 d o best to honor those 20 years and u.s. service members. we also thought it wasmportant 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 prident biden them in a very dangerous situation with otello and at the gates come with isis roami outside the gates and 13 u.s. serviceembers lost their lives. 13 new famies to do and thousands of gold star families fromhroughout the year. host: a phone number for afghan war veterans to call in during the segment, (202) 748-8003. otherwise, phone lines as usual. lifer democrats, william, georgia, good rning. caller: good morning.

you keep talking about context and you do ntion the agreement set up i trump, the thdrawal of troops under trump to 2500, but you brush er that and say it is all on joe biden because d we not gone from 2500 down to zero, and we never d go to ze, obviously if you withawal you would have zero troops, t we were the for 20 years. and the number we had with 10000 troops. so the premise that you have here, that 2500 troops could do what 100,0 troops couldn't do is absurd. guest: sure. to notegain, bagramirbase, a very strategic base,he base that had these terroris,

including the one who caied out the anti-gate attack, a base th was important for keeping the afghan military fighting and functioning, a strategic asset that the u.s. ha for the region as well,t still had a u.s. military presence wn president trump left office. it was predent biden andis 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 andore strategic place and would have also helped with keeping the taliban at bay, or at least keeping the taliban ay frokabul. with 2500 troops, obviously it is not a very large number but the afghan mitary was continuing to fight and hold the

television at bay with those 2500 troops helping support them, andeep in minthat also meant while u.s. troops were there, u. and international contractors were able to be there and to help the ahan 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 psence was significantlyarger than the u.s. military presence, of th u.s. going t 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 fashion without proper

supplementing on the way out the door, it resultein the afghan military falling back and rapid taliban advces into august 2021. post: long beach, california, lying for reblicans. caller: the bloody irony of u.s. foreign policysn 1979t of carter administration,ussia invaded afghanistan and the uned states responded by sending military advisors and troops to afghanistan, and they worked witthe taliban and they elevated the taliban. they said they were the warriors from godndhey were going to throw outhe russians. well, mayb they did and stead they installed themselves, but this is kind of the result of the u.s. constanbattleith russia and the concept of

communism veus democracy. that fighting has in his rhoric frequency when he refences his forei-polic biden said he was going to withdraw them by a specifidate with disregard for how would would be done, and it resulted in you writing a book about the needless bloodshed of u.s. troops a afghan lives. so i'm looking at this history and thus far abiden quoting what he had to doo go into afghanistan to g osama bin laden, wasn'he fou in pakistan, a untry at received millions in ornate from the ited states? so here is my comment, because u.s. foreign polic has a very poor history in humanirian termshen you look at the korean war, the vietnam war,

in afghanistan, the war on terror. it has all resulted inosses for the united states. there no vtories in here. and unnecessary loss of human life on both sides. host: let's lehim ta some of that up. guest: i'm not going to try to relitigate the cold war. one thing that i would notehat the taliban emerged in the 1990's,o after the soviets had been fced 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 attacks. 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 ablutely 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 pastan gave em.

in terms of fallout from u.s. foreign policy, one thing that i will load an something that we have twohapters on generic oks 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 t taliban, allies being left hind, women's rights being crushed. any sortf freedomhat d been built up over 20 years getting crushed, but we live anymore dangerous world now and you can be thatome of that comes from what ppenedn 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 vladimir putin's decision to invade ukraine. obviously putin has wanted to invade ukraine for a very long time, was very likely looking for what h would just see as his best moment inhe chaos nato and the u.s. looking like they were in disarray likely contributed to his decision to lach this massive war on the europeans. on top of that, the chinese communist already has sort o added the sastern afghanistan to their propaganda toolkit against taiwan. immediately after the taliban takeover, the communist party labeledhis a couple momenand used it as an oppounity to threaten taiwan to s look at wh happened in ahanist. 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. e taliban teover clearly spired jihadist groups around the world. they celebrated almost universally the telemann takeove and obviously you seen hamas' dgusting and devastating attack in israel. not everything bad that has happened has happened becae of afghanistan, but it ha contributed to a more dangerous world that we live in today. host: the book again, "kabul: the untold story of biden's fiasco of the american warriors who fought to the end." a striking image on the cover of your book, what is that? guest: that is a renring, 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 tovacuate americans and afgh allies with the taliban right outside the gates, and with isis=k trying to carry out a terrorist atta. it sort ofepicts t a bbygate attack a what that would like the u.s. service members who were on the gund during that attack. 13-year-old service members losing their lives in that terrorist attack dozens of emounded. some of rievously wounded with lif, lifeltering

es, anthen of course, 20innoce afghans losg their lives as well. a 20 year war, that washe third day for u.s. troops in afghanistan over that entire 20 yearar, and so we really try in our book to highlight the storieof the 13 service members. we have an entire chapr on the 13 service members fund giving their families an opportunity to talk about tse service members and to put a highlight on this final americans whlost their 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, go ahead.

caller: i have two issues that i would like clarity on from the guest this morning, and there is a reason why a former president to pull military out of, to bring them out of afghanistan clarity on why he decided to do that a as well, why there is no clarity on why he decided to take themerican troops out from supporting the curd at the time. those are two major things that donald trump d concerning our foreign policy that i would like for our guest to respond to. host: thanks for the question. >> obviously just from president pump -- trumps public statements, he did publicly for

u.s. troops to leave afghanistan and entered into the doha agreement th the taliban, and he brought u.s. troops down to 2500 by the end of his presidency. but the agreement with e liban,he doha agreement had conditions to t to a full u.s. withdrawal. in the taliban was not meeting those conditions. so obvusly the doha agreement wa a law aeement but it was not aondition this agreement. it was notust 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 qda, ensuring that they wou not threaten u.s. interest or u.s. homeland, d the taliban never

did that. the taliban's liance with al qaeda remained on the open when trust was president, when biden was president. it remains the caseoday more than two decades after the 9/11 attacks. and whilpresident trump may have wante t bring all u.s. troops home, hdid not go to zero during his presidency. he left 2500 u.s. troopsnd it was president biden who made the cision condition list with -- can distant -- conditionless withdrawal and bring those troops home, to pull u.s. troops, advisors and contractors right in the middle of the afghan fightinseason. host: the 13 soldiers who died, marine corps lance cporal, green core sergeant nicole g,

green core staff sergeant geen taylor, age 31. hunter lopez, age 22. lance corporal ryan mccallum, age 20. marine corps lance corporal dylan -- come age 20. marine corps lan corporal --, marine corpsorporal 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 to interact with the families of those fallen americans? guest: fir offthank you very much for doing that, for reading. tnk any of the mily matter to watch thehow appreciate that because a big purpose of th book was to keep the memories of those 13 u.s. rvice members alive as well as all the other u.sservice who

lost tir lives in afghanistan. when writing the book, i had the privilege and the honoro talk to bunchf the goldstar falies and it's tough. i can't imagine what they went thugh and what they are still gointhrough. but i appreciate their willingness to speak with me and speak publiclybout who those service members were. lot of these were very young service members, lot of them probab don't even remember 9/11 terrorist attacks guest: exactly right, that w the oldestuy. i had the pleasure of speakin

with darren hoover's parts, and a numbeof parents of the 13 u.s. service members. they wanted childr stories to be told, and they also want answers about how this would be able to happen, and they want acuntability for why a 20 year war ended this way, why the u.s. was pigeonholed into a tiny airport surrounded by an enemy thate had fought for 20 years, why isis terrorists would be able to carry out a deadly bombing that killed their 13 sons and daughters, that grievously wounded dozens of american service members, and killed the 200 afghans. i'm glad that youead e names there. host: i know you said youould stay for the past 9:00 a.m., washington, d.c., independent, go ahead.

>> thank you for taking my call. a lot of those situations that are going on today could be a result of this whole allowed from afghanistan. i'm wonderinif 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 neighbors. and imagine if we were from afghanistan, and those in the middle east, he had to make ugh decisions. it wasn't pretty. it caused the death of innocents , but he is probably looking at the broader picture. guest: what you just articulated

very well is sort of the argument that the biden administration sometimes has made, that being in afghanistan, that leaving afghanistan fed them up to deal with other challenges. i think that a problem with the argument that the biden administration makes is obviously losing a 20 year war war is strategically not a good thing. the taliban being in charge of afghanistan is 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 better focus on other threats, i think we ma a

pretty clear case that president biden's decision to leave afghanistan the way that he did and the debacle that it was was likely 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 that edge and to launch 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 him to invade ukrai, we are looking at a more dangerous world, a more dangerous russia.

host: thank you for waiting, carl. caller: yes, i can appreciate people doing books and evything, but the focus that we had, over 14,000 who volunteered. i have nothing but asked -- but respect for them. we lied our way into the last part of it. but see america has been doing bathings for a long time. 220 --

there were procedures that he went through. these people around the world are looking for an excuse to fight. they will fight americans just because. host: using the wor debacle. use the term yes go. why fiasco? guest: because it was a fiasco. what happened in 2021, the go to zero order, lling out u.s. troops in a condition this withdrawal, not forcing the

taliban to -- doing so, in theiddle of the season, the fighting season basilly kicks off in the early spring. the fighting slowed down quite a bit in the winter months. fighting reay kicks off rough the spring and summer. setting ptember 11 as a political withdrawal date rather than tg about this more puing the support from the afghan military when they need it and not having a proper plan. g pushed wn to just a tiny airpor and relng on the

taban to conduct our evaction was the definition of a fiasco. host that is the active worin at sentence there, the fiasco is the one that jumps out. you knew what the title was going to be when you wte it? guest: fiasco is the world -- is the word that wused from day one. not to give us toouch 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 aport, a dangers situation that they were put in during t situion. fiasco is the only word for it.

host: the untold sty of biden's fiasco.

>> thank you for being here. l's get started.