bagram air base is an enormous airfield and would have been possible to move more people out of bagram air base, but first it is far away. and kabul international airport is not far away from kabul. second, to secure a facility of that size, the general said would require not only more u.s. troops but also troops from the afghans as well as others. it is a much more difficult logistical operation to try to secure bagram air base. given limitations on personnel and the distance between kabul and the international airport versus kabul and bagram, the decision was made to secure the embassy and use hkia in kabul. that of course was a key decision and one that they are not considering revisiting. meaning that they won't send more people at least as of right now into bagram air base to try to get more people out of the base. as was just said, the issue here is not the number of flights although they are trying to increase that as well, given the numbers the pentagon gave us away, there were 18 flights with 2,000 people. that is about 110 people per flight, not nearly enough. those flights a

you bring a very good point about bagram.e day they wanted to close that base, why would they close it before all the americans were out? you housed more than 5,000 terrorists in a prison there. they have now been released. you left in the middle of the night without telling your allies. you left weaponry. now the prisoners are out, isis-k. we're seeing the damage, what they're able to do in such a short time frame. we're watching the americans being left behind but administration knowingly making that that decision. there's no excuse why this deadline has not been extended. the speaker has got to call us back in. maria: so you have demanded that nancy pelosi call congress back in so that you can understand what went wrong. have you heard back from the speaker? >> we have heard back from the speaker. only from her deputy chief who tried to criticize us for asking that a co-equal branch of government could have a say. when we were called back, other nations called back. the u.k. got called back to work on getting is citizens h

on bagram, for example.sident is fond of saying now the military commanders say that bagram field said itf wouldn't be much use. mark milley said it was ant tack -- tactful reasons, it wasn't much support. why was that? as milley testified or as he said in a news conference on august 18, he said the mission was t to protect the embassy. obviously the embassy is in kabul.on there was no thought that you would add forces to keep bagram open. he wanted -- what biden wanted was forces out. they had to surge forces in to kabul to protect the embassy they hoped, which failed obviously. but it was the nature of the mission given f by the commander-in-chief that led to that decision at bagram. >> tucker: i believe that. on the other hand, you know, it's become a merciless society. here you sear a series of decisions, most made in good faith but resulted in the deaths of boyss like that. the administration said nobody will resign. nobody will be punished. nobody did anything wrong.dys what is this? >> my guess is the

and bagram, you're correct. hamid karzai international airport is it's a metropolitan area and bagram is sort of more in the desert. but that does not make bagram even less prone to suicide bombers. it was just in 2019 where a suicide car bomb attacked a convoy that was retreating to bagram leading to the deaths of three marines. and i believe it was three or four wounded in that attack. so bagram is no more a better defense at stopping two side attacks than hamid karzai is. >> yeah, thank you for that. point taken. no, you're right. point taken. yamiche, any reason to think there is any room for mission creep here? or was the lesson of the day watch the president's words, look at his attitude. this if anything hardened his resolve. >> based on my conversations with white house officials all day, this deadly attack, this murder of u.s. soldiers as well as afghans really hardened the idea that president biden wants to have u.s. troops and americans out of afghanistan as soon as possible and that that august 31st

if so, why did you abandon the bagram air field? why did the u.s. military pull out given the uncertainty? >> jen, in terms of the aircraft that have been flown out, that you mentioned earlier, i have received reports of a number of aircraft that were flown in to uzbekistan. how many, i don't have firm numbers on. in terms of what we're doing about them currently, right now, jen, we're focused on the air field and getting people out safely. so we're going to take that issue up at a later date. we're going to continue to try to gain greater fidelity on the issue as well. >> on your question of bagram. you know how big that is. securing bagram takes a significant level of forces and would take help from the afghan forces. our task was to protect the embassy. in order for the embassy personnel to continue to function with their services and all that. if we were to keep bagram and the embassy going, that would be a significant number of forces that would exceeded what we had. so had to collapse one or the other. a decision made from centcom and the comm

pulled out of bagram air base, bagram air base was taken back by the taliban. they freed the prisoners outside of kabul. when the military pulled out of bagram, without properly informing those who were to take over the base and turning off the power so the afghans couldn't figure out how to put it back on, because the bases are not just a light switch. it's like a city you have to operate. so handing over the country in such a hasty manner sent a shock to the afghan troops. so that also helped collapse their, their morale, i think. so there are multiple issues here. it's not just the afghans who are to blame. i think the united states certainly share some of the blame as well. >> all right. richard engel joining us from kabul. richard, if you don't mind hanging only as we continue to cover the situation there on the ground. do want to get the congressional as well as the white house perspective on all of this as we continue to watch that live picture of kabul. at some point while richard was talking, i did see a small bit of black smoke, black plume. it is unc

we estimated that risk of going out of bagram. it was estimated to be a better tactical solution in accordance with getting the troops down to a 600 number. >> thank you. with a commercial airport making it much more difficult to send out this week, bagram had two runways. is there any thought of retaking bagram and expediting this evacuation, and if not, why not? gen. milley: great question. i cannot discuss branches and sequels off of our current operation, and i will leave it at that. >> that is the last one for today. >> the reality is, the taliban was threatening kaunda hair already. do you not feel you had a moral up -- obligation to protect afghanistan. should you have tried harder to get these people out? also, have you been asking to allow the afghans through, and have the taliban denied that? the united states could not provide any state relief. sec. austin: it is a very dynamic environment, as you can imagine. there have been things that occurred that we do hear reports of -- people getting turned away by checkpoints, g

general milley saying he had to choose between the embassy and bagram. bagram had to go. you see they mustered the 82nd air force? marine expeditionary forces, british special forces. can you -- why didn't they go to bagram? >> they were positioned to go to bagram if they want to. hold bagram, hold a place that is defensive. not the alamo. >> they said it was a tactical decision recommended to them by the commander on the ground in afghanistan. that guy is under the bus. up next, the ridiculous of example of big tech bias. twitter refusing to ball taliban terrorists after censoring conservatives. ♪♪ ♪ well the sun is shining and the grass is green ♪ ♪ i'm way ahead of schedule with my trusty team ♪ ♪ there's heather on the hedges ♪ ♪ and kenny on the koi ♪ ♪ and your truck's been demolished by the peterson boy ♪ ♪ yes -- ♪ wait, what was that? timber... [ sighs heavily ] when owning a small business gets real, progressive helps protect what you've built with affordable coverage. (vo) how do you know when you've found your team? progressive helps protect what you've built

and yet, joe biden actually says that bagram -- when they look back, well, we didn't really need bagrambase. watch. >> i asked whether best military judgment, what would be the most efficient way to accomplish the mission? they concluded, the military, that bagram was not much value added. that it was much wiser to focus on kabul. and so, i followed that recommendation. >> laura: is it just me, or was joe biden speaking at like three paces to slow today? it's weird. he comes across weird, like he is totally disconnected from the content of what he is saying. but congressman greene, given all your experience, how critical of a mistake was it for us to abandon bonham airbase? >> well, thanks for having us on, laura. it was a huge mistake, the biggest mistakes in our nation's military history, but it was joe biden who made that decision. i know for a fact that the military advised him not to leave bagram. he said we are going to downsize to 600 marines, and the leadership told him "we can't hold bagram with 600 marines." he said "i don't care, go to 600." he arbitrarily picked a number out

finally, when it comes to bagram, the best military advice that we received was that, number one, bagraman immense facility that would be difficult to secure over time and put our troops at risk, and second, it didn't lo gisticly make sense from an evacuation perspective because it is located outside of kabul, and both american diplomats, american citizens and most of the afghans at risk live inside kabul. that's the reason for bagram, which was the recommendation offered to the president by his national security experts at the pentagon and elsewhere. >> so you followed the military advice on closing bagram, but the same military advisers were telling you to keep a force on the ground. they told you not to pursue this withdrawal agreement with the taliban, correct? >> there are strategic judgments that a president makes, and there are tactical judgments that you give absolute premium to the commanders on the ground to make. if a commander on the ground says i need this resource or this move to accomplish my mission or keep my people safe, you weigh that very heavily. when it comes to the

we need to reopen bagram air base and cancel the august 31 deadline.is a disjointed half ass effort. it's not the quality of the intelligence, it's the quality of the man receiving the intel. he was wrong about iraq. he was wrong about killing bin laden. he got in front of the world and said al qaeda is out of afghanistan. good god, is the man brain dead? he also said the taliban are wading people through the checkpoints. does he not have a television? he says our allies agree with what he's doing. i'm worried about an isis attack at the airport that could kill thousands of people including americans who are sitting ducks. if we don't change his plan quickly we'll get people killed by isis, not the taliban. judge jeanine: it seems no one is in charge. when you say we should take back the bagram air base, how do you do that? what leverage to we have when we get up and leave in the middle of the night and don't tell our nato partners we are leaving and don't even answer their phone calls, what leverage to we have to take back bagram. >> we have the fines

critics say the president needs to reopen bagram.y leaders need to think about this option because it gives them the opportunity to get more people to fly out. >> i believe we could have maintained it safely. we've just gone 18 months with no casualties. we could have maintained two runways. >> -- 6800 people were evacuated from friday morning august 27th at 3:00 a.m. until this morning at 3:00 a.m. that brings the total to around 112,000 in the last two or so weeks. the president also spent sometime today, another huge story here in the united states, hurricane ida, he met with fema officials today to receive several briefings on hurricane ida. it is expected to hit louisiana tomorrow as a category 4 hurricane. tomorrow marks the 16th anniversary of hurricane katrina that has many concerned tomorrow in the gulf coast region. president biden did approve a disaster declaration for the state of louisiana and says that the federal government is here for anything that is needed down there pertaining to ida. jon? >> jon: david spunt at th

let's be real about bagram.sible president would give significant weight to the advice of the commanders on the ground and their advice was to close bagram and focus on kabul. >> bill: a lot of questions on this. jake sullivan with chris wallace over the weekend now leaving bagram early. a lot of questions about that mood amid the ongoing debacle in afghanistan. the "washington post" reports the taliban offered to stay out of kabul and allow the u.s. forces to secure the city. the u.s. turned down that offer saying that we only need the local airport. karl rove joins us. good morning. look at some of the abc polling numbers over the weekend. they're devastating. republicans, democrats, independents for this white house. good morning on a monday. what do you think? >> the polls overall have shown since the beginning of august the president has dropped 7 points and 535 rolling average 6 points. close to 7 and in both of them it's either dead even or upside down. it may be other things are contributing to it but cl

the military, he was nonspecific he said the military at large they recommended pulling out a bog bagram advice? >> i doubt that was actually the case frankly because the president is sadly has misrepresented the advice he's received once before you made the statement that nobody oppose his withdrawal decision that he made in april to take all the troops out of afghanistan when it is a fact that the entire military chain of command from secretary defense austin all the way down to a commuters in afghanistan were opposed so as intel services and many of our allies i cannot take the president at face value, he misrepresented the facts before, it is a fact that the military was attempting to get our afghan partners and american citizens out as early as may and believe me if they were going to do that and may they would use bagram air base not the kabul international airport no way would they have used the facility because it's much more difficult to secure in a sense because it's sitting inside of the city where bagram air base is 25 miles outside it's a sprawling place to go 30 miles acros

they had to shut down bagram. why would they shot down bagram?e ability to sustain thousands of troops and afghans with multiple runways, you have to wonder, joe biden who has mistrusted military leaders didn't want the air base to be open, whether that was on purpose or in effect it meant that we did not have our massive air base available to support our own citizens and to keep the taliban at bay as we had an orderly withdraw of the citizens and now look, we have airport right in the middle of downtown kabul with the taliban and even threats of isis right around the perimeter threatening civilians and our troops alike. maria: so where is this going? i mean, isis on the ground. we are actually talking about talking to the taliban. we have not deemed them a terrorist organization. why not and should we be negotiating with a group that performed a coup in afghanistan? senator: this is implications of joe biden's disastrous withdrawal. now he has to do business with the taliban. the taliban have checkpoints all over kabul and controlling in many ca

the country, bagram would have been place to do it.ey abandon that if the plan was to get all of these people out and do they regret it now? >> so bagram makes sense. there is more runways at kabul airport. it's not in the middle of kabul. you know, it's easier to secure from that perspective. it's not right in the middle of several million people. but it's also not ideal logistically in that you have to get people from kabul out to bagram. it's -- i've driven the road, actually. it's a long road to get out there. it's also an enormous sprawling basis it takes troops to security the perimeter there. i heard this criticism i don't know bam rak would have been the answer to this issue, this problem. it's not as, just getting the people out there look at the people who were outside kabul right now. one of the big issues that the u.s. state department and military are facing is. it's not just getting people through the taliban airport in kabul and into the gate and get a manifest on the flights. it's what about all the people who can't get

bagram, opened the prisons up, along with our equipment.it has been a disaster, look at what mike pompeo did for the years he was secretary of state, he gave briefings and had an action plan. blink -- blinken has failed and that's why the disaster is there. president biden listens to him enough, he should resign. doctor harris and i are going to impeach them, put it together and see what happens. >> will you get traction on this and do you think it should stop or other officials you look for accountability for as well? >> very few things we do on a bipartisan basis in washington but on a bipartisan basis we agree this was entirely botched, and the department of defense, they are running this withdrawal. they don't know where they are or have plans to evacuate or allowed the military to leave before we evacuated our americans. and in charge of this withdrawal. pete: keep us updated. still ahead lucas tomlinson brings the latest on us retaliation against isis k and johnny joey jones and sean parnell returns. it's moving day. and while her fri

. >> shannon: we are going to talk about bagram a little bit more coming up and about how that factors in here and the decision to let it go. in the meantime, mark and jake, we thank you both for being among the bravest and the best who have gone to that region and done what you did voluntarily to protect the rest of us and to fight for freedom, thank you both very much. >> thank you, shannon and god bless. >> shannon: you too buried much more reaction to the attack in afghanistan and here in washington china. the flag of the white house flying at half-staff in honor of our 13 fallen service members. my plaque psoriasis... ...the itching ...the burning. the stinging. my skin was no longer mine. my psoriatic arthritis, made my joints stiff, swollen... painful. emerge tremfyant™. with tremfya®, adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis... ...can uncover clearer skin and improve symptoms at 16 weeks. tremfya® is the only medication of its kind also approved for adults with active psoriatic arthritis. serious allergic reactions may occur. tremfya® may increase your risk of infections

soldiers pay highest sacrifice to -- dessert the bagram air force base. do we rescue the a thousand americans, that is a rolling number, a calculation, they don't know how many americans are there we have people racing to the borders. your thoughts? >> right, you know you plan a military operation as you go along, you open yourself up to more opportunities and you limit the enemies, we have done the opposite, we. we narrowed options we have. i think we'll be at a kabul airport in a new york minute, they will dug out, at-this-point, i don't know if they have options it is indefensible. they will likely set up rat lines, they will have assets they can piece together and away lot of these are not in u.s. government but folks just putting it together, rat lines to get people uzbekistan, you know maybe pakistan, i tell you, europeans are worried, very likely that will happen there will be a mass exodus that will probably go through iran that could dump to western europe. so they are really angry about what this president has done to them. elizabeth: people are

if talking about bagram air base bagram air base, been there very many times. i know it well, take a listen. >> badly damaged hanger here at bagram air base, they told secretary roosevelt the u.s. military effort in afghanistan provided the help of most afghans wanted. they reiterated the u.s. military effort was always about reading the country of terrorism. taliban commanders start to feel like they have to be a part of the political process to remain relevant. >> bret: hard to believe it's all coming down to this. this exit. our heart goes out to all those who have lost lives today in service of this country to their families. if we owe them a debt of gratitude. we will continue to cover the story fairly, thank you for trusting us. fair, balanced, and unafraid. jesse watters has "prime time live today tough day. >> good evening, welcome to "fox news primetime" i'm jesse watters. fox news alert, just when you thought it could not get any worse, we learned another u.s. service member has died. of bringing the taft told to 13 americans dead in the wake of the v

why didn't they reopen bagram air base. let's go to our reporter and get an update status on senator joni ernst. >> why not reopen bagram air base? you are bringing people out from kabul now and it is a choke point. >> first of all, the through-put has improved and increased. i'm not going to -- i don't think it would be a useful expenditure of our time to monday morning quarterback the whole issue with bag gram. it was closed down as part of the retrograde. >> i'm not talking about monday morning quarterbacking, why not look at the situation now. you need air fields that you can land on to get people out. >> we are improving our through-put at the kabul airport and we think that we'll be able to continue to try to improve that. that's the goal. >> harris: i grew up military, colonel's daughter. when they words like through-put i know we're in something that you don't want to get on your shoe. why not just answer jennifer griffin's question? can you reopen bagram airfield or anyplace else that you have what marines told me

and then i would have blown up all the airbases, but i would have kept bagram because bagram locatedext to china, right near china and iran. and it is in afghanistan. so we have the whole group coverage. they spent $10 billion building it. and we handed out the keys. it's the craziest thing i've ever seen. >> sean: mr. president, let me -- i've been playing on this program a map, and this map, it goes through -- it walks people through the movement of the taliban, starting in april and may, and i'm not sure if you have a television on in front of you, but it shows all of a sudden, may, june, july, and you see all of this territory that the taliban was taking over control of pretty much the entire country. our intelligence agencies knew this. i'm getting reports that they were giving dire warnings to the white house, that while they had control of kabul, that they could have -- they could have expedited the withdrawal, and they could have not only got every american outlaw they had total control, every afghan ally out, and that military equipment, the $83 billion of which you refer, o

i served at the driven in bagram. the same thing happened.a crystal ball. >> jesse: history is repeating itself. russians went in there. we went in there. that place is a cemetery for empires. we have to run. support this group. make a phone call. buddy check. get them out. we love. thank you so much. we really appreciate it. up next who has a bigger air force spain or the taliban? we are leaving behind more than just civilians during this stupid exit. (gong rings) - this is joe. (combative yelling) he used to have bad breath. now, he uses a capful of therabreath fresh breath oral rinse to keep his breath smelling great, all day long. (combative yelling) therabreath, it's a better mouthwash. at walmart, target and other fine stores. hi, i'm debra. i'm from colorado. therabreath, it's a better mouthwash. i've been married to my high school sweetheart for 35 years. i'm a mother of four-- always busy. i was starting to feel a little foggy. just didn't feel like things were as sharp as i knew they once were. i heard about prevagen and then i star

i think it is rightfully so, there is a lot of focus on bagram airbase.inistration said it was choice of military advisers, by the time that those was made, there was not the possibility of putting more troops in. the choice was made by the president of united states the ability for us, as u.s. to attack military targets today. like this drone strike, targeting 2 bombers on the way to kabul, administration said it was an over the horizon attack, but they would not happen without intelligence on the ground that will dry up quickly. how the administration talks about this, really has been all over the map. i think that is the biggest problem about communicating from the beginning. trey: from weather to war, brett baier thank you very much for joining us on a sunday night, i'll see you soon. >> you bet. trey: situation in afghanistan is at least in part driving president biden's job approval numbers down rapidly and significantly. we'll hear from hakeem jeffries, next on sunday night in america. ♪ ♪ ♪ security at your fingertips. control feels good. chase. m

how do you take bagram back without a major deployment? >> yeah. the 25 miles from kabul issue, keep in mind, we have basically americans all through afghanistan. so air can shorten that distance very quickly. there can be u.s. forces to do it. there's also a pretty significant resistance that still exists and they're calling themselves the northern alliance again, but it is actually made up of those old tribes, but also afghan national army that didn't just abandon the fight and decided to fight in a much more moderate group that we supported after 9/11. what we will have to do is take that area back and make the determination that we'll be here as long as it takes to get everyone out. i recognize the difficulty of that. the question is for americans do we want to take the impact of this, see this growing threat continue to thrive or are we willing to do tough things? i've got to tell you, no matter what we choose on bagram or anything else, the fact that we were sitting there going, man, we can't keep 2500 troops there. donald trump was telling e

but let's be real about bagram.s a difference between tactical advice from the commanders on the ground, what is the right operational method of executing a draw down, and on that he placed great weight on the advice of the people in the field and/or strategic decision to continue a war into its third decade with american troops fighting and dying in a civil war in another country. on the strategic decision, that's a decision only a president can make. on the tactical decision of which is the right airport to have for an evacuation, of course any response of a president would give significant weight to the advice of the commanders on the ground and their advice was to close bagram and focus on kabul. >> chris: jake, thank you so much for taking time out of this very busy schedule right now to talk with us. thanks again. >> jake: thanks for having me. >> chris: up next, we will have an exclusive interview with senate republican leader mitch mcconnell who says the president has made a grave mistake in afghanistan. whe

and that drawdown made it impossible to have bagram open.tion rapidly evolved and the president and the military are responding to the situation as it evolves. the collapse of the afghan government was not anticipated. and the afghan people less than a month ago, i was at a luncheon meeting with ghani and abdullah and both of them said that they did not want afghans to leave and that they were not going to make it easy for afghans to leave. that was the situation a month ago. we're now -- we now have a different situation. >> i understand that. and respect your point on that. but i do want you to respond to the counter points on it. let me ask you about something that can change now. and this is the discussion we had with your democratic colleague congressman seth moulton yesterday and that is what we did for the afghans, that stood by our side, once again the president has not fully publicly committed to keeping american troops there past august 31st if all of the afghan allies and interpreters are not out. listen to what congressman moulto

no effort to -- shut down bagram air force base as jake ellzey said, big mistake.process of planning and execution and we're seeing finger pointing as a result. >> john: yesterday the president held the news conference and peter doocy asked the question, the president on one hand accepting responsibility and blaming his predecessor, listen here. >> do you bear any responsibility for the way that things have unfolded in the last two weeks? >> president biden: i bear responsibility for fundamentally all that's happened of late. here is the deal, you know, i wish you would sayeh tavangar these things, you know as well as i do that the former president made a deal with the taliban. get all american forces out of afghanistan by may one. >> john: bret, you know and mike pompeo, former secretary of state was articulating earlier today, that agreement we have right here was conditions based and number of conditions that had to be met before u.s. forces would come out, that is why forces did not come out last may 1, yet the president is saying no, this was donald trump's fa

bagram, july 2 which failed. opened the prisons up to the most dangerous terrorists with our equipment. it's just been a disaster from day one. what look mike pompeo did. he gave briefings and he had an action plan. blinken has failed. that's why the disaster is there and whether biden listens to him or not, he should resign. that's why dr. harris and i will impeach him. let's put it to a vote and see what happens. >> pete: you think you will get traction or this? are there other officials you would look for accountability for as well? >> first of all, very few things that we do on a bipartisan basis in washington. we on a bipartisan basis agree this was entirely botched, that this withdrawal is a catastrophe. this was not a department of defense effort. the department of state was running this withdrawal. they didn't have plans to evacuate everyone. they allowed the military to leave before we evacuated our americans. this oh the first and foremost falls squarely on the secretary who headed the department that w

isn't is, a plausible scenario, then why give up bagram airbase?> there is no rationale that makes sense to give up bagram airfield. look, the bottom line he adopted a mind-set that the state department would run this negotiation from day one. they made diplomatic choices. within those trades apparently there was a decision to let them have bagram airfield and all the equipment residing there. turn over effectively all the as sets to abandon our afghan partners in the middle of the night. effectively to allow taliban to runrampant throughout the nation and painting us in a corner in the city of kabul and airfield of kabul. this is absolutely the riskiest option they could have considered. the bureaucrats in the state department were making decisions strategies and tactics. a lot of these were the same ones that botched benghazi in 2012. we're seeing a lot of lessons learned here. need to pivot this as commander-in-chief and turn it into military option. the mission can't get all americans out 8-31. the mission is getting all americans done and cost

>> when it reopened bagram air base? because right now you're bringing people often kabul and it is a choke point? >> i don't think it would be a useful expenditure of our time to monday morning quarterback -- >> not talking about monday morning court a backing but why not look at the situation now, you need airfields you can land on to get people out. >> it would be an expenditure of resources and personnel as well as an increase most likely to the threat they are under to try to go back and as you put it retake bagram air base which is the size of a small city. jillian: president biden painted himself into a corner because to retake bagram air base would take a military mission which would put troops in danger and was the number one thing president biden said about why he wants to leave afghanistan? he doesn't want a single american soldier to die in afghanistan and that could be a possibility if you have to go back and retake the air base. the strategy has been to bow down, appease and please the taliban, a terrorist

i've been to bagram.m's like a city, by the way, for the people at home. it's about 40 miles away from where they are. it's remote. there was a decision made. um -- during the trump and biden administration. finally, in july, they closed it but it's like a city. okay. bagram air base is literally like a city. go ahead. >> i have driven in there. you -- you can't get suicide bombers maybe to an outpost right at the edge. it was defensible. that was a mistake doing that and kabul is basically in the city. and it's really hit me hard, these guys. that -- that died. i was in beirut in the '80s when the marines got hit. when the embassy got hit. and -- and -- and in '83. it was indefensible. and this is what really has hit me hard. you just can't put these people, soldiers in a mob like this because suicide bombers. you don't know who they are. they can -- they can -- that crowd. there was a horrible mistake made here. and we -- we need to get a grip on this. and our military can fight battles but it cannot fi

officials say jake sullivan when saying the generals want to close bagram.o miles from the front gate of the airport where u.s. troops stand guard. yesterday president biden honored the 13 americans killed at the kabul airport attack on thursday, 11 marines, a navy medic and a soldier. another u.s. drone flying from the united arab emirates killed two isis planners. >> these individuals are no longer walking on the face of the earth, that's a good thing. it's a good thing for the people of afghanistan. it's a good thing for our troops and forces at the airfield. >> reporter: by wednesday, there will be no american troops in afghanistan for the first time in nearly 20 years. dana. dagen: lucas, real quick, before we go, the bagram issue, it's very clear just based on the comments publicly from general mille, chairman of joint chiefs of staff, is they were not given, the military, the resources. they were given a certain troop level from the white house from joe biden and they had no choice but to pull out of bagram, and bagram could have potentially been reta

now, as we have seen, they are inside of kabul and they have taken bagram. we have seen a number of very symbolic victories for the taliban over the last several days. this is definitely a big one, too. >> to be clear, the extra troops, i think the total now 5,000, from 2,500 or 3,000, these are not meant to be combat troops. there is an understanding that the taliban will not get into a shooting war with these troops. >> exactly right. many of them are infantry troops, they have the ability to go into combat. look, if they are threatened, if there is some threat, they will -- they have the inherent right of definite services. but their mission is very tailored and very specific. and that is the evacuation the americans from the embassy, and then helping with any evacuation of afghans who are eligible for the especially e immigrant visar who are eligible to get out under some sort of a u.s. diplomatic means. it will be a very -- according the defense officials -- they are quick the point out, this is not a long-term mission. that beinglo said one of the wot

retake bagram and other airports as well. it will take troops on the ground and a complete reassessment of our strategy. the military can do it. we need the will politically to do it. >> harris: see, now that's -- those are the words, right? the military can do this. it sounds huge with blood thirsty terrorists from different groups massing now, with the taliban who says it is in control of most of the country. i don't know if other terrorists are going to try to challenge that. we've learned this hour from our reporters thieves are not necessarily groups that want the same thing other than to kill us. they might want to rule something. we don't know what it looks like among these groups. what we do know is the enemy and the enemy is your friend when you are trying to kill americans and those who helped them. when you talk about retaking things, what does that look like militarily? you say the military can do it. we just drop what kind of numbers in there. >> it would look like we did in kabul. we lost it completely and retoo

troops were out when bagram closed down.here was a transition ceremony in mid july in kabul where the long time commander, general scott miller, stepped down. for all in tents and purposes that was the end of the u.s. military presence in afghanistan. the remaining troops were securing the embassy, small contingent at the airport, and small contingent in addition to that. we were talking hundreds of trops that were there. take that as timeline, mid july to now, about a month from the time the u.s. military left the country and the taliban took over. that's assistant with what was the worst case scenario, one of the worst case scenario. the notion they were not planning for it is simply not true. >> certainly looks like we negotiated with the taliban for august 31st, give us to august 31st, give us safe passage. seems nobody wants to admit we negotiated this with the taliban, but certainly looks like something has been communicated. >> absolutely. we know there are communications now at the state department level and at the m

bagram is a better airfield.uld have had multiple locations people could go to and require the taliban to spread out forces. now they can concentrate and create a blockade around that city so people who helped us -- i'm getting calls from former interpreters and people like medics who worked with us that are stranded. the taliban are searching for them going door-to-door and posted letters saying we'll burn you alive when we find you. that's what the taliban is saying. i believe them. they are a sadistic ideology so this is a failure of epic proportions both tactically and strategically. >> harris: to hear you and we know you served but most specifically for this conversation you know what the ground looks like in afghanistan and you are saying look, not only should we have done it differently it wouldn't have been that hard. create multiple zones that the taliban would have to focus on to get our people out. that's so basic it is hard to believe it didn't get done. >> it is intuitive. harris. and the president w

kimmitt: i'm a little bit conflicted about that issue with bagram airport.e secure, but it is also much further out, and the taliban would have set up check for anybody to get to the bagram airfield, so i think it is a convenient excuse, but bagram, while easier to defend, it would have been harder for people to evacuate to because it is so far away from the city of kabul. tom: what do you tell the man or woman coming out of the class of 2021 at west point? gen. kimmitt: this was a long war. it has been going on since 9/11, and it is not going to stop anytime soon. you need to look at what your predecessors from the last 20 years have done to defend this country, and you better be ready to defend it as well. tom: we look forward to speaking to you again. our retired brigadier general, working with the bush of adminstration as the deputy assistant director of defense for the middle east. just ask ordinary comments thereby someone informed. lisa: the idea that going forward, this is not going to end anytime soon, is a key point. tom: the 8:00 hour upon us. two

you're right about the mistakes, we should have held on to bagram air base.t's a far more secure location than the airport. look, when you have threats like this from isis and they are acute, persistent, clear threats, the first thing you want to do if possible is get off the x. that's not possible. we're stuck at the airport. the next thing you want to do is extend your perimeter. well, relying on the taliban for security outside the wire. they're not security professionals and they, for sure, don't have our best interests at heart. the third thing you want to do take the fight to the enemy, and the way you do that with intelligence and with the military kinetic strike as appropriate. where's the over the horizon capability right now to strike those targets before they target us? i don't think it's there there. it's not going to be there, and that's the problem we're going to face in the region and beyond once we leave. elizabeth: you know, congressman, to dan's point, you know, the pentagon can't rule out taliban involvement. the taliban has never renounced

but we don't know exactly who was in the prison at bagram? am i misunderstanding what he said there? >> it's two issues you are touching upon. we know who was at that prison because we were monitoring that prison with our afghan allies before the u.s. pulled out. so we know who was in the prison and why he could say with certainty that there are thousands of isis-k prisoners who have been released. the problem is we don't know where they are now and it would take another 20 years of war to go and find them. secondly, there is the issue of sharing information with the taliban, who by the way, we continue to hear from the pentagon is isis-k is a breakaway faction of the taliban. they fight against the taliban as much as they fight against americans. so they are not allies. and so what has happened is that the taliban who we are now dealing with in the government and as head of security in kabul, we understand that when they took over that base at bagram they also got access to biometric data of afghan allies who worked with the americans and th

in terms of bagram, i don't buy it. look, i have flown into bagram. it is a long way to kabul. there is a lot of territory when you are driving along that road. what that territory means is every time you get in a car, you might get hit by an rpg. you might get hit by something else that the taliban or somebody else, some rogue taliban element or isis-k has thrown at you. every scenario people come up with. well, the taliban took the country over. where are you going to put that thing? so every scenario people come up with including bagram, i am going to tell them let's have a conversation because there is a different scenario i'm going to tell you it's worse, chris. >> let me end it with this. on 9/11, i lived it. i lost people there. 11 days late, ir, i got engaged because i was so convinced that this was the new normal and nothing was guaranteed. and the next day could be horrible. and if anybody had told me it wouldn't happen again for 20 years, i would have thought they were off their meds. but, phil, on the intel side. colonel, on the military side, whether you want to ta