[sarcasm]Apparently some of these Afghan male refugees took Task Force-Bliss a little too literally.[/sarcasm]

[note: there are Tweets from Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Yvette Herrell containing pictures and a video clip of Press Secretary Jen Psaki at the linked article.]

---------------

A Female U.S. Soldier Has Been Assaulted by Afghan Refugees in New Mexico

Katie Pavlich Posted: Sep 24, 2021 8:00 PM

The FBI is investigating a group of male Afghan refugees after they assaulted a female U.S. soldier in New Mexico.

"We can confirm a female service member supporting Operation Allies Welcome reported being assaulted on Sept. 19 by a small group of male evacuees at the Doña Ana Complex in New Mexico," Fort Bliss Public Affairs released in a statement Friday. "We take the allegation seriously and appropriately referred the matter to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The safety and well-being of our service members, as well as all of those on our installations, is paramount."

"Task Force-Bliss is also implementing additional security measures to include increased health and safety patrols, additional lighting, and enforcement of the buddy system at the Dona Ana Complex. We will cooperate fully with the FBI and will continue to ensure the service member reporting this assault is fully supported," the statement continues.

Lawmakers are reacting to the situation and reminding Americans that President Biden's hasty exit from Afghanistan, when thousands of Afghans were shoved on evacuation planes without vetting, is to blame.

Earlier this week two Afghan men being housed in Wisconsin were indicted on federal charges for domestic violence and child rape.

"In unrelated cases, two individuals have been charged with crimes while at Fort McCoy, Wisconsin. Bahrullah Noori, 20, is charged with attempting to engage in a sexual act with a minor using force against that person, and with three counts of engaging in a sexual act with a minor, with one count alleging the use of force. The indictment alleges that the victims had not attained the age of 16 years and were at least four years younger than the defendant," the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Wisconsin released Wednesday evening. "Mohammad Haroon Imaad, 32, is charged with assaulting his spouse by strangling and suffocating her. The indictment alleges that the assault occurred on September 7, 2021."

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki assured Americans all Afghans coming into the U.S. would be thoroughly vetted.

As for the assault on a female, it also happened several times earlier with the Afghan males that Germany evacuated. he Germans were honest enough to report those incidents as sexual assaults or attempted sexual assaults.

When the US media and this administration are couching their wording by just referring this as an "assault", that translates to me as rape or attempted rape.

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
As for the assault on a female, it also happened several times earlier with the Afghan males that Germany evacuated. he Germans were honest enough to report those incidents as sexual assaults or attempted sexual assaults.

When the US media and this administration are couching their wording by just referring this as an "assault", that translates to me as rape or attempted rape.

Never fear. Since the big insurrection last week wasn't all they had expected, the FBI has a few undercover agents standing around waiting for something to do. They're looking into it now, and the female service member will probably be brought up on charges of war crime against the poor refugees.

https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2...l-university-n418817

The Taliban appointed known terrorist Mohammad Ashraf Ghairat as the new Chancellor of Kabul University two weeks ago

the new chancellor for Kabul University announced on Monday that women would be indefinitely banned from the institution either as instructors or students.

Kabul University is still in better shape than the American University in Afghanistan (which we invested more than $100 million into). That place of higher learning is completely closed and abandoned, with the Taliban having taken it over for non-educational purposes. All of the students who had been studying there are now either at home or they’ve fled the country.

Gen. McKenzie Confirms Biden Lied About Troop Recommendations In Afghanistan SEPTEMBER 28, 2021 By Tristan Justice

Gen. Kenneth McKenzie confirmed on Tuesday that President Joe Biden lied when claiming that military advisers had not advocated for maintaining a U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan.

“I recommended we keep 2,500 troops in Afghanistan,” McKenzie, the commander of the U.S. Central Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Withdrawal of those forces would lead inevitably to the collapse of the Afghan military forces and eventually, the Afghan government.”

McKenzie’s testimony contradicts what Biden told ABC News in August as turmoil plagued the American withdrawal.

“So no one told — your military advisers did not tell you, ‘No, we should just keep 2,500 troops. It’s been a stable situation for the last several years. We can do that. We can continue to do that’?” pressed George Stephanopoulos.

“No,” Biden said. “No one said that to me that I can recall.”

The crisis overseas, where an estimated 100 Americans remain trapped in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan four weeks after troops evacuated, has gripped the administration in scandal as Taliban fighters celebrate with tens of billions in U.S. military equipment left in their hands.

In the final days of the Taliban takeover, a transcript between Biden and the since-fled president of Afghanistan shows that Biden appeared to offer a quid pro quo, demanding new Afghan leadership over the war effort in exchange for continued U.S. air support.

“Things aren’t going well in terms of the fight against the Taliban,” Biden told President Ashraf Ghani in late July. “And there’s a need, whether it is true or not, there is a need to project a different picture.”

If Ghani empowered acting Defense Minister Bismillah Khan Mohammadi, Biden said, “you’re going to get not only more help, but you’re going to get a perception that is going to change.”

“We will continue to provide close air support,” Biden promised. “If we know what the plan is and what we are doing.”

https://thefederalist.com/2021...ions-in-afghanistan/

Milley also testified he thought we should leave 2500 to 3500 troops but he refused to say what he told the president.

Austin would not say what was recommended to biden

pretty clear biden over rode the military

So likely they agreed w McKenzie but are too pussy whipped to contradict Lyin' Joe in such a forum...

video of Sen Sullivan pushing Milley and McKenzie

https://twitter.com/i/status/1442876988469829640

What a spline-less POS, "I'm not going to characterize the presidents statement"?

Ok, can you you "characterize" what YOU said?

quote:

Gen. McKenzie Confirms Biden Lied About Troop Recommendations In Afghanistan SEPTEMBER 28, 2021 By Tristan Justice

Biden Lied; people DIED !!!!!

And the senior military advisors are too WOKE to try and tell him otherwise about Bad Decisions.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Milley also testified he thought we should leave 2500 to 3500 troops but he refused to say what he told the president.

Austin would not say what was recommended to biden

pretty clear biden over rode the military

'Or' these two morons are circling the wagons trying to protect themselves as they watch the presidency of the Urine Soaked Relic circling the bowl. I do not for one moment believe anything these two say.

This is the problem when you end up with incompetent morons in the White House. He is the Commander-in-chief and they are going to follow his orders unless those orders are illegal, even when they are stupid. I do not like Milley because he thinks he is a player and he undermined Trump. I believe at this point he is damaged goods, and he has to go.

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:
He is the Commander-in-chief and they are going to follow his orders unless those orders are illegal, even when they are stupid.

I'm not military so forgive my next statement. Should one of these clowns simply "follow his non-illegal orders" if doing so resulted in dropped our soldiers into a meat grinder? At what point does a person simply say, "I cannot in good conscience execute that order", and resign. Milley (King Peter Principle) and Austin (Mr. Affirmative Action) have both proven they do not give a damn about the lives of the soldiers on the ground. And as far as I'm concerned, Milley's call to his Chinese counterparts during his time working in the Trump administration put the noose around his neck. Someone needs to pull it tight and leave this piece of filth hanging in the wind.

Commanders have followed orders that got their subordinates (and sometimes themselves) killed since time immemorial. If they’re not willing to do that, and even when they object, then they have no business being military commanders. How effective do we believe our armed forces could possibly be if commanders refused to obey every time one of them thought, “Oh, someone might get killed”?

But perhaps I’m missing something: What meat grinder have troops been dropped into recently—or even in the past several decades? There have been any number of specific incidents in which things turned out very badly for small groups of personnel, but seldom was the actual outcome predictable in advance.
The incident in which the 13 personnel were killed involved some bad policies and judgments at various levels, but “meat grinder” as compared with events that truly merit the term? Hardly.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
But perhaps I’m missing something: What meat grinder have troops been dropped into recently—or even in the past several decades? The incident in which the 13 personnel were killed involved some bad policies and judgments at various levels, but “meat grinder” as compared with events that truly merit the term? Hardly.

Sorry, I guess my indignance over the totally unnecessary deaths of personnel is a bit different than yours. I was not talking of normal military operations. Of course men get killed. Unfortunately war is all about that. But shoving 13+ soldiers outside the gates at Kabul airport into a war zone (and yes, that's exactly what it was), 'trusting' the enemy to not to take advantage and act, and knowing full well and good there was no way to protect or support those troops is the height of irresponsibility and should have ended the careers of a number of military morons. Its clear, the men in charge right now have zero integrity or ethics and are a disgrace to the uniforms they masquerade around in.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Sorry, I guess my indignance over the totally unnecessary deaths of personnel is a bit different than yours.

You know nothing about my indignation over the incident in which the 13 were killed.

My comment pertained to your self-admitted ignorance about military combat operations and how you believe military commanders should react to orders that they sometimes don’t like.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Sorry, I guess my indignance over the totally unnecessary deaths of personnel is a bit different than yours.

You know nothing about my indignation over the incident in which the 13 were killed.

My comment pertained to your self-admitted ignorance about military combat operations and how you believe military commanders should react to orders that they sometimes don’t like.

bigdeal, as you are not familiar with the military, there are two kinds of orders: Direct Orders and Lawful Orders.

Commissioned Officers give Direct Orders

Non-Commissioned Officers give Lawful Orders

While the distinction may sound minor the reality is, everyone who joins the military follow the orders of the President and those appointed above them and; if an officer gives a direct order, the recipient follows said order(s).

Now the sticking point is when something like the Holocaust occurs or, in this case, a whistle blower makes something public which is not classified information.

The USMC Major's Lieutenant Colonel's (just saw those are silver oak leafs, not gold) fate is in the hand of the hand of the Commander in Chief (ie, the president). The people [supposedly] elected this POS of a POTUS.

Only time will tell if this POS will change the Major's fate or, a real president is elected in 2024 and fixes this POS' wrongs.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
My comment pertained to your self-admitted ignorance about military combat operations and how you believe military commanders should react to orders that they sometimes don’t like.

Change the term you used to "Military bureaucrats" and you're likely to find more agreement on my part. I don't know if Milley or Austin were ever "commanders", but they damn sure are not now.

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
bigdeal, as you are not familiar with the military, there are two kinds of orders: Direct Orders and Lawful Orders.

Commissioned Officers give Direct Orders

Non-Commissioned Officers give Lawful Orders

While the distinction may sound minor the reality is, everyone who joins the military follow the orders of the President and those appointed above them and; if an officer gives a direct order, the recipient follows said order(s).

Thank you for the info and clarifications. A question: If Milley disagreed about a proposed mission, could he not simple state that and resign from his post (not the military, just the appointed position)? I'm not suggesting that military commanders across the spectrum refuse to execute orders because they do not agree with them. My question is more about these pompous bureaucrats in Washington that are about as military as my 10 year old Coonhound at this point, and 'their' options.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
bigdeal, as you are not familiar with the military, there are two kinds of orders: Direct Orders and Lawful Orders.

Commissioned Officers give Direct Orders

Non-Commissioned Officers give Lawful Orders

While the distinction may sound minor the reality is, everyone who joins the military follow the orders of the President and those appointed above them and; if an officer gives a direct order, the recipient follows said order(s).

Thank you for the info and clarifications. A question: If Milley disagreed about a proposed mission, could he not simple state that and resign from his post (not the military, just the appointed position)? I'm not suggesting that military commanders across the spectrum refuse to execute orders because they do not agree with them. My question is more about these pompous bureaucrats in Washington that are about as military as my 10 year old Coonhound at this point, and 'their' options.

Survivors of a Direct Order tend to tell their tale the best.

That is; once the LtC noted his displeasure and was given the Direct Order to cease an desist, he should have. Once word got around this happened, others may chime in. Now, and having retired 15 years ago, all others have likely received the blanket order of "thou shall not speaketh thy mind, no matter how truthful."

Or something thereabouts.

For this part:

quote:

A question: If Milley disagreed about a proposed mission, could he not simple state that and resign from his post (not the military, just the appointed position)?

Nope. Disobeying a lawful or direct order can be, in time of war, a capital offense with punishment received in rapid order (like, right then). All others would go to the brig - eventually, if sever enough or somebody decided an example was needed to ensure others would follow the order.