Thread 1432433

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-reported-violent-failed-seal-team-6-mission/story?id=125300720

President Donald Trump said Friday he didn't know "anything" about what the New York Times reported was a classified 2019 SEAL Team 6 mission in North Korea in which unarmed North Korean civilians were killed during an aborted operation.

The Pentagon and U.S. Special Operations Command declined to comment to ABC News about The New York Times report.

Speaking to reporters from the Oval Office on Friday, Trump was asked by a reporter: "Can you confirm that it happened?"

"I don't know anything about it. I'm hearing it now for the first time," he responded.

The account, citing "two dozen people, including civilian government officials, members of the first Trump administration and current and former military personnel with knowledge of the mission" who spoke to the Times anonymously, said Trump had approved the mission.

SEAL Team 6 commandos, the Times said, were to plant a device that would "let the United States intercept the communications of North Korea’s reclusive leader, Kim Jong-un, amid high-level nuclear talks with President Trump."

The U.S. team members feared they had been spotted by a North Korean boat that was approaching the area, the Times reported. The SEALs opened fire, killing all aboard the boat, according to the Times.

Upon inspection, none of the people in the boat was armed, the Times reported, and evidence "suggested that the crew, which people briefed on the mission said numbered two or three people, had been civilians diving for shellfish."

The SEALs made it back to their large nuclear-powered submarine nearby and fled the North Korean coast undetected, according to the Times.

No one in the Trump administration informed Congress of the botched mission, the account said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/us/navy-seal-north-korea-trump-2019.html

A group of Navy SEALs emerged from the ink-black ocean on a winter night in early 2019 and crept to a rocky shore in North Korea. They were on a top secret mission so complex and consequential that everything had to go exactly right.

The objective was to plant an electronic device that would let the United States intercept the communications of North Korea’s reclusive leader, Kim Jong-un, amid high-level nuclear talks with President Trump.

The mission had the potential to provide the United States with a stream of valuable intelligence. But it meant putting American commandos on North Korean soil — a move that, if detected, not only could sink negotiations but also could lead to a hostage crisis or an escalating conflict with a nuclear-armed foe.

It was so risky that it required the president’s direct approval.

For the operation, the military chose SEAL Team 6’s Red Squadron — the same unit that killed Osama bin Laden. The SEALs rehearsed for months, aware that every move needed to be perfect. But when they reached what they thought was a deserted shore that night, wearing black wet suits and night-vision goggles, the mission swiftly unraveled.

A North Korean boat appeared out of the dark. Flashlights from the bow swept over the water. Fearing that they had been spotted, the SEALs opened fire. Within seconds, everyone on the North Korean boat was dead.

The SEALs retreated into the sea without planting the listening device.

The 2019 operation has never been publicly acknowledged, or even hinted at, by the United States or North Korea. The details remain classified and are being reported here for the first time. The Trump administration did not notify key members of Congress who oversee intelligence operations, before or after the mission. The lack of notification may have violated the law.

The White House declined to comment.

This account is based on interviews with two dozen people, including civilian government officials, members of the first Trump administration and current and former military personnel with knowledge of the mission. All of them spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the mission’s classified status.

Several of those people said they were discussing details about the mission because they were concerned that Special Operations failures are often hidden by government secrecy. If the public and policymakers become aware only of high-profile successes, such as the raid that killed bin Laden in Pakistan, they may underestimate the extreme risks that American forces undertake.

The military operation on North Korean soil, close to American military bases in South Korea and the Pacific region, also risked setting off a broader conflict with a hostile, nuclear-armed and highly militarized adversary.

The New York Times proceeds cautiously when reporting on classified military operations. The Times has withheld some sensitive information on the North Korea mission that could affect future Special Operations and intelligence-gathering missions.

t is unclear how much North Korea was able to discover about the mission. But the SEAL operation is one chapter in a decades-long effort by U.S. administrations to engage North Korea and constrain its nuclear weapons programs. Almost nothing the United States has tried — neither promises of closer relations nor the pressure of sanctions — has worked.

In 2019, Mr. Trump was making a personalized overture to Mr. Kim, in search of a breakthrough that had eluded prior presidents. But those talks collapsed, and North Korea’s nuclear program accelerated. The U.S. government estimates that North Korea now has roughly 50 nuclear weapons and missiles that can reach the West Coast. Mr. Kim has pledged to keep expanding his nuclear program “exponentially” to deter what he calls U.S. provocations.
Blind Spots

The SEAL mission was intended to fix a strategic blind spot. For years, U.S. intelligence agencies had found it nearly impossible to recruit human sources and tap communications in North Korea’s insular authoritarian state.

Gaining insight into Mr. Kim’s thinking became a high priority when Mr. Trump first took office. The North Korean leader seemed increasingly unpredictable and dangerous, and his relationship with Mr. Trump had lurched erratically between letters of friendship and public threats of nuclear war.

In 2018, relations seemed to be moving toward peace. North Korea suspended nuclear and missile tests, and the two countries opened negotiations, but the United States still had little insight into Mr. Kim’s intentions.

Amid the uncertainty, U.S. intelligence agencies revealed to the White House that they had a fix for the intelligence problem: a newly developed electronic device that could intercept Mr. Kim’s communications.

The catch was that someone had to sneak in and plant it.

The job was given to SEAL Team 6 in 2018, military officials said.

Even for Team 6, the mission would be extraordinarily difficult. SEALs who were more used to quick raids in places like Afghanistan and Iraq would have to survive for hours in frigid seas, slip past security forces on land, perform a precise technical installation and then get out undetected.

Getting out undetected was vital. In Mr. Trump’s first term, top leaders in the Pentagon believed that even a small military action against North Korea could provoke catastrophic retaliation from an adversary with roughly 8,000 artillery pieces and rocket launchers aimed at the approximately 28,000 American troops in South Korea, and nuclear-capable missiles that could reach the United States.

But the SEALs believed they could pull off the mission because they had done something like it before.

In 2005, SEALs used a mini-sub to go ashore in North Korea and leave unnoticed, according to people familiar with the mission. The 2005 operation, carried out during the presidency of George W. Bush, has never before been reported publicly.

The SEALs were proposing to do it again. In the fall of 2018, while high-level talks with North Korea were underway, Joint Special Operations Command, which oversees Team 6, received approval from Mr. Trump to start preparing, military officials said. It is unclear whether Mr. Trump’s intent was to gain an immediate advantage during negotiations or if the focus was broader.

Joint Special Operations Command declined to comment.

The plan called for the Navy to sneak a nuclear-powered submarine, nearly two football fields long, into the waters off North Korea and then deploy a small team of SEALs in two mini-subs, each about the size of a killer whale, that would motor silently to the shore.

The mini-subs were wet subs, which meant the SEALs would ride immersed in 40-degree ocean water for about two hours to reach the shore, using scuba gear and heated suits to survive.

Near the beach, the mini-subs would release a group of about eight SEALs who would swim to the target, install the device and then slip back into the sea.

But the team faced a serious limitation: It would be going in almost blind.

Typically, Special Operations forces have drones overhead during a mission, streaming high-definition video of the target, which SEALs on the ground and senior leaders in far-off command centers can use to direct the strike in real time. Often, they can even listen in on enemy communications.

But in North Korea, any drone would be spotted. The mission would have to rely on satellites in orbit and high-altitude spy planes in international airspace miles away that could provide only relatively low-definition still images, officials said.

Those images would arrive not in real time, but after a delay of several minutes at best. Even then, they could not be relayed to the mini-subs because a single encrypted transmission might give the mission away. Everything had to be done under a near blackout of communications.

If anything awaited the SEALs on shore, they might not know until it was too late.

The Operation Unravels

SEAL Team 6 practiced for months in U.S. waters and continued preparations into the first weeks of 2019. That February, Mr. Trump announced that he would meet Mr. Kim for a nuclear summit in Vietnam at the end of the month.

For the mission, SEAL Team 6 partnered with the Navy’s premier underwater team, SEAL Delivery Vehicle Team 1, which had been doing mini-sub espionage for years. The SEALs boarded the nuclear-powered submarine and headed for North Korea. When the submarine was in the open ocean, and about to enter a communications blackout, Mr. Trump gave the final go-ahead.

It is unclear what factors Mr. Trump weighed when approving the SEAL mission. Two of his top national security officials at that time — his national security adviser, John Bolton, and the acting defense secretary, Patrick M. Shanahan — declined to comment for this article.

The submarine neared the North Korean coast and launched two mini-subs, which motored to a spot about 100 yards from shore, in clear shallow water.

Mission planners had tried to compensate for having no live overhead video by spending months watching how people came and went in the area. They studied fishing patterns and chose a time when boat traffic would be scant. The intelligence suggested that if SEALs arrived silently in the right location in the dead of night in winter, they would be unlikely to encounter anyone.

The night was still and the sea was calm. As the mini-subs glided toward the target, their sensors suggested that the intelligence was correct. The shore appeared to be empty.

The mini-subs reached the spot where they were supposed to park on the sea floor. There, the team made what may have been the first of three small mistakes that seemed inconsequential at the time but may have doomed the mission.

In the darkness, the first mini-sub settled on the sea floor as planned, but the second overshot the mark and had to do a U-turn, officials said.

The plan called for the mini-subs to park facing the same way, but after the second sub doubled back, they were pointing in opposite directions. Time was limited, so the group decided to release the shore team and correct the parking issue later.

Sliding doors on the subs opened, and the SEALs — all gripping untraceable weapons loaded with untraceable ammunition — swam silently underwater to shore with the listening device.

Every few yards, the SEALs peeked above the black water to scan their surroundings. Everything seemed clear.

That might have been a second mistake. Bobbing in the darkness was a small boat. On board was a crew of North Koreans who were easy to miss because the sensors in the SEALs’ night-vision goggles were designed in part to detect heat, and the wet suits the Koreans wore were chilled by the cold seawater.

The SEALs reached shore thinking they were alone, and started to remove their diving gear. The target was only a few hundred yards away.

Back at the mini-subs, the pilots repositioned the sub that was facing the wrong way. With the sliding cockpit doors open for visibility and communication, a pilot revved the electric motor and brought the sub around.

That was probably a third mistake. Some SEALs speculated afterward in briefings that the motor’s wake might have caught the attention of the North Korean boat. And if the boat crew heard a splash and turned to look, they might have seen light from the subs’ open cockpits glowing in the dark water.

The boat started moving toward the mini-subs. The North Koreans were shining flashlights and talking as if they had noticed something.

Some of the mini-sub pilots told officials in debriefings afterward that from their vantage point, looking up through the clear water, the boat still seemed to be a safe distance away and they had doubted that the mini-subs had been spotted. But the SEALs at the shore saw it differently. In the dark, featureless sea, the boat to them seemed to be practically on top of the mini-subs.

With communications blacked out, there was no way for the shore team to confer with the mini-subs. Lights from the boat swept over the water. The SEALs didn’t know if they were seeing a security patrol on the hunt for them or a simple fishing crew oblivious to the high-stakes mission unfolding around them.

A man from the North Korean boat splashed into the sea.

If the shore team got into trouble, the nuclear-powered sub had a group of SEAL reinforcements standing by with inflatable speedboats. Farther offshore, stealth rotary aircraft were positioned on U.S. Navy ships with even more Special Operations troops, ready to sweep in if needed.

The SEALs faced a critical decision, but there was no way to discuss the next move. The mission commander was miles away on the big submarine. With no drones and a communications blackout, many of the technological advantages that the SEALs normally relied on had been stripped away, leaving a handful of men in wet neoprene, unsure of what to do.

As the shore team watched the North Korean in the water, the senior enlisted SEAL at the shore chose a course of action. He wordlessly centered his rifle and fired. The other SEALs instinctively did the same.
Compromise and Escape

If the SEALs were unsure whether the mission had been compromised before they fired, they had no doubt afterward. The plan required the SEALs to abort immediately if they encountered anyone. North Korean security forces could be coming. There was no time to plant the device.

The shore team swam to the boat to make sure that all of the North Koreans were dead. They found no guns or uniforms. Evidence suggested that the crew, which people briefed on the mission said numbered two or three people, had been civilians diving for shellfish. All were dead, including the man in the water.

Officials familiar with the mission said the SEALs pulled the bodies into the water to hide them from the North Korean authorities. One added that the SEALs punctured the boat crew’s lungs with knives to make sure their bodies would sink.

The SEALs swam back to the mini-subs and sent a distress signal. Believing the SEALs were in imminent danger of capture, the big nuclear submarine maneuvered into shallow water close to the shore, taking a significant risk to pick them up. It then sped toward the open ocean.

All the U.S. military personnel escaped unharmed.
Immediately afterward, U.S. spy satellites detected a surge of North Korean military activity in the area, U.S. officials said. North Korea did not make any public statements about the deaths, and U.S. officials said it was unclear whether the North Koreans ever pieced together what had happened and who was responsible.

The nuclear summit in Vietnam went ahead as planned at the end of February 2019, but the talks quickly ended with no deal.

By May, North Korea had resumed missile tests.

Mr. Trump and Mr. Kim met once more that June in the Demilitarized Zone between North and South Korea. It made for dramatic television, with Mr. Trump even stepping across into North Korea. But the brief meeting yielded little more than a handshake.

In the months that followed, North Korea fired more missiles than in any previous year, including some capable of reaching the United States. Since then, the United States estimates, North Korea has amassed 50 nuclear warheads and material to produce about 40 more.
Uneven Track Record

The aborted SEAL mission prompted a series of military reviews during Mr. Trump’s first term. They found that the killing of civilians was justified under the rules of engagement, and that the mission was undone by a collision of unfortunate occurrences that could not have been foreseen or avoided. The findings were classified.

The Trump administration never told leaders of key committees in Congress that oversee military and intelligence activities about the operation or the findings, government officials said. In doing so, the Trump administration may have violated federal law, said Matthew Waxman, a law professor at Columbia University who served in national security positions under former President George W. Bush.

Mr. Waxman said the law has gray areas that give presidents some leeway on what they tell Congress. But on more consequential missions, the burden leans more toward notification.

“The point is to ensure that Congress isn’t kept in the dark when major stuff is going on,” Mr. Waxman said. “This is exactly the kind of thing that would normally be briefed to the committees and something the committees would expect to be told about.”

Many of the people involved in the mission were later promoted.

But the episode worried some experienced military officials with knowledge of the mission, because the SEALs have an uneven track record that for decades has largely been concealed by secrecy.

Elite Special Operations units are regularly assigned some of the most difficult and dangerous tasks. Over the years, the SEALs have had a number of major successes, including hits on terrorist leaders, high-profile rescues of hostages and the takedown of bin Laden, that have built an almost superhuman public image.

But among some in the military who have worked with them, the SEALs have a reputation for devising overly bold and complex missions that go badly. Team 6’s debut mission, which was part of the U.S. invasion of Grenada in 1983, is a case in point.

The plan was to parachute into the sea, race to the coast in speedboats and plant beacons to guide assault forces to the island’s airport. But the SEALs’ plane took off late; they jumped at night and landed in stormy conditions, weighed down by heavy gear. Four SEALs drowned, and the rest swamped their speedboats.

The airfield was later seized by Army Rangers who parachuted directly onto the airfield.

Since then, SEALs have mounted other complex and daring missions that unraveled, in Panama, Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia. During a rescue mission in Afghanistan in 2010, Team 6 SEALs accidentally killed a hostage they were trying to rescue with a grenade and then misled superiors about how she had died.

In part because of this track record, President Barack Obama curtailed Special Operations missions late in his second term and increased oversight, reserving complex commando raids for extraordinary situations like hostage rescues.

The first Trump administration reversed many of those restrictions and cut the amount of high-level deliberation for sensitive missions. A few days after taking office in 2017, Mr. Trump skipped over much of the established deliberative process to greenlight a Team 6 raid on a village in Yemen. That mission left 30 villagers and a SEAL dead and destroyed a $75 million aircraft.

When President Joseph R. Biden Jr. succeeded Mr. Trump, the gravity of the North Korea mission attracted renewed scrutiny. Mr. Biden’s defense secretary, Lloyd J. Austin III, ordered an independent investigation, conducted by the lieutenant general in charge of the Army inspector general’s office.

In 2021, the Biden administration briefed key members of Congress on the findings, a former government official said.

Those findings remain classified.
___

The Generals have to know - the President doesn’t.

>>1432488
All Trump had to do was say he couldn't talk about it because it's classified, or refuse to confirm or deny it, but instead he pulled the same 'dduuuh I dunno' shit he did with the Epstein files.

>>1432488
>The Generals have to know - the President doesn’t.
Except this mission literally had to have presidential approval due to the massive risk it carried, something literally cited in the report. Either he's got dementia and genuinely can't remember, he's playing dumb for some reason, or someone went behind Trump's back.

i know nottttthings!

>>1432433 (OP)
Don't care. Fuck North Korea. Payback's a bitch.

>>1432511
Yeah Kim is really seething about those 3 civilians just trying to eek out a life who became missing persons.

Imagine if NK did this to the US, on US soil. There'd be blood.

>>1432513
>Imagine if NK did this to the US, on US soil. There'd be blood.
Depends on who is in office. Biden would've said "C'mon man!" and then forgot where he was. Maybe trade the equivalent of the Merchant of Death for another black WNBA player that hates America and work out a deal with NK. Either way there wouldn't be blood unless it was his underlings authorizing something behind his back.

>>1432514
that's a whataboutism record there, shill

>>1432514
>Depends on who is in office
The story isn't about other presidents it's about Trump.

>>1432525
Then yes in this hypothetical there would be blood. Trump actually gives half a fuck about American lives. He doesn't deliberately get them killed the same way Biden did with Abbey Gate.

>>1432528
Now THIS is bait.

>>1432528
LOL

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/27/517496770/father-of-navy-seal-killed-in-yemen-raid-has-harsh-words-for-trump

why do you still have this job, terrible shill?

>>1432531
Yes because your shitty npr article of a SEAL who died in combat with the enemy totally compares to the 13 soldiers that got blown up by the ISIS bomber Biden let out of prison.

Oh and since we're comparing upset family members:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2452299/abbey-gate-gold-star-families-continue-to-grieve-while-anger-at-biden-remains/

>>1432534
>a seal who died because trump ordered it with no military knowledge
>and also pulled out of syria and caused who knows how many more deaths by isis
why do you defend this draft dodger? i know, i know, you're a paid shill. it was a rhetorical question

>>1432535
>yeah Biden let out the bomber who killed 13 Americans when we haven't had a single KIA in Afghanistan after Trump signed the agreement to leave... but whataboutism this Navy SEAL who died who died doing Navy SEAL shit fighting Al-Qaida in a clandestine mission!?!
Fucking pathetic.

>>1432536
we heard you the first time faggot. you need better shill skills

>>1432536
>>1432534
Grasping at straws

>>1432534
If we’re gonna whataboutism, how about the Taliban leaders just taking over Afghanistan after Biden’s pull out? You know the ones Trump got released from prison?

>>1432545
Oh you mean those Taliban leaders that didn't shoot at any Americans? Those same Taliban who had to help us do crowd control to keep the rest of Afghanistan out of Kabul airport because Biden is such a colossal fucking retard that we had to rely on our enemies of 20 years to peacefully leave (would have been peaceful if not for the ISIS bomber BIDEN LET OUT)?

Yeah tell me more about them.

>>1432547
do you like being made fun of for your shitty bait or something, shill faggot?

>>1432547
>Oh you mean those Taliban leaders that didn't shoot at any Americans?
Someone come and fix this bot. It's hallucinating again.

>>1432555
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Kabul_airlift
>The Taliban took control of Kabul and declared victory on 15 August 2021, and the NATO-backed Islamic Republic of Afghanistan collapsed. With the Taliban controlling the whole city except Hamid Karzai International Airport, hostilities ceased and the Taliban assisted in the evacuation effort by providing security and screening evacuees during the Biden administration.
Retard.

>>1432558
Your point? The Taliban killed thousands of Americans.

>>1432566
My point... which I know you're retarded so I'll try to make this simple... is that the war was over with, we had ZERO soldiers die in combat after the deal was signed and the fighting between our soldiers in Afghanistan was basically over with. We could've evacuated Afghanistan without anymore of our soldiers dying, but nooooooo. Biden had to go and completely fuck it all up because he's a worse than worthless Alzheimer patient that democrats elected into office. And 13 of our soldiers got blown up by an ISIS - Not Taliban!!! - an ISIS prisoner that HE let out.

This is why we can't have nice things.

>>1432567
but what about?

>>1432569
Meme all you want but the fact is that if Trump was still in office those 13 soldiers would still be alive. Their deaths are on the hands of every person who voted for Biden.

>>1432570
your talking points are stale

>>1432571
And your counter-arguments are as non-existent as your punctuation.

esl shill sure hates being made fun of for his myriad errors, lol

>>1432567
Holy fuck your mental gymnastics are olympic level.
>We could've evacuated Afghanistan without anymore of our soldiers dying,
But Trump didn't.
>but nooooooo. Biden had to go and completely fuck it all up
It was already fucked yup because Trump fucked it up. Biden had the courage to end what Trump couldn't.
>And 13 of our soldiers got blown up by an ISIS - Not Taliban!!! - an ISIS prisoner that HE let out.
What's next, you gonna blame Biden for the Iranian Trump droned in Iraq, too?Why not blame him for Assad while you're at it,

>>1432575
>But Trump didn't.
Because Gen. Milley fucked him. Fun fact: Trump wanted to pull out on Jan 15th before Biden took over. Guess who prevented that from happening because he never wanted to leave Afghanistan.
>It was already fucked yup because Trump fucked it up. Biden had the courage to end what Trump couldn't.
Except your wrong you fucking retard. Trump's plan was to evacuate out of Bagram. That base was:
A) far more easy to defend (ask me how I know) than, oh I dunno... AN AIRPORT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FUCKING CAPITAL CITY!
B) the only airbase that could land C-5 Galaxy aircraft
C) had two runways
D) had more than enough apron space for the aircraft we would need to evac, and space to put everyone
E) had the military infrastructure needed to support the MILITARY aircraft we used to evac with, since none of the CRAF aircraft were used out of Kabul the entire evac was mil aircraft only
AND - MOST IMPORTANTLY
F) had the Parwan Detention Facility on it, which just so happened to have the ISIS bomber detained inside. Relevant to your dogshit last point you made in your post of
>Duuuuurrrrrrr What's next, you gonna blame Biden for the Iranian Trump droned in Iraq, too?Why not blame him for Assad while you're at it, duuuuurrrrrrrrrrr

>>1432590
esl

>>1432592
Every time you say that everyone on this board knows you just got btfo, without even needing to read what you replied to

>>1432602
delicious projection, esl shill

>>1432590
>guys the random airbase that would've had 0 support would've been a great idea!
>please ignore how fast we would've been surrounded

>>1432620
Because Kabul wasn't surrounded? Holy shit you are so fucking retarded it's sad.

>>1432622
>Well we could go with the place staffed by our allies and hope that it doesn't collapse in 24 hours
>Or the place without our allies that will get surrounded even faster
Sounds like a lose lose, especially after Trump went out of his way to hand the Taliban control of the country. Right down to NOT INVOLVING THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT WE SPENT ALL THAT TIME BUILDING UP IN NEGOTIATIONS.

>>1432623
>>Well we could go with the place staffed by our allies and hope that it doesn't collapse in 24 hours
Yeah how'd that work out by the way?

>>Or the place without our allies that will get surrounded even faster
>retard is too stupid to look at a map and notice that Kabul Airport is inside a city
>retard doesn't know about Bagram having mountains n shiet, making it easier to defend
>retard doesn't know that Bagram isn't inside a fucking city
>retard also doesn't realize that if Biden didn't abandon Bagram, those "allies" would also be in Bagram with us
>retard would rather we move to Kabul that is "well staffed by our allies" of the Afghan government that wanted us gone

> Right down to NOT INVOLVING THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT WE SPENT ALL THAT TIME BUILDING UP IN NEGOTIATIONS.
The same Afghan government that wanted us gone? What was Ghani's speech again? Something like "Afghans can fight for Afghanistan?" - lol and how long did he fight before catching a plane out of the country?

>>1432433 (OP)
>"I don't know anything about it. I'm hearing it now for the first time," he responded.
What is with these MAGA retards and making excuses that make them sound even more incompetent than if they'd just admitted the truth? If you're going to lie, then at least make up something that makes you look good.

>>1432635
I'm convinced it's that one indian guy who made the news last month for amassing and training an army of MAGA bots.
https://www.msn.com/en-in/entertainment/bollywood/saihajpreet-singh-meet-the-24-year-old-canadian-coder-built-a-maga-bot-army-targeting-us-progressives/ar-AA1K6AL3

>>1432635
I really want a reporter to just call him on it like
>Sir, you said you didn't remember the NK operation even though it would've required presidential sign off. Do you think someone acted behind your back and faked your approval?

>>1432624
I distinctly remember them being quite pissed we were conceding the country to the taliban before they even fell. And who did that? Oh right; Trump. But I'm sure leaving the government out of your negotiations for leaving the country had no effect on morale.

>>1432643
Yeah you're right. We should've followed General Milley and stayed in Afghanistan forever. Great plan, Anon.

>>1432642
The press has been cowering since two major networks had to pay Trump off to not revoke their licenses.

>>1432635
They all have the same person giving them media training. It’s always the same
>deflect all criticism with non-answers or use whataboutism

>>1432653
Milley never said that.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/28/us-military-officials-to-testify-on-afghanistan-withdrawal
>Milley and McKenzie said they had warned that the Western-backed government in Kabul would fall if the US withdrew all troops.

>>1432433 (OP)
If it was a success he would be stroking his own goat again. As it is, NK now owes us one.

>>1432666
Yeah and how does this support your argument retard? It bolsters mine by showing Milley didn't want to leave Afghanistan by saying he knew it would fall without US troops.

>>1432666
Oh and by the way:
>Well, I will say this. It has been my view that we should have - that I recommended a level of 2,500, a level that would have allowed us to hold Bagram and other airfields as well. Once you go below that level and make a decision to go to zero, it is no longer feasible to hold Bagram.
>So, at a troop level of 2,500, we would have held Bagram and that would have been my recommendation. That was my position.

Take a wild guess who said this.

>>1432723
>>1432732
He wanted a gradual drawdown to 0, not that you can read.

>>1432741
lol okay retard.
1) nowhere in your news article does it say "gradual drawdown" so maybe you can read for me and quote where it says that.

2) Makes no fucking sense how he wanted a gradual drawdown and then fought with Trump twice (in 2018 and 2021) to stay in Afghanistan.

and

3) He has repeatedly advocated for keeping Bagram and leaving a counter-terrorism force there indefinitely. I've already given you a few quotes, why not add a few more.

>My assessment was, back in the fall of 2020, and remained consistent throughout, that we should keep a steady state of 2,500 troops, and it could bounce up to 3,500, maybe something like that, in order to move toward a negotiated solution.
>I thought that the withdrawal of those forces would increase risks of instability and the potential collapse of the Afghan government.

>Senator King: And you've testified you provide your invested military advice to President Biden, that there should be a residual force left in Afghanistan. Did you provide the same advice to President Trump when they were negotiating the Doha Agreement?
>Milley: Again, I'm not going to discuss precise advice.
>Senator King: Was it your best military judgment that a residual force-
>Milley: At that time, yes. And that's what that a series of memos, and advice and meetings, et cetera, in the September, October timeframe, that's exactly what they were. And you can talk to Secretary Esper, He can tell you the same thing.
>Senator King: So your military judgment didn't change on January 20th.
>Milley: No.

Oh yeah that sounds like he wants a drawdown to 0. Totally. You fucking incompetent.

>>1432749
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/28/lloyd-austin-defends-afghanistan-evacuation-514470
>Milley, in his own opening statement, described the withdrawal as a “10-year, multi-administration drawdown,” and told senators it was “clear” and “obvious” the war in Afghanistan “did not end on the terms we wanted, with the Taliban now in power in Kabul.”
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2024/03/19/afghanistan-withdrawal-errors-came-despite-military-concerns/
>Milley and McKenzie both acknowledged that, but also noted that military leaders recommended keeping some military force in the country beyond the August 2021 deadline but were overruled by administration officials.

>They also noted that the move to pull civilian workers and allies out of the country came later than they requested, leading to more complications.
You are being absolutely retarded and disingenuous.

>>1432750
>but also noted that military leaders recommended keeping some military force in the country beyond the August 2021 deadline but were overruled by administration officials
That's the second time your own quote debunked you. Are you okay Anon? Do you need to take more pills?

>>1432753
>Anon said Milley wanted to draw down troops to 0
>Anon posts Milley quote confirming that
>"That's the second time your own quote debunked you."
>gaslighting intensifies
This bot really is broken. It needs to be reprogrammed.

>>1432767
>military leaders recommended keeping some military force in the country beyond the August 2021 deadline
>but were overruled by administration officials
Reading is hard for you.

>>1432779
Yes to draw them down, dumbass, that's what Milley and Austin were saying.

>>1432780
Except he wasn't you dumbass. He's mentioned on several occasions how he wanted to keep Bagram past any deadline for counter-terrorism in that region, and got all butthurt in his testimony when we evac'd because now it's harder to blow up civilians in that area.

Not to mention he stopped Trump twice from pulling out of Afghanistan completely. We could've been done with it as early as 2018 if Trump just fired his insubordinate ass. But by all means please keep coping forever about this distraction to deflect from my earlier point about how Biden got 13 soldiers killed through his incompetence.

>>1432784
Except he was and you've ignored every source saying so.
> He's mentioned on several occasions how he wanted to keep Bagram past any deadline
He said the deadline should have been longer than what it was, which you know and are playing stupid.
>and got all butthurt in his testimony when we evac'd because now it's harder to blow up civilians in that area.
Now you're just injecting your headcanon into it, which is worse than gaslighting.
>Not to mention he stopped Trump twice from pulling out of Afghanistan completely.
This is becoming hilarious. Keep going. Did he tip over your trash as well?

>>1432786
>This is becoming hilarious. Keep going. Did he tip over your trash as well?
Oh you didn't know that? Yeah Trump wanted to pull out of Afghanistan in 2018. You should look it up sometime.

>>1432794
>Trump wanted to invade Iran in 2018
*ftfy

>>1432801
lol keep cope-meming. None of this changes the fact that Biden got 13 soldiers killed. Or the fact that if Trump didn't have treasonous faggots like Milley for generals we would've been out of Afghanistan before Biden could have the chance to kill anyone.

But I guess I'm the only one here who gives a shit about dead soldiers.

>>1432803
No, you're a compulsively lying shill who only remembers things when they negatively affect democrats.

>>1432803
you're not even american shill anon

>>1432804
>who only remembers things when they negatively affect democrats.
Shit I wish I had that great of a memory. You cocksuckers fuck up every hour.

Imagine how low our crime rates would be in this country if democrats just stopped existing.

>>1432807
>conservatives would ever kill the people who actually invent things and make money
lmao

>>1432808
>who actually invent things and make money
LMAO

Old and busted: The buck stops here

New and improved: I am not responsible for anything

>>1432811
It's worse than that. They openly refer to the media as "the enemy" for reporting on what they do.

>>1432815
>he said nazis at charlottesville were good people

>>1432816
He said there were very fine people on both sides, which wasn't true.

>>1432817
And that media you're defending pushed the narrative that he was calling nazis good people. Don't play dumb now, you damn well remember looping that story during election season.

>>1432822
>And that media you're defending pushed the narrative that he was calling nazis good people.
What are you talking about? The nazis "pushed the narrative" themselves with their Trump flags.
>Don't play dumb now, you damn well remember looping that story during election season.
It's not even a partisan issue. They were chanting "jews will not replace us" for fucks sake.

>>1432825
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/
You know you're completely brain-poisoned when even Snopes disagrees with you.

>>1432817
>He said there were very fine people on both sides
So why didn't Anonymous bring down Antifa & BLM sites, but only white supremacist ones after Charlottesville? Thus the only fine people are those who aren't rightards, Trump & co. Anonymous agrees, don't bother them about it.

>>1432833
Snopes doesn't disagree with me. Did you even read it? And what does the quote have to do with the entire media anyway?

>>1432433 (OP)
Can't wait for the hearings on this to begin once Dems are back in charge of the House

>>1432970
kek

>>1432838
>Snopes doesn't disagree with me
Nta and I don't know what you said, but the title is "No, Trump Did Not Call Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists 'Very Fine People'"
Did you repeat the oft-spoken lie that trump called Nazis very fine people?

>>1432979
Are you offended on behalf of Nazis or Trump?

>>1432979
>Trump called Nazi's very fine people, then his dementia handler reminded him to condem Nazi's as a followup
You can tell he really meant it the second time and not the first time too.

>>1432979
Who were the "very fine people" on the nazi side?

>>1433006
There was no Nazi side.

>>1433007
you're retarded
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally
>The Unite the Right rally was a white supremacist[4][5][6][7] rally that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia, from August 11 to 12, 2017.[8][9][10] Marchers included members of the alt-right,[11] neo-Confederates,[12] neo-fascists,[13] white nationalists,[14] neo-Nazis,[15] Klansmen,[16] and far-right militias.[17] Some groups chanted racist and antisemitic slogans and carried weapons, Nazi and neo-Nazi symbols, the valknut, Confederate battle flags, Deus vult crosses, flags, and other symbols of various past and present antisemitic and anti-Islamic groups.[23] The organizers' stated goals included the unification of the American white nationalist movement[11] and opposing the proposed removal of the statue of General Robert E. Lee from Charlottesville's former Lee Park.[21][24] The rally sparked a national debate over Confederate iconography, racial violence, and white supremacy.[25] The event had hundreds of participants.[26]

>>1433007
>white supremacist sites brought down by Anonymous after Charlottesville
Anon proves your opinions wrong
Rightard retardation. Like pottery.

>>1433012
>leaves out all the non-nazi groups that were protesting the removal of statues - like the 3 percenters, oath keepers, various militias from New York, Pennsylvania, etc.
I guess we can label all the counter-protesters as Antifa then?

>>1433018
see >>1432992

the impotently seething 1433019 is offended on behalf of white rightards

>>1433019
You're confused again.