Anonymous ID: f0aac8 Nov. 19, 2021, 9:49 a.m. No.15035197   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5262 >>5299

Treasonous Biden Regime Pays $144 Million To Taliban While Leaving Thousands of Army Veterans and Family Members to Die

 

The treasouous, illegitimate and failing Biden regime will send $144 million in “humanitarian assistance” from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the U.S. Department of State to Afghanistan, which will wind up in the pockets of the Taliban terrorists, just like the $83 billion in military equipment the traitors surrendered to our worst enemies. Over 100 military family members were left behind in Afghanistan, while the U.S. Embassy repeatedly hung up on a former U.S. soldier in Pakistan as he pleaded for help and wouldn’t let him enter the building, as Fox News reported.

 

 

“Every week new revelations arrive about the scale of Biden’s betrayal in Afghanistan”, writes Daniel Greenfield of the David Horowitz Freedom Center . “After months of claiming that only a few hundred Americans had been abandoned behind enemy lines, the real numbers are still growing. Shocking reports continue to come to light including a military memo which claims that over a hundred family members of servicemen may still be trapped under Taliban rule.”

 

“The humiliating collapse in Afghanistan is not a mystery. It was the product of a deliberate strategy to maintain relations with the Taliban at any cost. Every step of the disaster was really a betrayal.

 

Why did the Biden administration abandon Bagram Air Base and the nearby prison facility holding thousands of Taliban, Al Qaeda, and ISIS-K prisoners without notifying the Afghans?

 

When the Taliban repeatedly violated their agreement to stop the violence, why did the Biden administration still insist on keeping our side of the agreement, withdrawing by the deadline even if it meant leaving Americans behind?

 

As the Taliban approached Kabul, why was the Biden administration trying to cut a deal to provide a sizable cash delivery if the Taliban included the existing government in its administration?

 

When the Taliban offered to let the United States hold on to Kabul for the duration of the evacuation, why did the Biden administration refuse and allow the Jihadis and their Al Qaeda allies to take over the city and maintain the checkpoints through which Americans and Afghans had to pass to the airport?

 

Why is there still no official determination about the role that the Haqqani Network, Taliban allies of Al Qaeda, played in enabling Islamic terrorists to make it through their checkpoints with heavy weaponry and bomb vests to carry out attacks, resulting in the murder of 13 American military personnel?

 

Why did the Biden administration hand over lists of allies to the Taliban and delay going out into Kabul to rescue Americans? Why, even now, does it continue to repeat the same lies that only a handful of Americans were left behind and that the Taliban were helpful and cooperative during the evacuation?

 

The common denominator for all of them is that the Biden administration prioritized diplomatic relations with the Taliban over the lives of Americans and our national security. It’s why the Biden administration continues to engage diplomatically with the Taliban, directing aid to Afghanistan, and negotiating the release of the Americans whom they had previously claimed didn’t want to leave.”

 

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/treasonous-biden-regime-pays-144-million-taliban-leaving-thousands-army-veterans-family-members-die/

Anonymous ID: f0aac8 Nov. 19, 2021, 9:49 a.m. No.15035200   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5262

Russia reacts to NATO proposal to move nukes into Eastern Europe

 

Moscow has hit out at a statement from NATO’s top official highlighting the bloc’s new plans to shuttle American nuclear warheads around Eastern European nations, sparking fears of a potential conflict between the West and Russia.

 

On Friday, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg made an address at the German Atlantic Association, in which he said moving the atomic weaponry around the continent was necessary because of the alleged threat posed by Moscow. “Russia carries out aggressive actions, it interferes in other countries’ affairs,” he insisted. The military bloc chief also claimed that Moscow has “invested significantly in military capabilities, including new, advanced nuclear weapons.”

 

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko was taken aback by the remarks. He told RIA Novosti, some hours later, that the comments were a threat to existing peace accords. “If he really said that, it means that for NATO, the collective voice for which the secretary general speaks, the Founding Act of Russia-NATO relations no longer exists.”

 

The Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security, inked between Russia and the US-led bloc, was signed in May 1997. Under the agreement, Moscow and NATO do not consider each other as opponents and should strive to “overcome the remnants of the previous confrontation and rivalry,” as well as work on building mutual trust and cooperative relations.

 

Separately, the document also promised not to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new NATO members, after that date. Since then, 14 states have acceded, including the non-Soviet members of the old Warsaw Pact.

 

Stoltenberg had earlier said that with German chancellor Angela Merkel’s imminent departure from office, there were concerns Berlin could decline purchasing new nuclear-capable aircraft.

 

In response to the NATO chief’s speech, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Moscow would not ignore “major provocations” made by the bloc and EU nations.

 

The potential deployment of nukes even closer to Russia has been a sore point in relations between the two. Lavrov’s deputy, Sergey Ryabkov, last year shared Moscow’s “hopes that the US will stop ‘sharing’ nuclear weapons with its allies, and stop deploying nuclear weapons in countries that do not possess such weapons.” He went on to say that such actions spiral to “destabilization and, in addition, new risks appear.”

 

https://www.rt.com/russia/540774-stoltenberg-statement-potential-conflict/