I really shouldn't be shocked at the disingenuous lies by House Republicans anymore at this point, but here we are. This statement by HASC RM Rogers is a real doozy though, and it actually shows a lot about how things have gotten so f*ed up. So let's dig in. 🧵
Let's start with Rogers claim at this airstrike was 'ordered by President Biden.' That is a lie & Rogers knows it. Here's the CENTCOM Cmdr confirming as much that same day. 2/
Rogers knows how the launch authority for these strikes works and he knows @POTUS didn't personally order it. But he lied because it makes for a better political attack on Biden. He's lying about a military action to serve his political aims. That's beyond dangerous. 3/
This isn't some bankbench Congressman shooting his mouth off, this is the highest ranking Republican on the Armed Services Cmte and possible future chair. His words carry weight and his knowing choice to lie here is dangerous given his powerful position. 4/
But let's keep going. Rogers uses this as a chance to hit @POTUS on his planned use of 'over the horizon' counterterrorism operations following the drawdown in #Afghanistan. Except here's the problem, this wasn't actually 'over the horizon.' 5/
This attack occurred while there were thousands of US forces on the ground in a location in which we have deep intel networks and robust knowledge. The problem with this strike wasn't that the operator was somewhere else, it was that the strike was based on patterns/behavior. 6/
Here's the thing about that it's nothing new. The US has routinely conducted strikes like that, many with the same devastating, horrific consequences for innocent victims. Rogers has NEVER been an opponent of that nor condemned them. Again, his outrage here is purely partisan. 7/
If Rogers was worried about this type of activity, he has had ample opportunity over the last two decades to voice his concerns and criticism. Spoiler Alert: he hasn't. His hypocritical feigned outrage here is all about trying to score political points, nothing more. 8/
Ask yourself a simple question, when under President Trump, Afghan civilians were dying at record numbers as a result of US airstrikes, was Rogers leading the charge to oppose them and denouncing the loss of innocent life? Yeah, didn't think so. 9/
None of this is to say there aren't real concerns about the inevitable loss of life from over the horizon CT strikes in Afghanistan. There are and we should all be outraged about their planned use. 10/
But again, this isn't new. We've been conducting similar attacks in other countries where we haven't had thousands of US forces on the ground for years. That's in fact why we should be outraged, we know how awful the strategy is. See: Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc. 11/
None of that is what Rogers is concerned about & his 'concerns' here should not be treated like they are legitimate. There are real questions to be asked about our drone wars, but they're never going to be genuinely answered unless we stop indulging bad faith bs like this. 12/12
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Saudi govt's decision to spike oil prices to simultaneously help Russia and hurt @POTUS is reigniting a debate in DC about just why the US has such a close relationship with the Saudi monarchy. Gonna start a 🧵to capture some of what's happening in one place.
First up, Rep @Malinowski, who has been a steadfast champion of human rights, is introducing legislation to withdraw all US troops from Saudi and the UAE. Here's his thread explaining why:
A few quick thoughts on no fly zones (NFZ). Just to be clear, no fly zones don't just happen, they're declared and then must be enforced. In this case, enforcing a NFZ over Ukraine would mean shooting down Russian military planes that refused to comply. 1/
There is zero reason to believe that Russian military aircraft would comply, which means someone has to shoot them down. The Ukrainian military is already doing what they can to shoot them down, so you're talking about outside intervention. In this case, presumably US or NATO. 2/
So now you're talking about US and/or NATO partners shooting Russian jets and bombers out of the sky. Which means you're talking about direct US/NATO military engagement with Russia. Russia will fight back. So then what? 3/
I’m truly baffled by the number of folks on this website who seem not to grasp that if you manage to temporarily avert a conventional attack only to then have everyone on the planet die in a nuclear war, you haven’t actually saved the lives you thought you were saving.
It’s not at all that I don’t understand the horror that these Russian convoys portend. I do. It is horrific and terrifying. But it’s also pure delusion to think that US military action to “take it out” would not quickly escalate towards nuclear war.
And before some folks come at me with nonsense about how we can do it without escalating, understand that the “analysts” telling you that are the very same ones who have told us forever we should prolong a nuclear arms race that is what put humanity in this position.
There’s an emerging right wing narrative that somehow @POTUS energy policy is the real culprit on #Ukraine. It’s absurd but nonetheless having to refute absurdity is where we’re at in 2022, so let’s dig in. 🧵
The argument goes like this, Trump had a policy of “energy independence” and Biden is ending that which means that now since Russia exports oil and gas, we’re now strengthening them and Putin. Again, this is absurd in multiple ways. 2/
Let’s start with the fundamental truth that Trump’s energy policy was to double down on fossil fuels and undermine global efforts for a green transition. This isn’t “energy independence” it’s preservation of a global fossil fuel industry that empowers Russia. 3/
If you're a natsec analyst/commenter/purveyor of hot takes I'm asking today that you be careful about how you discuss the confirmation that the Kabul drone strike in fact only killed innocent victims. Quick thread.
It's important to be honest in our commentary that this kind of thing has been common throughout the entirety of America's drone wars. Commenting in this moment in ways that implies this was simply an unusual mistake risks creating a false narrative of this being unusual.
It's also important that we not erase other innocent civilians of drone strikes who happened to have been killed in a strike where we did in fact hit a known target, but nonetheless killed numerous innocent bystanders. Their deaths are no less tragic.
.@POTUS just finished his remarks laying out his plans for a complete drawdown of the US war in Afghanistan. I'll link to the full text once it's live, but I think it's REALLY important for progressives and anti-war advocates to show up in this moment. Let me explain why. 🧵
First, let's start with the obvious. @POTUS is doing what many, many of us have LONG called for. Yes, details matter. Yes, he's also doing a LOT we disagree with. And yes, this all should have happened a decade ago. But he's also still doing what we've called for. 2/
More often than not, we're in the business of pressuring, pushing, and calling out when the President isn't doing what we want. And trust me, I'll be back to that very, very shortly. But right now, he's doing what we want and we should recognize that and applaud it. 3/