Saturday evening, we learned that the USA had successfully bombed the three most strategic nuclear sites in Iran.

Sunday morning Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine gave us the details of the incredibly detailed strategic plan for the attack, which included more than 125 U.S. aircraft (seven bombers, refueling aircraft, and fighter jets) as well as submarines. The secrecy behind the planning and execution which included many layers of deception inspires nothing but awe.

But this wasn’t the first time Trump pulled off a successful strategic military initiative with only a small number of planners and impressive global deception. In December of 2018 President Donald J Trump called for the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria because “ISIS had been completely defeated.” And on October 7, President Trump announced the United States would be withdrawing troops from the Syrian border with Turkey, probably not coincidentally exactly where al-Baghdadi was hiding. Not knowing what Trump was really planning, many Republicans were incensed, including many allies of President Trump.

Mitch McConnell said in a statement that "a precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces from Syria would only benefit Russia, Iran, and the Assad regime."

Lindsey Graham called it a “disaster in the making.” And predicted the move “Ensures ISIS comeback.”

Ted Cruz said it would be "DISGRACEFUL if we sat idly by while Turkey slaughters the Kurds, as public reports suggest that Turkish leader Erdogan explicitly told President Trump he intends to do.”

Marco Rubio said in a Twitter post, “If reports about US retreat in #Syria are accurate, the Trump administration has made a grave mistake that will have implications far beyond Syria.”

Why, then, wouldn’t the world believe Trump was serious? He’s always been unpredictable and not necessarily aligned with mainstream Republican thinking, so would a decision contrary to the thinking of other Republicans be too much of a stretch to believe?

Apparently, ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi also believed him. So, he got careless. Then on October 26, 2019 in Syria U.S. forces trapped him and he killed himself in Northwestern Syria. In this operation there were only a handful of planners and fewer than 100 service members were involved.

What we have witnessed from the Trump administration in both terms is international strategic brilliance, not only in the face of evil, but also in the areas of trade, economics, and peace.

Through that lens, let’s take another look at the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal by the Biden Administration. In 2017 at the beginning of President Trump’s first term there were about 10,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. At the end of his first term, it was down to about 2,500. In 2020, the Trump administration negotiated an agreement with the Taliban to withdraw all U.S. forces by May 1 of 2021. By May 1, and against all odds, Trump was no longer the President, but the occupant of the Oval Office at the time apparently thought it was a good idea to abide by the agreement, resulting in the disastrous withdrawal that resulted in 13 U.S. service members being killed, the loss of massive amounts of U.S. military hardware that would end up in the hands of the Taliban, and left the Taliban to take over the country.

Biden and his cronies, as expected, decided to blame Donald Trump. After all, he

"…provided no plans for how to conduct the final withdrawal or to evacuate Americans and Afghan allies… President Biden had committed to ending the war in Afghanistan, but when he came into office he was confronted with difficult realities left to him by the Trump Administration."

Further, the Biden administration, rather than accepting responsibility for its own international diplomacy, simply whined about how “the lack of communication from the Trump administration underscores why effective coordination for the transition process is critical, especially when it comes to complex military operations,"

We have evidence now of how Trump keeps his strategic military planning and secrets under incredibly tight wraps. We also know how nobody in the Biden administration could be trusted with those secrets. The idea that Donald Trump would reveal any secrets of his strategy to Ol’ Joe is akin to David Copperfield revealing the secrets of his magic on CNN.

We must wonder then, was more planning in the works for Afghanistan by the Trump administration and was the promise of withdrawing all our troops by May 1 yet another brilliant deception? I’ve read the agreement with the Taliban and it seems to have more holes than Swiss cheese. For example, the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the government of Afghanistan at the time and our ally, was left out of the agreement. Why?

Second, the agreement itself and almost every paragraph of the agreement starts with “The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” Hmm… that seems curiously “over the top” when most legal agreements simply make reference to something only once.

Further, the agreement repeatedly promises to prevent “any group or individual, including al-Qa’ida, from using the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States and its allies.” I’m not a ccnstitutional scholar, but can the USA enter into a “treaty” with a non-nation over the use of land that the non-nation has no authority over? The government of Afghanistan (at the time) were our allies, yet the Taliban walked all over them on the soil of Afghanistan. A UN report in May/June 2021 outlines:

“It is difficult to predict how this dynamic will play out over the remainder of 2021. The Taliban’s messaging remains uncompromising, and it shows no sign of reducing the level of violence in Afghanistan to facilitate peace negotiations with the Government of Afghanistan and other Afghan stakeholders. The Taliban’s intent appears to be to continue to strengthen its military position as leverage. It believes that it can achieve almost all of its objectives by negotiation or, if necessary, by force. It is reported to be responsible for the great majority of targeted assassinations that have become a feature of the violence in Afghanistan and that appear to be undertaken with the objective of weakening the capacity of the Government and intimidating civil society”

So, was Trump up to something? Was the “agreement” with a non-nation just to make the Taliban complacent (or emboldened) in preparation for another strategic initiative?

We may never know.

Image: AT via Magic Studio