You are right to describe ISIS-K as an extreme off-shoot of the Taliban. With our help, Afghanistan imprisoned many of the Taliban leaders, some of whom were ISIS-K supporters. I am sure they managed to consolidate their plans and relationships while in captivity! You omit to mention that they were all released from prison along with their leader, imprisoned in Pakistan, at our request as part of the Doha agreement, which was meant to end the war. You omit that historically, the American government armed and encouraged Al Qaida, then known as the Mujahideen because Ronald Reagan wanted them to attack the Russians which they did successfully. Also that our main argument for invading Iraq was that they had nuclear weapons which they didn't. With Saudi money, Al Qaida grew and brought about 9/11. This was an operation led by Saudi Arabians. Their version of Islam, an extreme form of Wahhabism was initially encouraged by the British who preferred kings to democracy just as we preferred the Shah of Iran to a democratically elected leader, all of which brought about the present mess.

Your editorial writers want to make this a partisan issue when it shouldn't be. Americans have never been good at geopolitics. During the build up to the Vietnam War, the White House never understood that the traditional enemy of the Vietnamese were the Chinese. The domino theory was a product of the anti-communist hysteria. The Vietnamese were fighting against colonial rule, first the French, then America. Ho Chi Min had a portrait of Washington in his office. 56,000 Americans had to die for that mistake along with millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians. I feel for the Afghan people but if twenty years was not enough time to build a cohesive, politically stable society then how long?

It is unfortunate that the Editorial Board ignores the poor decision making of the previous administration. Biden was carrying out Trump's much touted plan signed in 2020. The Taliban had plenty of time to prepare. But, if we are "badly wounded" by what happened at the airport, as you suggest, then it's a pinprick. The Russian economy is the size of Italy's, their military about as effective as during the Cuba crisis when their ICBMs needed 24 hours to fuel. Their drying tundra is on fire. China with its massive population has to feed itself and keep its population, now consumer orientated, docile. Its central government is panicking. America virtually feeds the world. We have the No.1 economy in the world and our armed forces are bigger than almost every other country's put together. We're exploring Mars and the universe ahead of the rest of the world. Whichever way you argue it, Mutually Assured Destruction has kept the peace since 1945. All countries will have to cope with the climate crisis and we need to do it together. If overall that's failure, please explain what success is?

You do great injustice to America and its armed forces to call the Afghan operation a "disastrous pratfall." We are extracting our forces and those Afghans who supported us. This requires risk and courage and Americans are sacrificing their lives for their country trying to keep people safe. We are stronger not weaker as you suggest because our ideas and our humanity matter more than our military superiority. I seem to remember the British getting out of the US but then going on to defeat Napolean. It's ideas which make America strong. Our internal problems come from right wing extremism, poorly educated people who politically don't know how to distinguish a snake oil salesman from their banker, who don't understand the benefits of vaccination and masks and who, persuaded by false prophets and media operators concerned only with profit, spend their hard earned cash chasing ghosts and silly pipe dreams.

My reaction: FDR - "We have nothing to fear except fear itself."