Hegseth orders Pentagon to launch comprehensive review into 'catastrophic' 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is instructing the Pentagon to launch a comprehensive review into the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.
In 2021, then-President Joe Biden removed U.S. troops from Afghanistan, following up on existing plans from the first Trump administration in 2020 with Taliban leaders to end the war in the region. Biden faced scrutiny after the withdrawal as the Taliban quickly took over Afghanistan again and more than a dozen U.S. service members died supporting evacuation efforts.
Thirteen U.S. service members were killed during the withdrawal process due to a suicide bombing at Abbey Gate, outside the then-Hamid Karzai International Airport, as the Taliban quickly seized control of Kabul.
Trump Pushes To Recover 'Billions Of Dollars' Of Military Equipment Left Behind In Afghanistan Withdrawal
"The Department of Defense has an obligation, both to the American people and to the warfighters who sacrificed their youth in Afghanistan, to get to the facts," Hegseth said in a Tuesday memo. "This remains an important step toward regaining faith and trust with the American people and all those who wear the uniform and is prudent based on the number of casualties and equipment lost during the execution of this withdrawal operation."
Hegseth said the Pentagon has already completed a review into the "catastrophic" withdrawal and concluded that a full investigation is necessary to provide a complete picture of the event and to hold those responsible accountable.
Read On The Fox News App
As a result, Hegseth is directing Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell to spearhead a special review panel to evaluate previous investigations and to "analyze the decision-making that led to one of America's darkest and deadliest international moments."
"This team will ensure ACCOUNTABILITY to the American people and the warfighters of our great Nation," Hegseth wrote in the memo.
On Aug. 26, 2021, an ISIS-K suicide bomber who the Taliban released earlier that month detonated his body-worn improvised explosive device at Abbey Gate outside Kabul's airport, according to a U.S. Army Central Command investigation released in 2024. In addition to the 13 U.S. service members who were killed, approximately 170 Afghan civilians also died.
House Gop Releases Scathing Report On Biden's Withdrawal From Afghanistan
The Biden administration's White House released a report in 2023 evaluating the Afghanistan withdrawal, which stated that top intelligence officials did not accurately assess how quickly the Taliban would retake control of Kabul.
Republicans on the House Foreign Affairs Committee conducted their own investigation into the withdrawal, and the U.S. military produced at least two reports on the matter.
The Biden administration "prioritized the optics of the withdrawal over the security of U.S. personnel on the ground," according to the House Foreign Affairs Committee report.
"For that reason, they failed to plan for all contingencies, including a noncombatant evacuation operation (NEO) and refused to order a NEO until after the Taliban had already entered Kabul," the report said.
Additionally, the report said the "failure" to adequately establish evacuation plans led to an unsafe environment at the airport and put the lives of service members and State Department officials at risk.
In February, Trump told reporters that he wouldn't instruct Hegseth on what actions the Pentagon should take when asked if he was considering firing military leaders who oversaw the withdrawal. But Trump said he would "fire every single one of them."
The commander of U.S. Central Command in 2021, retired Marine Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr., in 2024 took full ownership of the loss of U.S. troops that day.
"I was the overall commander, and I and I alone bear full military responsibility for what happened at Abbey Gate," McKenzie told the House Foreign Affairs Committee in March 2024.
Now-retired Army Gen. Mark Milley, the former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told lawmakers at the same hearing that he believed the evacuation should have occurred sooner and that multiple factors contributed to failures in the withdrawal. Both McKenzie and Milley told lawmakers they advised Biden to keep some U.S. troops in Afghanistan after pulling out most U.S. forces.
"The outcome in Afghanistan was the result of many decisions from many years of war," Milley told lawmakers. "Like any complex phenomena, there was no single causal factor that determined the outcome."
Fox News' Liz Friden contributed to this report.Original article source: Hegseth orders Pentagon to launch comprehensive review into 'catastrophic' 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
8 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Trump is no man of steel
President Donald Trump is hardly the first chief executive to try to save the U.S. steel industry. Going back to George W. Bush's presidency, the U.S. government has imposed multiple rounds of tariffs meant to protect an iconic sector that built American heavy industry starting in the 19th century. The levies have been bad for the United States' 21st-century economy. But Trump wants to go even bigger, imposing on Wednesday a whopping 50 percent tariff on imported steel and aluminum.
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Belated Republican Objections to the One Big Beautiful Bill Glide Over Its Blatant Fiscal Irresponsibility
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which the House of Representatives narrowly approved early in the morning on Thursday, May 22, lives up to its name in at least one respect: It is big, weighing in at 1,037 pages and nearly 200,000 words. Since the bill's final text was not available until 10:40 p.m. on Wednesday, about eight hours before it passed by a single-vote margin shortly before 7 a.m. the next day, it would not be surprising if bleary-eyed legislators overlooked some of its nuances in their hurry to deliver the package that President Donald Trump demanded. As Reason's Liz Wolfe notes, at least two Republicans—Reps. Mike Flood (R–Neb.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R–Ga.)—have publicly admitted as much, saying they missed objectionable parts of the bill when they voted for it. If Flood and Greene had voted no, it would have been enough to change the outcome. Furthermore, it seems safe to assume that at least some of their colleagues had similar regrets but are too embarrassed to admit that they failed to exercise the minimum diligence that should be expected from members of Congress. But the complaints from Flood and Greene are notable for another reason: They have nothing to do with the bill's blatant fiscal irresponsibility, the main flaw highlighted by critics such as Rep. Thomas Massie (R–Ky.), Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.), and Elon Musk, who on Tuesday condemned "this massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill" as "a disgusting abomination." That much was clear prior to the House vote. As Reason's Eric Boehm noted the day before Flood and Greene gave their crucial assent to the bill, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that it would add $2.3 trillion to the national debt over 10 years—an estimate that the CBO upped to $2.4 trillion this week. Boehm added that "other assessments of the bill" by the Yale Budget Lab (originally published on May 16) and the Penn Wharton Budget Project (published three days later) estimated that it would add "more than $3 trillion" to the debt. Those are low-ball estimates, based on the unrealistic assumption that Congress will allow Trump-favored tax cuts to lapse toward the end of that period. If "temporary provisions in the bill are made permanent," Boehm reported, the Yale Budget Lab estimated that it would trigger $5 trillion in new borrowing. The national debt currently exceeds $35 trillion, including about $29 trillion in debt held by the public, which is about the size of the entire U.S. economy. Last March, Trump promised to do something about that. "In the near future," he told Congress, "I want to do what has not been done in 24 years—balance the federal budget. We're gonna balance it." But the glaring gap between that promise and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act did not faze Flood or Greene, whose concerns are much narrower. Flood belatedly objected to a provision on page 541 of the bill that would limit the authority of federal judges to "enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order." While that would be convenient for an administration that seems bent on defying court orders, it raises clear rule-of-law concerns, and it is not obviously related to taxes or spending, the bill's ostensible subjects. But as The New York Times notes, this provision "was advanced out of committee three weeks before" the House approved the bill. At a town hall in Nebraska last week, Flood nevertheless admitted that the provision was "unknown to me when I voted for the bill." Although that confession provoked "boos from the crowd," Flood thought he should get points for candor, saying, "I am not going to hide the truth." Greene, for her part, was upset about a provision on page 278 of the bill that would impose a 10-year moratorium on local and state regulation of artificial intelligence. "Full transparency, I did not know about this section," Greene admitted in an X post on Tuesday. "I am adamantly OPPOSED to this [because] it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there." Why did Greene miss that vote-changing detail? "You know," she told the Times, "it's hard to read over 1,000 pages when things keep changing up to the last minute before we voted on it." But the deal-breaking provision that Greene overlooked was not one of the things that changed at the last minute: There it is on page 491 of a report that the House Budget Committee distributed on May 20, two days before the vote on the bill. "PRO TIP," Rep. Ted Lieu (D–Calif.) wrote in response to Greene's confession. "It's helpful to read stuff before voting on it." Many other commenters joined Lieu in mocking Greene's dereliction of duty. To be fair, however, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was a lot to digest even with two days' notice. It combines the extension of income tax cuts enacted in 2017 with sundry new tax provisions, increases in spending on the military and border control, cuts to welfare programs such as Medicare, and various changes that have little or nothing to do with fiscal policy, including the provisions that bother Flood and Greene. The White House counts "50 Wins in the One Big Beautiful Bill," and its list is not exhaustive. The challenge of understanding what the bill would do was magnified by Trump's unremitting pressure and House Speaker Mike Johnson's insistence on a vote prior to Memorial Day, which left legislators and their staffs scrambling to read and comprehend the final version in the middle of the night. Although "major provisions of the big beautiful bill are still being negotiated and written," Massie noted on May 21, "we are being told we will vote on it today. Shouldn't we take more than a few hours to read a bill this big and this consequential?" That wait-and-hurry-up approach has long been par for the course with Congress, where must-pass legislation succeeds by sheer volume and artificial haste, cramming together unrelated provisions that would not have passed on their own. Even if you have trouble mustering sympathy for legislators like Flood and Greene, who by their own account fell down on their jobs, this is no way to make law. Still, it is telling that the post-passage dissents do not even touch upon the looming fiscal crisis that Trump and Congress seem determined to ignore. The post Belated Republican Objections to the One Big Beautiful Bill Glide Over Its Blatant Fiscal Irresponsibility appeared first on
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gay rights icon Harvey Milk's legacy slighted by decision to rename Navy ship
American gay rights activist Harvey Milk was known for keeping his face and name on the front pages of San Francisco's newspapers. Now, as Pride Month begins, the Trump administration is set to take the almost unprecedented action of stripping his name from a Navy ship, a defense official told CNN. The order to rename the oiler ship USNS Harvey Milk – christened four years ago – is unusual but is in line with the White House mandate to reverse a number of military initiatives by Democratic presidents. The move also comes amid the administration's broader efforts to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in government and education, as well as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's promise to 'revive the warrior ethos' in the military. Milk was posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2009. His legacy as one of the first openly gay politicians elected to office in the US – and the first openly gay official elected in California – was burnished in history with an Oscar-winning biopic performance from Sean Penn. Before Milk served as a supervisor in San Francisco, the politician followed in the footsteps of his parents and served in the Navy. His service as a stateside diving instructor during the Korean War was cut short after four years when his Navy supervisors caught him at a park popular for gay men and questioned him about his sexual orientation. Decades before the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy prohibited the military from actively investigating its members' sexuality, Milk was outed and forced to resign with an 'other than honorable discharge' and the rank of lieutenant junior grade. Gay service members were not allowed to serve openly in the US until 2011. Milk later set up shop in the Castro neighborhood in San Francisco – the country's most famous 'gayborhood' – where he helped start the Castro Village Association, one of the first predominantly LGBTQ-owned business groups in the country. In 1977, he was elected to San Francisco's Board of Supervisors after years running his political operation from his camera store in the Castro, where stacks of campaign posters competed for space with stacks of 35mm film. While serving as a city supervisor, Milk introduced legislation to protect the gay community, including a gay rights ordinance in 1978 to ban discrimination against LGBTQ people in housing or employment. He and other activists also succeeded in striking down Proposition 6, which would have mandated the firing of gay or lesbian teachers in California. Milk was a popular figure in San Francisco, but his actions were also controversial at times. Milk fervently encouraged gay people not to be secretive about their lives, even with hostile or unsupportive family members. 'We are coming out to tell the truths about gays, for I am tired of the conspiracy of silence, so I'm going to talk about it,' he said at a 1978 gay pride march. 'And I want you to talk about it.' Milk is believed to have been one of the people behind the forced media outing of Oliver Sipple, a friend and fellow veteran who was credited with saving the life of President Gerald Ford when he grabbed the arm of would-be assassin Sara Jane Moore just as she was firing her second shot in 1975. Milk's biographer Randy Shilts told The Washington Post the politician 'wanted Sipple's homosexuality made public' because it was an opportunity for the gay community to be seen in a positive light. 'For once we can show that gays do heroic things,' he told Shilts. Sipple, who had not come out to his parents and didn't want his sexuality revealed, unsuccessfully sued media organizations that reported on it, according to The Washington Post. Less than a year after Milk became a city supervisor, he and San Francisco Mayor George Moscone were shot to death in the San Francisco City Hall by former fellow city supervisor Dan White over a job dispute. Investigators determined that White was motivated by a political dispute rather than anti-gay animus. But a jury's decision to convict White of manslaughter rather than murder shocked the gay community and prompted rioting at City Hall, the San Francisco Examiner reported. White argued in the trial that he was not fully responsible for the killings because he was depressed and acted in 'the heat of passion.' White was sentenced to seven years in prison. Milk's legacy has never faded in San Francisco, where his bust now sits in City Hall and a school in the Castro is named after him. Milk, who told friends and loved ones he knew he was in danger of being assassinated, according to the Harvey Milk Foundation, hoped his death would inspire the cause he worked for. 'If a bullet should enter my brain, let that bullet destroy every closet door,' Milk said in an audio message accompanying his will. The USNS Harvey Milk is part of a class of oilers that were designated to be named for 'people who fought for civil rights and human rights.' Some of those namesakes are people who never served in the military, including congressman and civil rights icon John Lewis and women's voting rights advocate Lucy Stone. The future of those other honors is unclear. A Navy webpage marking the beginning of construction on the USNS Thurgood Marshall has been deleted. Although much of the administration's LGBTQ rollback has been focused on the transgender community – the federal government even removed the 'T' from the abbreviation – it has also cracked down on affinity groups and barred the flying of the Pride flag at any US embassy or consulate. The administration also formally declined to recognize Pride Month, instead referring to June as 'Title IX Month,' referencing the civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools. The White House has cited the law in its ban on transgender women participating in women's sports. Despite the decision falling in line with White House policy, Rep. Nancy Pelosi – whose San Francisco district includes the Castro – said erasing Milk from the military is particularly insulting. 'Our military is the most powerful in the world – but this spiteful move does not strengthen our national security or the 'warrior' ethos,' Pelosi said in a statement.'Instead, it is a surrender of a fundamental American value: to honor the legacy of those who worked to build a better country.' CNN's Natasha Bertrand and Nicquel Terry Ellis contributed to this report.
