Did Paul Krugman and the New York Times tip off the Taliban about Biden?

Four months ago to the day this piece is written, August 20, the print edition of The New York Times carried an editorial essay by rabid radical leftist Paul Krugman, with what is now this unfortunate title: "What's the Secret of Biden's Success?"  Essentially, Krugman argued that the Democrats are now better salesman of progressive policies than was the Obama camp.  And his column included knee-jerk leftist disdain for Republicans — referring to them as a cult rather than a political party.  (That Krugman is your run-of-the-mill leftist liar is evident from his description of the raging rabid radical Democrats as "basically a mildly center-left party.")

It is, however, his description, in the context of high praise, of Biden that should draw our attention.  It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the Taliban sat up and took notice: "Biden ... benefits from his non-threatening persona and an opposition that has forgotten how to make persuasive policy arguments."  Translation: Biden is a patsy, and his compliant media will make certain that his limp foreign policy withstands effective criticism from the Republicans.

Krugman thus alerted the Taliban that they will face no credible opposition from Washington to their takeover of Afghanistan when the Americans quit Afghanistan in what deserves to be called a U.S. "nakba," to borrow the Palestinian term ("catastrophe") for Israel's victory in 1948.  Ironies abound, not least that our NATO allies are said to be shocked that Biden failed to consult with them on the U.S. departure from Afghanistan.  Didn't the rabid radical left insist that President Trump was undermining NATO?

One of the anti-Trump lies pressed by the left, in the days of the Russia hoax, was that the Russians were sowing "chaos" in the U.S. as part of their scheme to install Trump in the White House.  See, now, how the Biden team, including Trump-loathers defense secretary Lloyd Austin and Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Mark Milley, has sown chaos in Afghanistan.

Questions are now being raised: who is in charge of the federal government?  It can't be Biden.  Early last month, a Yahoo poll reported that most Americans thought Biden officials, not Biden, are in charge of the government.  We haven't heard much from Susan Rice lately.  Could she be Biden's puppeteer?  If so, considering her sorry performance after the Benghazi disaster just before the 2012 presidential election, that would explain the present "nakba" in Afghanistan.

History instructs that Democrats have given us presidents who became enfeebled in office — namely, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was nominated notwithstanding knowledge among party leaders that he was seriously ill.  It would certainly be inexcusable if the Twenty-Fifth Amendment came into play to affect Biden's removal from office, for that would be as good an indication as any that he should not have run for president.

What could possibly save the Biden presidency?  An address to Congress asking for a declaration of war against the Taliban, with a goal of unconditional surrender and the installation of an American proconsul in Afghanistan, along the lines of Gen. Douglas MacArthur's rule in Japan, for more than five years after V-J Day?  Not likely, for that would require Biden to put a halt to the left's demonization of the general these past seven decades.  Is there a President Kamala in our near future?

Image: Adam Jones via Flickr (cropped).

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com