Way, oh as i say that it's just starting now, hang on all right, we are good. We are good good afternoon. I want to speak today to the unfolding situation in afghanistan. The developments that have taken place in the last week and the steps we're taking to address the rapidly evolving events, my national security team and i have been closely monitoring the situation on the ground in afghanistan and moving quickly to execute the plans we had put in Place to respond to every constituency, including and contingency, including the rapid collapse, we're seeing now i'll speak more in a moment about the specific steps we're taking.

But i want to remind everyone how we got here and what america's interests are in afghanistan. We went to afghanistan. Almost 20 years ago, with clear goals, get those who attacked us on september 11 2001 and make sure al qaeda could not use afghanistan as a base from which to attack us again. We did that we severely degraded al-qaeda in afghanistan.

We never gave up the hunt for osama bin laden and we got him that was a decade ago. Our mission in afghanistan was never supposed to have been nation-building. It was never supposed to be creating a unified, centralized democracy. Our only vital national interest in afghanistan remains today what has always been preventing a terrorist attack on america's homeland.

I've argued for many years that our mission should be narrowly focused on counterterrorism, not counterinsurgency or nation-building. That's why i opposed the surge when it was proposed in 2009, when i was vice president and that's why, as president i'm adamant, we focus on the threats we face today in 2021, not yesterday's threats. Today, the terrorist threat has metastasized well beyond afghanistan, al-shabaab in somalia, al-qaeda in the arabian peninsula al-nusra in syria, isis attempting to create a caliphate in syria and iraq and establishing affiliates in multiple countries in africa and asia. These threats warrant our attention and our resources.

We conduct effective counterterrorism missions against terrorist groups and multiple countries where we don't have permanent military presence if necessary, we'll do the same in afghanistan. We've developed counterterrorism over the horizon capability that will allow us to keep our eyes firmly fixed on the direct threats to the united states in the region and act quickly and decisively if needed. When i came into office, i inherited a deal that president trump negotiated with the taliban under his agreement. U.S forces would be out of afghanistan by may 1 2021.

Just a little over three months after i took office, u.s forces had already drawn down during the trump administration from roughly 15 500 american forces to 2500 troops in country, and the taliban was at its strongest militarily since 2001.. The choice i had to make, as your president was either to follow through on that agreement or be prepared to go back to fighting the taliban in the middle of the spring fighting season. There would have been no ceasefire. After may 1., there was no agreement protecting our forces.

After may 1., there was no status quo of stability without american casualties. After may 1., there was only a whole reality of either following through on the agreement to withdraw our forces or escalating the conflict and sending thousands more american troops back into combat in afghanistan lurching into the third decade of conflict. I stand squarely behind my decision. After 20 years, i've learned the hard way that there was never a good time to withdraw u.s forces.

That's why we're still there. We were clear-eyed about the risk we planned for every contingency, but i always promised the american people that i will be straight with you. The truth is this: did unfold more quickly than we had anticipated. So what's happened, afghanistan, political leaders gave up and fled the country.

The afghan military collapsed sometime without trying to fight. If anything, the developments of the past week reinforced that ending u.s military involvement in afghanistan now was the right decision. American troops cannot and should not be fighting in a war and dying in a war that afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves. We spent over a trillion dollars, we trained and equipped an afghan military force with some 300 thousand strong, incredibly well-equipped a force.

Larger in size than the militaries of many of our nato allies, we gave them every tool they could need. We paid their salaries provided for the maintenance of their air force, something that taliban doesn't have taliban does not have an air force. We provided close air support. We gave them every chance to determine their own future.

We could not provide them. It was the will to fight for that future. There's some very brave and capable afghan special forces units and soldiers, but if afghanistan is unable to mount any real resistance of the taliban now there is no chance that one year, one more year, five more years or 20 more years, u.s military boots on the ground Would have made any difference. Here's what i believe to my core.

It is wrong to order american troops to step up when afghanistan's own armed forces would not. The political leaders of afghanistan were unable to come together for the good of their people, unable to negotiate for the future of their country. When the chips were down, they would never have done so, while u.s troops remained in afghanistan bearing the brunt of the fighting for them and our true strategic competitors, china and russia would love nothing more than the united states to continue to funnel billions of dollars in Resources and attention and destabilized in afghanistan indefinitely when i hosted president ghani and chairman abdullah at the white house in june and again when i spoke by phone to gani in july, we had very frank conversations. We talked about how afghanistan should prepare to fight their civil wars after the u.s military departed to clean up the corruption in government, so the government could function for the afghan people.

We talked extensively about the need for afghan leaders to unite politically. They fail to do any of that. I also urge them to engage in diplomacy to seek a political settlement with the taliban. This advice was flatly refused.

Mr ghani insisted the afghan forces would fight, but obviously he was wrong. So i'm left again to ask of those who argue that we should stay, how many more generations of america's daughters and sons would. You have me send to fight afghan afghanistan, civil war when afghan troops will not how many more lives american lives? Is it worth? How many endless rows of headstones is arlington national cemetery? I'm clear on my answer. I will not repeat the mistakes we've made in the past mistake of staying and fighting indefinitely in a conflict that is not in the national interest of the united states, of doubling down on a civil war in a foreign country of attempting to remake a country through The endless military deployments of u.s forces - those are the mistakes.

We cannot continue to repeat because we have significant vital interest in the world that we cannot afford to ignore. I also want to acknowledge how painful this is to so many of us. The scenes were seen in afghanistan, they're gut-wrenching, particularly for our veterans, our diplomats, humanitarian workers, for anyone who has spent time on the ground working to support the afghan people for those who have lost loved ones in afghanistan and for americans have fought and served in the Country serve our country in afghanistan. This is deeply deeply personal.

It is for me as well. I've worked on these issues as long as anyone i've been throughout afghanistan during this war, while the war was going on from kabul to kandahar to the kunar valley, i've traveled there on four different occasions, i met with the people. I spoken to the leaders. I spent time with our troops and i came to understand firsthand what was and was not possible in afghanistan.

So now we're focused on what is possible. We will continue to support the afghan people. We will lead with our diplomacy, our international influence and our humanitarian aid. We'll continue to push for regional diplomacy and engagement to prevent violence and instability, we'll continue to speak out for the basic rights of the afghan people of women and girls.

Just as we speak out all over the world, i've been clear: the human rights must be the center of our foreign policy, not the periphery, but the way to do it is not through endless military deployments. It's with our diplomacy, our economic tools and rallying the world to join us. Let me lay out the current mission in afghanistan. I was asked to authorize when i did 6 000 u.s troops to deploy to afghanistan for the purpose of assisting the departure of u.s and allied civilian personnel from afghanistan and to evacuate our afghan allies and vulnerable afghans to safety outside of afghanistan.

Our troops are working to secure the airfield and ensure continued operation of both the civilian and military flights we're taking over air traffic control. We have safely shut down our embassy and transferred our diplomats. Our diplomatic presence is now consolidated at the airport as well. Over the coming days, we intend to transport out thousands of american citizens who've been living and working in afghanistan.

We'll also continue to support the safe departure of civilian personnel. The civilian personnel of our allies, who are still serving in afghanistan, operation allies refugee, which i announced back in july, has already moved 2 000 afghans who are eligible for special immigration, visas and their families to the united states. In the coming days. The us military will provide assistance to move to move more siv eligible afghans and their families out of afghanistan.

We're also expanding refugee access to cover other vulnerable afghans who worked for our embassy, u.s non-government agencies or u.s non-governmental organizations and afghans who otherwise are at great risk in u.s news agencies. I know there are concerns about why we did not begin evacuating afghans. Civilians sooner part of the answer is some of the afghans did not want to leave earlier still hopeful for their country and part of it, because the afghan government and its supporters discouraged us from organizing the mass exodus to avoid triggering, as they said, a crisis of Confidence american troops are performing this mission as professionally and as effectively as they always do, but it is not without risks. As we carry out this departure, we have made it clear to the taliban if they attack our personnel or disrupt our operation.

The u.s presence will be swift and the response will be swift and forceful. We would defend our people with devastating force if necessary. Our current military mission, we shortened time limited scope and focused in its objectives, get our people and our allies as safely as quickly as possible, and once we have completed this mission, we will conclude. Our military withdrawal will end america's longest war after 20, long years of bloodshed.

The events we're seeing now are sadly proof that no amount of military force would ever deliver a stable, united, secure afghanistan, as known in history as the graveyard of empires what's happening now. Could just as easily happen five years ago or 15 years in the future. We have. To be honest.

Our mission in afghanistan is taking many missteps made many missteps over the past two decades. I'm now the fourth american president to preside over war in afghanistan, two democrats and two republicans. I will not pass this responsibly on responsibility onto a fifth president. I will not mislead the american people by claiming that just a little more time in afghanistan will make all the difference.

Nor will i shrink from my share of responsibility for where we are today and how we must move forward from here. I am president of the united states of america and the buck stops with me. I'm deeply saddened by the facts we now face, but i do not regret my decision to end america's war fighting in afghanistan and maintain a laser focus on our counterterrorism missions there and other parts of the world. Our mission to degrade the terrorist threat of al qaeda.

In afghanistan and kill, osama bin laden was a success. Our decades-long effort to overcome centuries of history and permanently change and remake afghanistan was not, and i wrote and believed it never could be. I cannot and will not ask our troops to fight on endlessly another in another country's civil war, taking casualties suffering, life-shattering injuries, leaving families broken by grief and loss. This is not in our national security interest.

It is not what the american people want. It is not what our troops, who have sacrificed so much over the past two decades deserve. I made a commitment to the american people when i ran for president that i would bring america's military involvement in afghanistan to an end. While it's been hard and messy, and yes far from perfect i've honored that commitment.

More importantly, i made a commitment to the brave men and women who served this nation that i wasn't going to ask them to continue to risk their lives in a military action that should have ended long ago. Our leaders did that in vietnam, when i got here as a young man, i will not do it in afghanistan. I know my decision will be criticized, but i would rather take all that criticism than pass this decision on to another president of the united states. Yet another one, a fifth one, because it's the right one: it's the right decision for our people, the right one for our brave service members to risk their lives serving our nation.

That's the right one for america! Thank you! May god protect our troops, our diplomats and all brave americans serving in harm's way? Well, folks, um, i'm sure there are some very raw uh feelings to that, and i am not the person to tell you that you're right or wrong. Obviously i have my opinions on what this does doesn't mean it, it being a good it being a bad decision, and i know you have yours, we might be in alignment, we might agree on some stuff and not other or we might be in complete disagreement. For me, i um you, you can have your own opinions uh. You can share your own opinions with that.

All i ask is just be respectful to another person. Maybe try to understand their viewpoint. I'm not telling you what's right what's wrong and i'm not even telling you to keep your mouth shut like i'm, i'm all about freedom and speech. That's one of my favorite things about being here in the u.s, so i think everyone should be able to talk about it.

My reason for streaming it on this channel is because uh we talk about stocks here and decisions like this, whether you like it or not, will have an impact on the stock market. So that's why i'm just doing it! I'm not doing this for the the fun of it obviously uh. I i think, like i said earlier, there's going to be a lot of raw emotions to this, and even with that, if i'm being honest, i'm afraid to open my mouth about it because as much as i sit here and wish that people didn't just endlessly yammer On about things in the stock market that they don't understand, for example, today we had a person who didn't know what they were talking about. I don't want to be that, but then in the political arena i have uh an okay understanding of what this means and what this doesn't mean.

But i'm no means an expert. So i don't want to say something stupid for the point of just sitting here: blabbering on just to get people to arbitrarily agree with me or disagree with me when i don't feel confident in my my own knowledge with it. But i do want to watch it in terms of the market and through the lens of the market uh. The one thing i would like to touch on uh in terms of that was how he was saying that the us military would have a swift reaction.

If there's any issues of getting the people who we support or our citizens out of the country, um to my understanding of what's going on and the borderline turmoil of currently we're seeing in the country specifically kabul, i don't know how we could do a full-on evacuation Without there being problems um, so with that being said, what i'm telling you not politically right or wrong? What i'm saying pay attention to the market and pay attention for increased volatility in the market, because, if there's the one thing that the stock market doesn't like it is uncertainty also worthwhile to pay attention to this. Not only volatility such as vixx pay attention to the s p, 500, the main indices, the s p, 500, the russell 2000 and the nasdaq 100 also pay attention to the dow see how they react uh for this evening, the futures market. Tomorrow, i would recommend - or my own prediction would be - that there would be increased volatility depending on your opinion, on of how this will or won't play out uh. One way you could look at it is through companies that are commonly employed by the us government for defense, such as boeing lockheed martin raytheon.

If you want to look into those tonight to do your own research due diligence, maybe there's potentially some sort of play there of if they will be used by the government not used by the government. But like i said, and i i guess, i'm almost speaking weird because, like i'm on the line, i'm teetering on a line in a read in arena. I don't have expertise in so i'm not pretending to have expertise in it. But i'm saying with events like this, i can only speak through it through the viewpoint of the stock market and when we've seen things like this, previously, it's led to more volatility and specifically when it comes to things involving the us military, there are the defense contract Companies, like i said just to name three boeing lockheed martin raytheon that might be worthwhile for you to look in if you think that there's some sort of connection there or not, i'm just giving out some suggestions.

Obviously, i'm definitely not some sort of u.s political military expert, i'm not a financial advisor, i'm not a lawyer, i'm not a fortune teller. I don't know how any of this goes, but i do know that there is a good chance. This has an impact on the market at large and as long as this storyline continues and its potential relation to the stock market i'll, let you know at least what i view to be its implications on stocks. But if you're looking at it, if it's politically smart or not um, that's just not where my field of expertise is so i'll.

Let you debate that in uh, not with me. If you want to debate with other people, you're fine, that's! Okay! I think that's a beautiful thing that people can debate things um, but this is like i'm not the particular niche of the internet, where you're gon na have some sort of like long-form agreement, long-form debate. I just uh that that's not specifically what i'm here for so i just wanted to talk to it through the lens of the stock market. I hope you want to at least take that information.

Maybe you want to look up some stuff about historically getting in and out of war with that's under the stock market. Historically, what's that done to individual companies a lot of these companies, these contract companies have been around for a while. So maybe that's a! I guess. A unique spin that potentially you haven't thought of, or maybe you thought about it and you're already light years ahead of me and you've already been doing.

Your research and my uh applause go off to you, but that's what i have for you uh, depending on the time i do have some time so i'll probably do an update, video on amc and jimi later this evening on the channel. So you guys can check that out and then tomorrow i'll be back to my nine to 11 and then two to four schedule. So i will be up there at the crack of dawn to stream. What's going on in the stock market at 9 00 a.m, and until i catch you, then from me and chair best of luck in the markets.