Politics

Last Troops Exit Afghanistan, Ending America’s Longest War

Published

5 years ago

August 30, 2021

A carry team loads a transfer case with the remain of Navy Corpsman Maxton W. Soviak, 22, of Berlin Heights, Ohio, into a transfer vehicle during a casualty return at Dover Air Force Base, Del., Sunday, Aug. 29, 2021, for the 13 service members killed in the suicide bombing in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Aug. 26. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States completed its withdrawal from Afghanistan late Monday, ending America’s longest war and closing a chapter in military history likely to be remembered for colossal failures, unfulfilled promises and a frantic final exit that cost the lives of more than 180 Afghans and 13 U.S. service members, some barely older than the war.

Hours ahead of President Joe Biden’s Tuesday deadline for shutting down a final airlift, and thus ending the U.S. war, Air Force transport planes carried a remaining contingent of troops from Kabul airport. Thousands of troops had spent a harrowing two weeks protecting the airlift of tens of thousands of Afghans, Americans and others seeking to escape a country once again ruled by Taliban militants.

In announcing the completion of the evacuation and war effort. Gen. Frank McKenzie, head of U.S. Central Command, said the last planes took off from Kabul airport at 3:29 p.m. Washington time, or one minute before midnight in Kabul. He said a number of American citizens, likely numbering in “the very low hundreds,” were left behind, and that he believes they will still be able to leave the country.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken put the number of Americans left behind at under 200, “likely closer to 100,” and said the State Department would keep working to get them out. He praised the military-led evacuation as heroic and historic and said the U.S. diplomatic presence would shift to Doha, Qatar.

Biden said military commanders unanimously favored ending the airlift, not extending it. He said he asked Blinken to coordinate with international partners in holding the Taliban to their promise of safe passage for Americans and others who want to leave in the days ahead.

The airport had become a U.S.-controlled island, a last stand in a 20-year war that claimed more than 2,400 American lives.

The closing hours of the evacuation were marked by extraordinary drama. American troops faced the daunting task of getting final evacuees onto planes while also getting themselves and some of their equipment out, even as they monitored repeated threats — and at least two actual attacks — by the Islamic State group’s Afghanistan affiliate. A suicide bombing on Aug. 26 killed 13 American service members and some 169 Afghans.

The final pullout fulfilled Biden’s pledge to end what he called a “forever war” that began in response to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that killed nearly 3,000 people in New York, Washington and rural Pennsylvania. His decision, announced in April, reflected a national weariness of the Afghanistan conflict. Now he faces criticism at home and abroad, not so much for ending the war as for his handling of a final evacuation that unfolded in chaos and raised doubts about U.S. credibility.

The U.S. war effort at times seemed to grind on with no endgame in mind, little hope for victory and minimal care by Congress for the way tens of billions of dollars were spent for two decades. The human cost piled up — tens of thousands of Americans injured in addition to the dead.

More than 1,100 troops from coalition countries and more than 100,000 Afghan forces and civilians died, according to Brown University’s Costs of War project.

In Biden’s view the war could have ended 10 years ago with the U.S. killing of Osama bin Laden, whose al-Qaida extremist network planned and executed the 9/11 plot from an Afghanistan sanctuary. Al-Qaida has been vastly diminished, preventing it thus far from again attacking the United States.

Congressional committees, whose interest in the war waned over the years, are expected to hold public hearings on what went wrong in the final months of the U.S. withdrawal. Why, for example, did the administration not begin earlier the evacuation of American citizens as well as Afghans who had helped the U.S. war effort and felt vulnerable to retribution by the Taliban?

It was not supposed to end this way. The administration’s plan, after declaring its intention to withdraw all combat troops, was to keep the U.S. Embassy in Kabul open, protected by a force of about 650 U.S. troops, including a contingent that would secure the airport along with partner countries. Washington planned to give the now-defunct Afghan government billions more to prop up its army.

Biden now faces doubts about his plan to prevent al-Qaida from regenerating in Afghanistan and of suppressing threats posed by other extremist groups such as the Islamic State group’s Afghanistan affiliate. The Taliban are enemies of the Islamic State group but retain links to a diminished al-Qaida.

The final U.S. exit included the withdrawal of its diplomats, although the State Department has left open the possibility of resuming some level of diplomacy with the Taliban depending on how they conduct themselves in establishing a government and adhering to international pleas for the protection of human rights.

The speed with which the Taliban captured Kabul on Aug. 15 caught the Biden administration by surprise. It forced the U.S. to empty its embassy and frantically accelerate an evacuation effort that featured an extraordinary airlift executed mainly by the U.S. Air Force, with American ground forces protecting the airfield. The airlift began in such chaos that a number of Afghans died on the airfield, including at least one who attempted to cling to the airframe of a C-17 transport plane as it sped down the runway.

By the evacuation’s conclusion, well over 100,000 people, mostly Afghans, had been flown to safety. The dangers of carrying out such a mission came into tragic focus last week when the suicide bomber struck outside an airport gate.

Speaking shortly after that attack, Biden stuck to his view that ending the war was the right move. He said it was past time for the United States to focus on threats emanating from elsewhere in the world.

“Ladies and gentlemen,” he said, “it was time to end a 20-year war.”

The war’s start was an echo of a promise President George W. Bush made while standing atop of the rubble in New York City three days after hijacked airliners slammed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center.

“The people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!” he declared through a bullhorn.

Less than a month later, on Oct. 7, Bush launched the war. The Taliban’s forces were overwhelmed and Kabul fell in a matter of weeks. A U.S.-installed government led by Hamid Karzai took over and bin Laden and his al-Qaida cohort escaped across the border into Pakistan.

The initial plan was to extinguish bin Laden’s al-Qaida, which had used Afghanistan as a staging base for its attack on the United States. The grander ambition was to fight a “Global War on Terrorism” based on the belief that military force could somehow defeat Islamic extremism. Afghanistan was but the first round of that fight. Bush chose to make Iraq the next, invading in 2003 and getting mired in an even deadlier conflict that made Afghanistan a secondary priority until Barack Obama assumed the White House in 2009 and later that year decided to escalate in Afghanistan.

Obama pushed U.S. troop levels to 100,000, but the war dragged on though bin Laden was killed in Pakistan in 2011.

When Donald Trump entered the White House in 2017 he wanted to withdraw from Afghanistan but was persuaded not only to stay but to add several thousand U.S. troops and escalate attacks on the Taliban. Two years later his administration was looking for a deal with the Taliban, and in February 2020 the two sides signed an agreement that called for a complete U.S. withdrawal by May 2021. In exchange, the Taliban made a number of promises including a pledge not to attack U.S. troops.

Biden weighed advice from members of his national security team who argued for retaining the 2,500 troops who were in Afghanistan by the time he took office in January. But in mid-April he announced his decision to fully withdraw.

The Taliban pushed an offensive that by early August toppled key cities, including provincial capitals. The Afghan army largely collapsed, sometimes surrendering rather than taking a final stand, and shortly after President Ashraf Ghani fled the capital, the Taliban rolled into Kabul and assumed control on Aug. 15.

Some parts of the country modernized during the U.S. war years, and life for many Afghans, especially women and girls, improved measurably. But Afghanistan remains a tragedy, poor, unstable and with many of its people fearing a return to the brutality the country endured when the Taliban ruled from 1996 to 2001.

The U.S. failures were numerous. It degraded but never defeated the Taliban and ultimately failed to build an Afghan military that could hold off the insurgents, despite $83 billion in U.S. spending to train and equip the army.

Up Next

AP Sources: Intel Shows Extremists to Attend Capitol Rally

Don't Miss

State Representative Marie Woodson Travels to Haiti with Envoy to Address Political and Humanitarian Crisis in the Nation

Click to comment

Florida

Civil Rights Group Honors Nobel Peace Prize Winner Navi Pillay, Highlights Florida’s Trayvon Martin Connection

Published

1 day ago

October 13, 2026

FNN NEWS

FCRA representatives address reporters beside a “Justice for Trayvon” sign outside Florida’s regional offices in Orlando.

The Florida Civil Rights Association (FCRA) held a press conference outside the State of Florida’s regional offices in Orlando in 2012, calling on then-Gov. Rick Scott to take action following Trayvon Martin’s killing. Photo by FCRA

The Orlando-based civil rights association recalls supporting the former U.N. human rights chief’s 2012 call for an investigation into the teenager’s killing in Sanford.

ORLANDO, Fla. (FNN) — The Florida Civil Rights Association is congratulating 2026 Nobel Peace Prize winner Navanethem “Navi” Pillay, recalling her call for an investigation into Trayvon Martin’s killing and the international attention it brought to questions of racial equality and justice in Florida.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee announced Pillay’s selection Oct. 9 for her efforts to promote peace and international law. The South African jurist served as United Nations high commissioner for human rights from 2008 to 2014 and helped shape landmark international court decisions.

In a press release, FCRA President J. Willie David III said Pillay’s intervention connected a Florida family’s demand for answers to a broader concern for human rights.

“Pillay’s call for an investigation reinforced that a family’s demand for justice in Sanford mattered beyond Florida and the United States,” David said.
“We welcomed her intervention in 2012 because families deserve answers and the law must protect everyone equally.”

UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay (Photo credit: UN Photo/Jean-Marc Ferre)

FCRA recalls its response in 2012

Martin, an unarmed Black 17-year-old, was fatally shot by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman on Feb. 26, 2012, in Sanford, northeast of Orlando.

In April 2012, Pillay called for an immediate investigation into the killing as the case drew international attention and scrutiny of Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.

FCRA welcomed that call. The association’s current release cites an April 7, 2012, West Orlando News report that quoted David discussing the case’s global impact.

“The shooting death of Trayvon Martin and Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law have created a worldwide movement that calls into question how justice is delivered to victims of color,” David said at the time, according to the release.

FCRA describes the activism surrounding Martin’s death as a defining moment that galvanized a new generation of civil rights advocates.

Zimmerman was charged with second-degree murder and acquitted in July 2013. In February 2015, the U.S. Justice Department closed its separate investigation, finding insufficient evidence to pursue federal criminal civil rights charges.

Why Florida’s case drew global scrutiny

The Florida connection shows how the handling of a local killing can draw international scrutiny over racial discrimination, access to justice and the protection of human rights.

Pillay’s intervention brought those concerns into the international discussion surrounding Martin’s death. In September 2013, U.N. human rights experts also urged the United States to complete its civil rights investigation and examine concerns about racial profiling.

The significance lies in human rights oversight: how public institutions investigate deaths and provide equal treatment can attract attention beyond national borders. Pillay’s call was an appeal for investigation, rather than an international court judgment about Zimmerman’s guilt or Florida’s compliance with international law.

For FCRA, that connection remains relevant to how Florida leaders evaluate laws and practices affecting the communities they serve.

Pillay’s record in international justice

Pillay challenged discrimination under apartheid before serving on South Africa’s High Court, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Criminal Court.

At the Rwanda tribunal, she was part of the judicial panel that established that rape and sexual violence can constitute acts of genocide, a landmark development in international criminal law.

David said honoring that career should also encourage accountability at home.

“Her Nobel Peace Prize recognizes a career built on confronting injustice through the rule of law,” he said. “Honoring that work means demanding transparent investigations and equal protection here at home. Rights belong to everyone.”

A renewed call for fairness in Florida

FCRA urged Florida leaders to safeguard impartial investigations, examine whether Stand Your Ground and other laws are applied fairly, and address policies or practices that produce discriminatory outcomes.

Founded in 2005, the association advocates for civil rights, human rights and civil liberties through education, advocacy and accountability. Its statement links Pillay’s international recognition to a continuing demand for fairness and human dignity in Florida.

Florida

Florida Governor Candidates: Donalds Spent Longer as a Democrat; Jolly Reports Longer Republican History

Published

4 days ago

October 11, 2026

FNN NEWS

Byron Donalds, left, and David Jolly, right, pictured in separate portraits with American flags behind them.

Party changes and congressional votes offer a closer look at both candidates’ records on issues affecting Black Americans.

ORLANDO, Fla. (FNN) — Republican Byron Donalds spent nearly seven years as a registered Democrat—longer than Democrat David Jolly’s approximately 18 months in the party. Jolly, however, reports having spent 25 years as a Republican, exceeding Donalds’ approximately 16½ years.

The two major-party candidates for Florida governor have political histories that cross party lines. Their congressional votes offer another basis for scrutiny: Jolly supported repealing the Affordable Care Act, while Donalds opposed major voting-rights and police-accountability proposals. Both also supported other legislation relevant to Black communities.

Why This Article Matters to Voters

Voters can examine previous decisions in public office alongside campaign promises. Party affiliation identifies a political association; legislative records show how candidates acted on specific proposals.

The measures examined here concern health insurance, employment opportunities, voting discrimination, police accountability and racial violence. These issues affect African Americans and the wider electorate, making the candidates’ records relevant to voters deciding who should lead Florida.

Who Spent Longer in Each Party?

Donalds was registered as a Democrat in Collier County from April 2003 until March 2010, according to Florida Politics. He then became a Republican. Jolly left the Republican Party in September 2018, became an unaffiliated voter and registered as a Democrat in April 2025.

Candidate	Time as a Democrat	Time as a Republican
Byron Donalds	Approximately 6 years, 11 months, April 2003–March 2010	Approximately 16 years, 7 months, March 2010–October 2026
David Jolly	Approximately 1 year, 6 months, April 2025–October 2026	25 years, according to his account, before leaving in September 2018

Durations are approximate as of Oct. 11, 2026. Jolly’s 25-year Republican history was reported by WUSF; his original Republican registration date was not independently verified for this comparison.

Donalds’ documented Democratic registration exceeds Jolly’s by approximately five years and five months. Jolly’s stated Republican history exceeds Donalds’ by approximately eight years.

Jolly’s Defeat, Party Change and Return to Electoral Politics

Jolly lost his 2016 congressional reelection bid as a Republican to Democrat Charlie Crist in Florida’s 13th Congressional District. Published election results show Crist received 184,693 votes to Jolly’s 171,149, winning by 13,544 votes.

Crist, a former Republican governor, had already moved from Republican to independent to Democrat. Jolly later followed the same sequence, although that does not establish identical motivations. Reporting republished on Jolly’s campaign website described his departure from the Republican Party as a response to its direction under Donald Trump.

Jolly declined to endorse Trump in 2016, according to Sunshine State News. PolitiFact subsequently found that a Democratic campaign advertisement portraying Jolly as a Trump ally was inaccurate.

After considering but declining another congressional run in 2018, as reported by Roll Call, Jolly returned to electoral politics with his governor campaign. He registered as a Democrat in April 2025, roughly six weeks before announcing his candidacy June 5—more than a year before the 2026 election.

Different Congressional Terms, Relevant Policy Questions

Official congressional biographies show that Jolly served in Congress from March 2014 through Jan. 3, 2017, during President Barack Obama’s administration. His service ended before Trump’s first inauguration. Donalds entered Congress in January 2021 after serving in the Florida House from 2016 through 2020.

Their congressional terms did not overlap, so this comparison examines different bills rather than votes they cast together.

Both served as Republicans during the votes examined below. Their subsequent or previous party affiliations do not change those legislative records.

Jolly Supported ACA Repeal and Workforce Training

Official U.S. House Clerk records show that Jolly voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act on Feb. 3, 2015. The proposal did not become law, but his vote supported removing a framework that expanded health insurance access for African Americans.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the uninsured rate among nonelderly Black Americans fell from 20.9% in 2010 to 10.8% in 2022 following implementation of the ACA’s coverage provisions. Those gains make health coverage relevant to examining repeal proposals, without establishing that Jolly’s unsuccessful repeal vote caused anyone to lose insurance.

House Clerk records also show that Jolly supported the final House agreement to the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act on July 9, 2014. The legislation supported training and employment services for people facing employment barriers, including eligible Black workers and young people. Its programs serve people across racial groups, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.

Donalds Opposed Voting-Rights and Policing Bills, Backed Antilynching Measure

House Clerk records show that Donalds voted against the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act on Aug. 24, 2021. The proposal sought stronger federal safeguards against racial discrimination in voting, including renewed requirements for certain jurisdictions to obtain approval before changing election practices.

On March 3, 2021, Donalds voted against the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act. The congressional bill summary describes proposed protections against racial profiling and changes to police accountability.

In a statement published by his congressional office, Donalds defended his opposition by arguing that the measure would defund and dismantle policing. That was his characterization of the proposal, whose provisions included measures addressing racial profiling and constitutional violations by law enforcement.

Donalds voted for the Emmett Till Antilynching Act on Feb. 28, 2022, according to House Clerk records, supporting federal legislation addressing lynching through hate-crime law—a measure with particular historical significance for African Americans.

What Voters Can Assess

These selected votes document Jolly’s support for ACA repeal and workforce opportunities, and Donalds’ opposition to major voting-rights and policing proposals alongside support for antilynching legislation.

They do not establish discriminatory intent or determine whose entire record benefited African Americans more. That would require a broader review of policies and measurable outcomes, including Donalds’ Florida legislative record.

Donalds spent longer as a documented registered Democrat, while Jolly reports a longer Republican history. Both cast the congressional votes examined here as Republicans.

Either Major-Party Candidate Would Bring a Republican History

If either of the two major-party candidates wins, Florida’s next governor will bring a substantial Republican history to office—Donalds as a current Republican and Jolly as a former Republican congressman now running as a Democrat. Voters can weigh those histories alongside their legislative records, current positions and plans for Florida.

Central Florida News

Commissioner Uribe Announces New Date for Hispanic Heritage Festival Due to Weather

Published

6 days ago

October 9, 2026

FNN NEWS

ORLANDO, Fla. (FNN) — Commissioner Uribe announced that the Hispanic Heritage Festival has been rescheduled due to weather conditions. The event will now take place Saturday, Oct. 24, 2026, from 9 a.m. to noon at Cypress Grove Park, 290 Holden Ave., Orlando.

The festival will celebrate the rich history, cultures, traditions and contributions of Hispanic and Latino communities through live music, dance performances, food and community resources.

Scheduled highlights include:

Live music by youth orchestra The Nucleus Orchestral.
Dance performances featuring Maria Saavedra of FusionFest with Huellas de Colombia, Unidos for Ecuador and Mexico Dansa.
Food from Zaza.
Community resources from 311 and other participants.

Join Commissioner Uribe and the community for a morning celebrating Hispanic and Latino heritage.

NEW DATE: Saturday, Oct. 24, 2026
TIME: 9 a.m. to noon
LOCATION: Cypress Grove Park
ADDRESS: 290 Holden Ave., Orlando, FL 32839