Do you understand what I'm replying from the start? Talking about other (Obama for Trump subject, Karzai for Taliban subject) is not an argument to judge the quality of the other? Better or worst don't make something good or bad.
It is not about comparing 2 subjects, but comparing one with all other (what we call morality, law, expectations, etc.. said otherwise good or bad scale). I said as very first line : Hitler and Stalin (as it is two commonly admitted bad guys) can look good if you remove the bad, it works the same here with whataboutism you are using every single time :
Hitler is responsible for 6 millions civilians death, while Stalin 20 millions. Hitler is a good guy compared to Stalin then.
It doesn't work that way, because to judge good or bad, you have to compare with the whole subject : here humans. As most of them are not responsible for 6 millions death, 6 millions death is a bad thing. There is also the cost/benefit ratio to take in consideration (as killing 2 terrorists to save 20 people is still 2 kill so bad compared to rest of humanity, but yet saving 20 people repay for it. Anyway that's not the subject).
That's the difference between good and better, bad and worst.
You got that right?
So Afghanistan is a shithole, his government is a puppet of USA, we both agree on that. But here again, it doesn't change the fact that giving peace and legitimacy to talibans it a bad thing.