US and Nato withdrawal from Afghanistan...- threadbanned users in OP

Gatling

Labaik wrote: »

Defeats of the Soviet Union and The U.S with outdated weapons will only strengthen the resolve of the Afghans and the Taliban. A shambolic decision by the US to invade and it cost the lives blood of many of there servicemen for absolutely nothing.

If Russia stayed out if wouldn't have happened in the first place sure it wouldn't.

They didn't defeat America , America just didn't have any real plan for the medium to longer terms .

kildare lad

riffmongous wrote: »

Exactly, the role of Pakistan in all of this can't be ignored. Unless they are dealt with the Taliban will never be stopped. It's also worth bearing in mind that during the time when the Taliban were in charge they never actually controlled the entire country, the northern regions with their different ethnic mix and distance from Pakistan were controlled by different 'warlords' and managed to resistance the Taliban without much foreign support, at least up until shortly before 9/11

From what I've read the Taliban don't want a global sharia caliphate like Isis do . I wouldn't be as worried about the Taliban commiting attacks in Europe as the likes of Isis would and do . They just want to rule their own area under sharia law and I think they don't wanna go down that road again of letting the likes of Al Queda who had camps and bases there . I don't know was that a way of thanks to bin laden for is help with money from Saudi during the Russian war. Your right though between warlords and tribal areas you can't really say that Afghanistan is a true country the way we see it . I'd hate to be living in kabul after having a little taste of freedom and now know the yanks are pulling out and the Taliban are on the loose .

Gatling

kildare lad wrote: »

It looks like they're working their way there . I'm sure there'll be a lot more fighting as they get nearer . I'm sure there's plenty of people that don't wanna end up in the talibans hand . We'll probably see a mass migrantion again into Europe . Will the Americans help out the afghan government with drone and airstrikes if they do come near kabul ?? Whatever happens it look likes it'll be back to square one after tens of thousands of deaths and trillions down the drain. I think a few in the white house wanted bin laden to escape so the neocons could push the axis of evil crap in the middle east but iraq didn't turn out as easy as they thought. How George bush , Blair and Co have gotten away with the crap they've caused is beyond me

Will the Taliban be able to manage heavy losses , every late spring into summer is fighting season fighters and supplies come across the border from Pakistan ,if the us and NATO keep up drone strikes and other air cover they could still do a lot of damage to the Taliban ,
But that's only if the will is there to do so ,

kildare lad

Gatling wrote: »

Will the Taliban be able to manage heavy losses , every late spring into summer is fighting season fighters and supplies come across the border from Pakistan ,if the us and NATO keep up drone strikes and other air cover they could still do a lot of damage to the Taliban ,
But that's only if the will is there to do so ,

That's the thing , there's a lot of unknowns , but obama droned the hell out of Afghanistan and now the Taliban are strong as ever . They can play the long game . They don't live in a society the way we do . It's all about Islam with them , sure you can't even own a telly or a radio and kids can't kick a ball around or fly a kite. I was listening to a podcast with a navy seal and a reporter , the reporter discussed the problems with drone strikes . He said at the start you get the right guys as you've already got the Intel but as you keep doing it , it becomes less effective because you get no human intelligence because you've no boots on the ground capturing people and interrogating people , do you then just start bombing everyone who comes over the border in groups of 5 or 6 . The Taliban are more than an army it's a way of life .I suppose if Pakistan got in on it , it would be a lot harder for them to operate but they'll hardly start now

donaghs

joseywhales wrote: »

Remind me, what was the last country to be invaded, successfully converted to the invader's culture and then thrived independently?

India maybe? Australia for sure but that was utter domination.

I don't think the US were looking to "convert" them their culture. They wanted something stable and friendly to their interests, so they could leave.

Afghanistan was relatively stable in the 1960s and 70s, up till the coup which preceded the Soviet invasion. Hippie types used to travel to Kabul overland via Turkey and Iran.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippie_trail

I think the question is, was it ever possible to put in place a resilient government which was a better alternative to the Taliban? It was the corruption and in-fighting of the post-Soviet governments which help usher in the Taliban.

BluePlanet

riffmongous wrote: »

Exactly, the role of Pakistan in all of this can't be ignored. Unless they are dealt with the Taliban will never be stopped. It's also worth bearing in mind that during the time when the Taliban were in charge they never actually controlled the entire country, the northern regions with their different ethnic mix and distance from Pakistan were controlled by different 'warlords' and managed to resistance the Taliban without much foreign support, at least up until shortly before 9/11

In fairness at one point they controlled 97% of the land area.
I'd say that's pretty comprehensive.
It's not black and white on alliances either.
You'd get warlords and factions that were part of the Northern Alliance at one point (albeit with their very own and different objectives), then they fall-in with the Taliban.
If we are looking at a sort of Northern Alliance as some sort of saviour or alternative to the Taliban, i'm afraid it will be short lived and much of a muchness.

BluePlanet

kildare lad wrote: »

The Taliban are more than an army it's a way of life .I suppose if Pakistan got in on it , it would be a lot harder for them to operate but they'll hardly start now

IF Pakistan got in on it?
The Taliban have been considered a proxy of the Pakistani ISI (intelligence service) since they came into existence.

They draw their support massively from refugee camps located inside Pakistan.

kildare lad

donaghs wrote: »

I don't think the US were looking to "convert" them their culture. They wanted something stable and friendly to their interests, so they could leave.

Afghanistan was relatively stable in the 1960s and 70s, up till the coup which preceded the Soviet invasion. Hippie types used to travel to Kabul overland via Turkey and Iran.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippie_trail

I think the question is, was it ever possible to put in place a resilient government which was a better alternative to the Taliban? It was the corruption and in-fighting of the post-Soviet governments which help usher in the Taliban.

Maybe in the city in kabul you could have a modern a stable government , but some places in Afghanistan is like the back of beyond . I watched a doc with the ANA going around with the royal marines . The marines were trying to get them to operate like an army so when the brits left they could police an area on their own . The ANA had no interest on doing much , they went into a compound and took the owners cannibis to smoke and on the way back they robbed 10 watermelons from a farmers crop. I'm sure thats the type of stuff you wouldn't get away with if the Taliban were in power.
Like it or not some people are just a little bit backwards . It doesn't matter what government you have in kabul to people who live hundreds of miles away in a mountain village , they're gonna live their life , the way it's always been lived

kildare lad

BluePlanet wrote: »

IF Pakistan got in on it?
The Taliban have been considered a proxy of the Pakistani ISI (intelligence service) since they came into existence.

They draw their support massively from refugee camps located inside Pakistan.

I mean get in on the Pakistanis helping the Americans to control the Taliban moving between countries ,

BluePlanet

kildare lad wrote: »

I mean with the Americans to control the Taliban moving between countries ,

Why would the Pakistanis do that?
Neverminding the shear scale of the operation and logistical difficulty in manning border outposts throughout mountain ranges that are essentially no mans land and controlled by warlords.

kildare lad

BluePlanet wrote: »

Why would the Pakistanis do that?
Neverminding the shear scale of the operation and logistical difficulty in manning border outposts throughout mountain ranges that are essentially no mans land and controlled by warlords.

You've misread a reply I wrote to a previous post . I know the Taliban are heavily involved with Pakistan .

BluePlanet

kildare lad wrote: »

You've misread a reply I wrote to a previous post . I know the Taliban are heavily involved with Pakistan .

IMO the Taliban have been pretty good bang for the buck, for Pakistan.
They've managed to mostly control events on the ground in Afghanistan via the Taliban for years before the US and a few Nato friends arrived.
They were handy in keeping other regional players competing for influence in check too.

Labaik

Gatling wrote: »

They didn't defeat America , America just didn't have any real plan for the medium to longer terms .

You could use that same logic with the Soviets.

The Americans were defeated in both Afghanistan and Iraq, these are wars the west havent got the stomach to win as they will sustain massive casualties on the ground just like they did in Vietnam. Only a mad man would say the intervention in the middle east and the war on terror was a success, it was a resounding failure.

BluePlanet

Labaik wrote: »

You could use that same logic with the Soviets.

The Americans were defeated in both Afghanistan and Iraq, these are wars the west havent got the stomach to win as they will sustain massive casualties on the ground just like they did in Vietnam. Only a mad man would say the intervention in the middle east and the war on terror was a success, it was a resounding failure.

It wasn't a resounding failure.
Al-Qaeda is basically a tiny shadow of what it once once and their aims totally neutralized.

Dr. Bre

Dr. Bre wrote: »

That’s why the Russians left - you can’t win in Afghan

Afghanistan is one of those places where "win" is impossible to define.

kildare lad

BluePlanet wrote: »

It wasn't a resounding failure.
Al-Qaeda is basically a tiny shadow of what it once once and their aims totally neutralized.

Do you think they could have not achieved it at the start , but american SF forces were told to pull back . I think that the neocons wanted a total change of leaders in middle east , dubya thought that the iraq war would be over in a few months and they'd pay for it with Iraqi oil . How well did that work out .

kildare lad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Afghanistan is one of those places where "win" is impossible to define.

What is there to win ?

kildare lad

kildare lad wrote: »

What is there to win ?

Dust.

kildare lad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Dust.

Well worth a trillion dollars and tens of thousands of lives .

kildare lad

kildare lad wrote: »

Well worth a trillion dollars and tens of thousands of lives .

It was worth it to the companies that supplied the military.

Jimbob1977

In many ways, the last 20 years have been total folly.

The status quo has returned.

The Taliban are effectively in power and the Afghan government will disintegrate rapidly

BluePlanet

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

In many ways, the last 20 years have been total folly.

The status quo has returned.

The Taliban are effectively in power and the Afghan government will disintegrate rapidly

Yes but this time they won't be hosting an Osama Bin Laden group and terrorist organization with a global reach.
I'll wager they learned a hard lesson on that score.

kildare lad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It was worth it to the companies that supplied the military.

That's the price of " Freedom"

spring lane jack

Wonder what will happen to the Heroin trade and how long will it be till we see the effects on the ground here in Ireland. I'm sure Drew Harris's old crew will figure out someway to keep the cash flowing.

Pre 9/11. https://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/20/world/taliban-s-ban-on-poppy-a-success-us-aides-say.html

TheValeyard

spring lane jack wrote: »

Wonder what will happen to the Heroin trade and how long will it be till we see the effects on the ground here in Ireland. I'm sure Drew Harris's old crew will figure out someway to keep the cash flowing.

Pre 9/11. https://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/20/world/taliban-s-ban-on-poppy-a-success-us-aides-say.html

It's interesting. Wonder will they ban it once in power again. They've made a fortune from it during the past decade.

suicide_circus

Perhaps the Taliban are the right men to run Afghanistan

TheValeyard

suicide_circus wrote: »

Perhaps the Taliban are the right men to run Afghanistan

Has to be a better alternative.

Strict interpretation of Islam running the country is a pretty crappy situation to be in.

Jimbob1977

Not good news for television and mini-skirt sales anyway

kildare lad

suicide_circus wrote: »

Perhaps the Taliban are the right men to run Afghanistan

Looking back on it now so were Saddam and Gadaffi

kildare lad

TheValeyard wrote: »

Has to be a better alternative.

Strict interpretation of Islam running the country is a pretty crappy situation to be in.

The only way to get rid of them would be if the yanks stayed there forever , the ANA have shown they're not up to it .

Gatling

Labaik wrote: »

You could use that same logic with the Soviets.

Lol not a hope ...

Thousands of soldiers killed , thousands of vehicles blown up , hundreds of aircraft shotdown ,and a military that left with its tail firmly stuck between their legs ,
Russian loses from Afghanistan , Chechens wars ,and Ukraine are far higher than America lost in two invasions of Iraq ,and then Afghanistan to the point they have made all losses on foreign locations a classified state secret
America always said they wouldn't be staying in Afghanistan ,nor did they invade and massacre a government .

Stovepipe

Thousands of people,especially members of the Army and Government have already fled to neighbouring countries so there is little incentive for the remainder to stay, especially when people have had their pay delayed or stolen. What's the point in staying to fight when the battalion commander has fled?

Gatling

At one point soldiers from the Afghan army were left unpaid for months at a time while their commanders pocketed all the money ,
Remember when Ross Kemp went to Afghanistan and was embedded with British and Afghan forces ,the Afghans went on a mission to kidnap locals because their commander didn't send them cake which they were promised for not getting their wages ....

Paid in cake ........

charlie_says

I wonder if we will see articles regarding the Taliban treatment of women and gay people that will blame Trump.

kildare lad

charlie_says wrote: »

I wonder if we will see articles regarding the Taliban treatment of women and gay people that will blame Trump.

??

Labaik

TheValeyard wrote: »

Has to be a better alternative.

Strict interpretation of Islam running the country is a pretty crappy situation to be in.

Western style democracy was and is never going to take hold in Afghanistan any time soon. These Islamic countries need to be left alone and let them decide for themselves what sort of society or laws they want to abide by. If it wasnt for oil there is zero chance the west would be anywhere near the place militarily.

The West is out now. They can still offer guidance and financial support but it's up to the regional players to sort the situation out. Europe needs to focus on preventing millions more migrants moving from the central Asian countries into the EU.

Manic Moran

Beta Ray Bill wrote: »

The only way to win, is to win the hearts and minds of the people there. And that just isn't going to happen.
The US would have been better off with a softy softy approach to try an get them or at least some of the onside after 911 but the American public were calling for an aggressive response.

I think if it were to ever happen again and the US had to invade/do something, they'd just do something awful to them (Off the books like)

Well, the Taliban are winning the hearts and minds of the people. It's worth noting that there are two methods of doing so, carrot and stick. The British counter-insurgency manual specifically states that the "Hearts and minds" campaign which worked for the British Army in Malaya was not 'throwing candies to children', but blunt coercion: Which seems to be the Taliban M.O. However, it is a politically unacceptable course of action for a Western force. The problem is, as noted above, that the "Western" way of doing things simply doesn't apply to such a tribal organisation as Afghanistan has.

The US simply stayed too long, they achieved their own goals years ago. The problem was they had this concept in their minds that they should be nice and benevolent and try to build the country in a democratic-ish, modern manner.
That's fair enough, but there's giving a leg up and a helping hand to start, and there's pissing into the wind. It became obvious quite some time ago that the Taliban were going to take over again due to the lack of a competent and effective central government.

The primary goal of the US was to deny terrorist organisations a place of operations. "You let them attack us, we'll make life miserable (and probably short) for you". If the Taliban leadership does it again, the US should go in again, except this time, once they've knocked out the Taliban leadership, pretty much immediately go home, and so on. Eventually the next group of folks in charge of the Taliban will figure out it's easier and safer for them to have their own little domestic ideological dictatorship which they can enjoy, without poking the Americans.

It might implode in on itself and fragment along tribal regions.

Things could get very bleak... or improve now they've no common enemy

Galwayguy35

Wallace and Daly will be happy the Yanks are leaving anyway, sure they might even pay a visit to see how the Taliban are getting on.

The Americans being in Afghanistan provided an enemy to focus on. The greatest enemy.. and a perfect rallying call to any fundamentalist Muslim anywhere in the M.East or Asia.

The only way for change to occur in these regions, is to leave them alone, and let them figure out that their primitive culture is horrendous. Involvement by western nations in their country takes away from that awareness ever occurring, because keeping that culture becomes a reason to fight, elevating the culture to something important to retain.

It would be best to withdraw completely from the region, and leave them to whatever they want to get up to. Their neighboring nations will have to deal with them, and that means mostly they'll be contained. No need for the US or any other western nation to be involved.. because time and time again, the initiatives have simply made things worse, especially once the rollback happens when the last American troop leaves.

jmreire

The last time the Taliban ruled Afghanistan ( the part they controlled fully), they ruled with an iron fist. In the beginning, they were welcomed as they put a stop to the warring factions, who were well on the way to destroying what was left of the Country after the war with the Russians. But soon their barbaric methods turned the people against them, and it would be interesting to see how they would have fared out long term if the US had not invaded. My guess is that they would have been a very reformed taliban by now, that is if they were even still in power.
As to how it will go now, is anyones guess. Natural wealth it has in spades,it's thought that Afghanistan's resources could make it one of the richest mining regions in the world. ... The major mineral resources include chromium, copper, gold, iron ore, lead and zinc, lithium, marble, precious and semiprecious stones, sulfur and talc among many other minerals. But the "uncertain climate" meant that it has not been acted on, although the Chinese took out a 30 year mining lease in 2007, so be interesting to see how that goes now, if theres a change of "Management".

kildare lad

jmreire wrote: »

The last time the Taliban ruled Afghanistan ( the part they controlled fully), they ruled with an iron fist. In the beginning, they were welcomed as they put a stop to the warring factions, who were well on the way to destroying what was left of the Country after the war with the Russians. But soon their barbaric methods turned the people against them, and it would be interesting to see how they would have fared out long term if the US had not invaded. My guess is that they would have been a very reformed taliban by now, that is if they were even still in power.
As to how it will go now, is anyones guess. Natural wealth it has in spades,it's thought that Afghanistan's resources could make it one of the richest mining regions in the world. ... The major mineral resources include chromium, copper, gold, iron ore, lead and zinc, lithium, marble, precious and semiprecious stones, sulfur and talc among many other minerals. But the "uncertain climate" meant that it has not been acted on, although the Chinese took out a 30 year mining lease in 2007, so be interesting to see how that goes now, if theres a change of "Management".

Would the Taliban have a great need for wealth through mining ? They seem happy enough living like Mohammed did except with AKs and dirt bikes. They don't seem like the type that want mansions with swimming pools etc . They live a very austere version of Islam compared to most other Islamic countries. I watched a documentary and they were goinh to punish a man for having to many people at is son's wedding as it was a waste of money and that's classed as un - islamic

Galwayguy35

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Wallace and Daly will be happy the Yanks are leaving anyway, sure they might even pay a visit to see how the Taliban are getting on.

We live in hope. I'd say the Taliban would be really interested in Daly's pontifications

Tyrone212

biko wrote: »

Hopefully Biden will finish what Trump started.
US can't keep policing the rest of the world.
It should never have been invaded in the first place.

Policing is a hilarious term. They invade and plunder.

kildare lad

Tyrone212 wrote: »

Policing is a hilarious term. They invade and plunder.

While the industrial military complex sits back and counts the millions rolling in .. .

jmreire

kildare lad wrote: »

Would the Taliban have a great need for wealth through mining ? They seem happy enough living like Mohammed did except with AKs and dirt bikes. They don't seem like the type that want mansions with swimming pools etc . They live a very austere version of Islam compared to most other Islamic countries. I watched a documentary and they were goinh to punish a man for having to many people at is son's wedding as it was a waste of money that's classed as un - islamic

Theres a lot of truth in that..pre sept 11th, a representative of (I think) Sweden, came to Kabul to discuss helping the Country. They duly explained what they could do in regards health, education, infrastructure etc. An all they wanted in return was that the Taliban relax their extreme version of Islam, and to pay more than lip service to human rights, especially where women were concerned. When they ( the Swedes) were finished talking, the Taliban asked them how had they arrived in Afghanistan? They replied by air. The Taliban replied, then you should leave the same way. End of story. None the less, even at the height of their power, they still needed hard cash ( more than ever, as they were ostracised by the world of commerce due to their inhuman behaviour, so trading as we know it was out) Mullah Omar, their leader would turn on ( and off) the drugs tap, Afghan drugs being of a very high quality and purity, had a ready market, and for hard cash. Will be interesting to see how te new arrangements will work out financially.

Unfortunately this is a relatively common thing in Afghanistan - killing girls who are being educated

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/08/world/asia/bombing-school-afghanistan.html

https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/05/10/killing-schoolgirls-afghanistan

Bombing Outside Afghan School Kills at Least 90, With Girls as Targets

The Afghan army and police are taking huge casualties and had always been taking the brunt of the casualties. Its harder for them to recruit.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/afghan-troops-suffer-shockingly-high-casualties-violence-mounts-2021-06-07/

June 7 (Reuters) - At least 150 Afghan troops have been killed or injured in the last 24 hours in a surge of attacks by Taliban militants as foreign forces withdraw, senior government officials said on Monday.

Fighting is now raging in 26 of the country's 34 provinces, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Casualties were "shockingly high", one added.

ChickenDish

Even half an hours research by a 10 year old could have shown the Americans that invading Afghanistan was a lost cause, yet here we are 20 years later - the Taliban to be shortly be back in power with a lot of new weaponry courtesy of the good old USA.

How many lives, resources and money was wasted on American interference in the middle East. America in its arrogance thought invading Afghanistan and Iraq was a Nobel cause and justified - when in fact all they did was destabilise a huge portion of the middle east and cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands.

At this stage of the game you would think that they have learned a valuable lesson, but unfortunately they will continue to meddle and paint themselves as a legitimate target for reprisals from terror groups across the Middle East.

America, Russia and China are all the same, the difference only being that America purport to be a democracy and shining light in the world.

ChickenDish

ChickenDish wrote: »

Even half an hours research by a 10 year old could have shown the Americans that invading Afghanistan was a lost cause, yet here we are 20 years later - the Taliban to be shortly be back in power with a lot of new weaponry courtesy of the good old USA.

How many lives, resources and money was wasted on American interference in the middle East. America in its arrogance thought invading Afghanistan and Iraq was a Nobel cause and justified - when in fact all they did was destabilise a huge portion of the middle east and cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands.

I seriously doubt they had any real belief in changing anything. It has been tried multiple times to enforce Democracy and western culture on other countries and it's failed even under the best of circumstances. Vietnam, South Korea, Japan.. all places where American culture gained a foothold, and yet, failed to truly change anything. The same can be said for most of South America, or anywhere Americans have tried pushing their beliefs on to others.

Just as I doubt they believed that there was any kind of higher purpose or Nobel prize involved. It was revenge, pure and simple. A need to flex their military muscles again, pushing the attention of the electorate outside of America's borders, and away from the myriad domestic problems they had. The US has always used foreign ventures as a way to distract their population.. it just backfired because they didn't learn their lessons from their last few wars and the effect it had on the US population.

At this stage of the game you would think that they have learned a valuable lesson, but unfortunately they will continue to meddle and paint themselves as a legitimate target for reprisals from terror groups across the Middle East.

Nothing is going to change that. Too much water under the bridge regardless of what the US does, and that's been the case since the 80's.

America, Russia and China are all the same, the difference only being that America purport to be a democracy and shining light in the world.

You need to get out more. I've been to Russia and the US... and I live in China. There are loads of differences between them. Oh, I really don't like US foreign policy, and I don't trust them as a nation to stand for anything worthwhile... but they're not the same as either China or Russia. For one thing, the American public, while completely nutty, still have a chance at influencing the direction of American policy. That's not the case for Russia or China.. but yeah.. the US just has a better propaganda machine than China/Russia.. and TBF we want to believe that the US is better, because they're a western nation.