nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Sandor Clegane

Incredible to think that after being in Afghanistan for 20 years that we are possibly on the verge of having the Taliban back in power, by all accounts the government is on the brink of collapse in a matter of months or even weeks...

How is it possible that after a 20 year occupation by Nato/US that the Afghan government/military was so ill equipped?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/04/afghanistan-americas-longest-war-ends-amid-accusations-of-betrayal

Threadbanned users
jmreire
Timberrrrrrrr

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

TP_CM

Dr. Bre wrote: »

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

+1 Even Alexander the Great failed there. It's practically impossible.

[Deleted User]

They're going to have a population equal to or surpassing Germany in about two/three decades. The whole area is a tinderbox but it's up to the locals and the regional players to sort things out now. It's in all their interests.

Beta Ray Bill

Sandor Clegane wrote: »

How is it possible that after a 20 year occupation by Nato/US that the Afghan government/military was so ill equipped?

there are a huge number of contributing factors which make winning a war in Afghanistan is so difficult.

There is no "Real" Government in the true sense of the word, it's all local administration.
There is no money, its one of the poorest countries in the world.
There is little of no Infrastructure (No Canals, No Railroads up until very recently, Not many large airports, No Sea Ports, Poor Road Network).
The Terrain make it extremely difficult to for a large army to leverage their heavy weapons, and on top of that the locals know exactly how to fight in this type of Terrain.
In terms of Geography they are surrounded by other countries that will help them "off the record" if required.
The Climate also make is difficult to fight there, hot in the day, freezing at night.

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)

awec

Beta Ray Bill wrote: »

there are a huge number of contributing factors which make winning a war in Afghanistan is so difficult.

There is no "Real" Government in the true sense of the word, it's all local administration.
There is no money, its one of the poorest countries in the world.
There is little of no Infrastructure (No Canals, No Railroads up until very recently, Not many large airports, No Sea Ports, Poor Road Network).
The Terrain make it extremely difficult to for a large army to leverage their heavy weapons, and on top of that the locals know exactly how to fight in this type of Terrain.
In terms of Geography they are surrounded by other countries that will help them "off the record" if required.
The Climate also make is difficult to fight there, hot in the day, freezing at night.

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)

I think, unlike Iraq, there was compelling reasons to invade Afghanistan. They went in to hunt for Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, and they should have killed Bin Laden in 2001, they had him holed up in Tora Bora but managed to let him escape into Pakistan.

FileNotFound

awec wrote: »

I think, unlike Iraq, there was compelling reasons to invade Afghanistan. They went in to hunt for Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, and they should have killed Bin Laden in 2001, they had him holed up in Tora Bora but managed to let him escape into Pakistan.

Actually given the fall of Bin Laden and the seeming demise of Al Queda (at least as the major player, no doubt remnants exist).

What are the Taliban these days - are they essentially just the standard Afghans fighting foreign invaders (in the eyes of the people over there)?

Hande hoche!

Gatling wrote: »

Current reports are saying the Afghan army are fleeing to other countries in the north rather than actually putting up a fight ,it seems many army outposts are poorly equipped and supplied ,most places the Taliban have taken without firing a single shot
With the latest push the Taliban now control 130 + districts out of 412

The Taliban are also capturing a tremendous amount of equipment from the Afghan government. A blog crunched numbers, with the group capturing over 700 jeeps and trucks recently.

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2021/06/disaster-at-hand-documenting-afghan.html

[Deleted User]

Will China step in? Maybe not militarily but economically?

Gatling

Hande hoche! wrote: »

The Taliban are also capturing a tremendous amount of equipment from the Afghan government. A blog crunched numbers, with the group capturing over 700 jeeps and trucks recently.

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2021/06/disaster-at-hand-documenting-afghan.html

That's mad ,the had the biggest military re-equipping drive seen since WW2 to build and train a standing army' and aircraft and Intelligence gathering and it's already collapsing before coming under any real pressure ,

The biggest issue now will the Taliban be replaced with Isis ,can you imagine that situation choose one extremist group over another extremist group

[Deleted User]

Gatling wrote: »

The biggest issue now will the Taliban be replaced with Isis ,can you imagine that situation choose one extremist group over another extremist group

I think everyone has accepted that the Taliban are going to be running the country in some form or another but maybe everyone is hoping they have softened their positions somewhat. Seems mad to be saying that. Who knows what's going to happen over the next few years.

Labaik

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.

FileNotFound

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.

In fairness to Afghanistan the US invaded to hunt the orchestrators of the twin towers.

They succeeded in killing the man they hunted so have no interest in the nation now.

Beta Ray Bill

Deleted User wrote: »

Will China step in? Maybe not militarily but economically?

China already has an ally in the region, Pakistan
Afghanistan has literally nothing to offer them.
No Technology
No Army
No Natural Resources
No Arable land
No Major Strategic Advantage
No Skilled Workforce

It's hassle, and to be avoided.

kildare lad

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Must the Taliban have some significant level of domestic support in order for them to still exist?

Where do they get their weapons from?

Pakistan I'd say , it's kind of ironic that the yanks gave the mujahedeen stingers which played a big part in the defeat of the Russians , look how that came back to bite them .

kildare lad

FileNotFound wrote: »

In fairness to Afghanistan the US invaded to hunt the orchestrators of the twin towers.

They succeeded in killing the man they hunted so have no interest in the nation now.

They killed him 10 years ago

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

Will China step in? Maybe not militarily but economically?

They've already started negotiating their Belt and Road Initiative.

kildare lad

Hande hoche! wrote: »

The Taliban are also capturing a tremendous amount of equipment from the Afghan government. A blog crunched numbers, with the group capturing over 700 jeeps and trucks recently.

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2021/06/disaster-at-hand-documenting-afghan.html

I've seen twitter posts where scores of ANA soldiers are surrendering to the Taliban . I also seen another where the Taliban are in a warehouse full of American weapons . Sure a lot of arms Isis ended up with were American also .

kildare lad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Will China step in? Maybe not militarily but economically?

If they have natural resources I'm sure they might , the Chinese and Russians are buying up a lot of Africa at the minute , America's really taken their eye of the ball on the global stage. I'm not a fan of American foriegn policy but I wonder how far China are willing to push it in their quest for global power , they're already devastating on the enviorment , never mind they've already pushing a lot of animals to extinction.

Hande hoche!

kildare lad wrote: »

I've seen twitter posts where scores of ANA soldiers are surrendering to the Taliban . I also seen another where the Taliban are in a warehouse full of American weapons . Sure a lot of arms Isis ended up with were American also .

It does raise an interesting question. In time for the twentieth anniversary of 9/11, will the Taliban be in control of the majority of the country or even at the outskirts of Kabul?

[Deleted User]

kildare lad wrote: »

Pakistan I'd say , it's kind of ironic that the yanks gave the mujahedeen stingers which played a big part in the defeat of the Russians , look how that came back to bite them .

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

kildare lad

Hande hoche! wrote: »

It does raise an interesting question. In time for the twentieth anniversary of 9/11, will the Taliban be in control of the majority of the country or even at the outskirts of Kabul?

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

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.