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

Relax brah

Gatling wrote: »

The biggest fear has to be a resurgence of isis from Syria and Iraq to Afghanistan ,they share similar beliefs to the Taliban only more extreme and had people in their droves all over the world joining ,this could be similar especially with Pakistan next door along with Iran
Remember when the Taliban almost over ran Pakistan

The ISIS-Khorasan branch in Afghanistan are already incredible active and considered a serious threat. The same US military leadership withdrawing from the country have stated that they fear an ISIS stronghold across the country within two years.

The taliban have been on the offensive against ISIS within the country so I don’t see any sort of collation, they would need to beat and remove the taliban which is impossible in Afghanistan (as previously demonstrated.)

[Deleted User]

Labaik wrote: »

Happened a few months ago in the US. There were some states basically in martial law.

Basically, Martial law. Are you really trying to draw an equivalence with Russia and China?

Have you ever read about these countries, because I get the sense you don't have a clue.

I understand the desire to talk down about the US (I do it myself).. but this is ridiculous.

Gatling

Labaik wrote: »

Julian Assange rotting in a prison cell basically been kept in solidary confinement for 23 hours a day and what would happen to Edward Snowden

Still alive and well .....
Again no massacres of civilian protesters n

Not this has anything to do with this thread other than whataboutery

Gatling

The biggest fear has to be a resurgence of isis from Syria and Iraq to Afghanistan ,they share similar beliefs to the Taliban only more extreme and had people in their droves all over the world joining ,this could be similar especially with Pakistan next door along with Iran
Remember when the Taliban almost over ran Pakistan

Labaik

Gatling wrote: »

But no massacres ,or tanks used against civilians ,
No political opponents , journalists or doctors falling off balconies .

no ....

Dead civilians in the capitol riots. Julian Assange rotting in a prison cell basically been kept in solidary confinement for 23 hours a day and what would happen to Edward Snowden if he ever came back to the US?

Gatling

Labaik wrote: »

Happened a few months ago in the US.

But no massacres ,or tanks used against civilians ,
No political opponents , journalists or doctors falling off balconies .

no ....

jmreire

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Cowards would be the wrong word, but they definitely lack a will to fight. The ANA are mostly worthless, it's only their SOF forces that are in any way effective, and even then only typically when under direct guidance. Bear in mind, the Afghan military numbered around 300+ thousand for most of the war.

Yes, my point was that in the past, they had fought very well, so it all boils down to the battle.. aginst the Russians, ? (and unbelievers to boot) they were 100% committed, but against the Taliban ( who are pushing the "invaders" narrative ) and arguably also that the US are unbelievers too? So for a lot of the ANA, it was just a job. Then there is the whole Afghan culture thing,,,,,, and in the countryside, life goes on very much the same as it did hundreds of years ago. Its a very tribal based society, and they are more focused on local rather than national issues. But again, they will be guided by the local Mullah / Imam, and their local Chief. So we will have to wait and see if there will be any committed organised local resistance like in the past. If they can still depend on long range US support ( who now will be more or less free to act as they see fit) there's a good chance the Taliban will not get it as easy as they think.

Labaik

Gatling wrote: »

Tiananmen Square comes to mind ten thousand + massacred ,
In Russia you go to prison or accidentally fall off balconies or get poisoned actually remind me of Chechnya or Ukraine

Happened a few months ago in the US. There were some states basically in martial law.

Gatling

Labaik wrote: »

Dont recall Russian or Chinese civilians attacking any of there government buildings due to simmering societal issues in the last few decades

Tiananmen Square comes to mind ten thousand + massacred ,
In Russia you go to prison or accidentally fall off balconies or get poisoned actually remind me of Chechnya or Ukraine

Labaik

Gatling wrote: »

Compared with russia and China they are doing quite a good job ,

Dont recall Russian or Chinese civilians attacking any of there government buildings due to simmering societal issues in the last few decades or large scale rioting in most of there cities for that matter.

Has there been many police stations burned down lately in Moscow or Beijing?

You paint the US as some sort of utopian paradise and when rightly ridiculed you always have to bring the Russians into it lol.

AbusesToilets

jmreire wrote: »

Before now, there were not any Taliban living in the villages..and any Taliban living in the villages now, are living in well armed groups, ( they need to be ) and they are not in any way connected tribally or in any other way ( marriage, Family etc) to the village they are in. After the US invasion, the Taliban retreated to their stronghold of Kandahar, and the roads they took were littered with burnt out vehicles and Talib bodies. Shows what the locals thought of them. But just like isis, who rolled over vast swatches of territory, and imposed their own administrations in areas under their control. Same thing happened in the past with the Taliban, and will again, unless they manage to get another Alliance together to fight them.
Another thing, despite the trillions spent in war, very little actually filtered down to the ordinary Afghan ( especially in rural areas)
It was siphoned off due to corruption at all levels, but mostly by the Govt. So where was the incentive to fight ( and die) for a corrupt Govt like that? They are not cowards, for sure,,,Thats not the reason. look at how they fought against the Russians for several years.

Cowards would be the wrong word, but they definitely lack a will to fight. The ANA are mostly worthless, it's only their SOF forces that are in any way effective, and even then only typically when under direct guidance. Bear in mind, the Afghan military numbered around 300+ thousand for most of the war.

jmreire

AbusesToilets wrote: »

They deserve better, but they don't seem to want to fight for it. The reason there's been 20 years of warfare is Afghans inability to make the effort to defeat the Taliban living in their own villages. Leading a horse to water, and all that

Before now, there were not any Taliban living in the villages..and any Taliban living in the villages now, are living in well armed groups, ( they need to be ) and they are not in any way connected tribally or in any other way ( marriage, Family etc) to the village they are in. After the US invasion, the Taliban retreated to their stronghold of Kandahar, and the roads they took were littered with burnt out vehicles and Talib bodies. Shows what the locals thought of them. But just like isis, who rolled over vast swatches of territory, and imposed their own administrations in areas under their control. Same thing happened in the past with the Taliban, and will again, unless they manage to get another Alliance together to fight them.
Another thing, despite the trillions spent in war, very little actually filtered down to the ordinary Afghan ( especially in rural areas)
It was siphoned off due to corruption at all levels, but mostly by the Govt. So where was the incentive to fight ( and die) for a corrupt Govt like that? They are not cowards, for sure,,,Thats not the reason. look at how they fought against the Russians for several years.

AbusesToilets

Gatling wrote: »

For most part the Taliban aren't living in villages there imported from the various ungoverned provinces inside Pakistan and elsewhere ,
They use Tribal allegiances that allow them to pass through and stay in villages ,and fear ,
That's why we don't see fighting in winter they flee back to Pakistan to regroup and resupply and return in spring and summer .
It's not a simple case of not wanting to fight , average Joe Afghan know the dire consequences they face if they do stand against the Taliban

That's not entirely accurate, it depends on the region. In many places the Taliban are members of the local tribe. You can talk to a villager and they'll be related to ones you'd be fighting.

For many also, as with Is, the Taliban are a means of employment where it would otherwise be lacking. The Afghan government has repeatedly failed to deliver the services to the population, after white space has been created by the military.

Gatling

AbusesToilets wrote: »

They deserve better, but they don't seem to want to fight for it. The reason there's been 20 years of warfare is Afghans inability to make the effort to defeat the Taliban living in their own villages. Leading a horse to water, and all that

For most part the Taliban aren't living in villages there imported from the various ungoverned provinces inside Pakistan and elsewhere ,
They use Tribal allegiances that allow them to pass through and stay in villages ,and fear ,
That's why we don't see fighting in winter they flee back to Pakistan to regroup and resupply and return in spring and summer .
It's not a simple case of not wanting to fight , average Joe Afghan know the dire consequences they face if they do stand against the Taliban

AbusesToilets

jmreire wrote: »

They didn't and they don't. The original Taliban ( means student) literally swarmed out of the Pakistani madrassa's to quell the war between the different factions. Pakistani ISI played a big part in this, as they didn't then ( or now ) want a strong Afghanistan on their border, and especially either Russian or American controlled.
Outside of the cities, the Country has not changed much,and that is especially true of their devotion to Islam. One of the gripes they had with the Taliban was why they were trying to impose Islam on an already Islamic Country when as they reasoned, there was absolutely no need for it. Especially the brutal form of Islam followed by them. But when you establish a heavily armed militia in each town and village, its easy to control them. Thats what they did in the past, and its what they will do again.
Except this time around, Afghans, both men and women have had the benefit of 20 years of education, and it may just make a difference. For their sake, I hope so. They deserve better.

They deserve better, but they don't seem to want to fight for it. The reason there's been 20 years of warfare is Afghans inability to make the effort to defeat the Taliban living in their own villages. Leading a horse to water, and all that

jmreire

political analyst wrote: »

Why would a substantial element of the Afghan public support the Taliban? That's like turkeys voting for Christmas!

They didn't and they don't. The original Taliban ( means student) literally swarmed out of the Pakistani madrassa's to quell the war between the different factions. Pakistani ISI played a big part in this, as they didn't then ( or now ) want a strong Afghanistan on their border, and especially either Russian or American controlled.
Outside of the cities, the Country has not changed much,and that is especially true of their devotion to Islam. One of the gripes they had with the Taliban was why they were trying to impose Islam on an already Islamic Country when as they reasoned, there was absolutely no need for it. Especially the brutal form of Islam followed by them. But when you establish a heavily armed militia in each town and village, its easy to control them. Thats what they did in the past, and its what they will do again.
Except this time around, Afghans, both men and women have had the benefit of 20 years of education, and it may just make a difference. For their sake, I hope so. They deserve better.

[Deleted User]

ChickenDish wrote: »

Vietnam taught the US what!? So what have the last 20 years in Afghanistan been, the Americans exacting revenge! Or them making the same mistakes they made with Vietnam.

I said the lessons that were taught due to Vietnam.. And the US didn't make the same mistakes over the last 20 years. They made new ones.

So you think America's civil rights record is golden - huh?

I'm going to stop you here. Deal with what I've written, not the argument you want to have inside your own head, because in spite of all your words, and the CAPS, you haven't countered what I said.

A two party system with two parties different sides of the same coin is a total illusion, ours is not perfe t but its no illusion.

Sure it is. Why does FF continue to exist as a party after the Banking crash? How many politicians were held criminally responsible for the negligence leading up to the crash, and during it? There is a serious lack of accountability among our political elite... and what happens when most of the parties are spouting similar crap on the same issues? There's very little choice for alternatives than the traditional parties, and they do whatever the like once the elections are finished.

Democracy is an illusion. It's a nice illusion, but the electorate has little real power as long as it accepts the system that politicians have been changing slowly over time to benefit themselves.

If your believe removing Sadam didn't destabilise Iraq and have a knock on effect in the Area, your on hard drugs and probably should do some research. Saying it would probably happen is a cop out and proves absolutely nothing.

Again, you're not reading what I wrote. Do so.

Your right, we obviously disagree, I tend to believe the facts.

Oh lord. :rolleyes: You're stating your opinions, not facts. As am I.

Gatling

ChickenDish wrote: »

So you think America's civil rights record is golden - huh? Let's forget guantanamo bay, their past record/legacy, support of various regimes/dictators, killing of non combatants, detention of families on the Mexican border ( children separated from parents), imprisoning of innocent people,

Compared with russia and China they are doing quite a good job ,

[Deleted User]

political analyst wrote: »

Why would a substantial element of the Afghan public support the Taliban? That's like turkeys voting for Christmas!

First off, I said an element of public support, not a significant amount of support, because there doesn't need to be a significant percentage to provide support and information to any force.

Secondly, why would they? Religious conditioning/indoctrination, propaganda, fear, etc. Any number of reasons. What you think the Taliban doesn't have much support? Where does it's fighters come from? Who encourages others to volunteer to fight?

1874

johnsae2231 wrote: »

Knowing what psychological warfare/guerilla warfare entails the reason they are withdrawing is because they have probably gained a large amount of control over the taliban through agents/informants etc.

I doubt they are really even the Taliban anymore all the hardcore taliban have probably been killed and replaced with less hardcore members and agents.

I agree with the other poster that says this is "baselessly optimistic"

More than likely, as already occurred elsewhere in the middle east, when you take out those in charge at the start, then gradually more militant and extreme sorts take over.
I didnt think the Taliban/Taleban? was completely wiped out in one go, or even at all, so as individuals may have gotten picked off they were as likely replaced by people lined up by the Taliban to replace them anyway.
Cut off one head, at least one more appears to replace it if not more.
The Taliban were always in this for the long haul, they belived it, they believed in what that lands history has shown them, so much so that it is/has become true (se;f fullfilling prophecy)
There was no solid plan, it was always going to be a matter of pouring people and material resources in.

As with Vietnam, if the US spent a fraction of the money lifting the people out of poverty, rather than engaging in warfare, they may have actually brought people onside, maybe then the Taliban or anyone like them would have faded/turned or what remnants there were left, defeated.
The only wars that are a success are those in which have the support of the populace, otherwise your options are not engage in war or kill everyone, the former should be the option, but to satiate the appetites of some people and misplaced anger, Afghanistan (and even Iraq) were invaded, a by product of this was a lot of businesses can only have made a fortune off those wars.

Neither of those Countries was responsible for the attacks on the US,
IF Bin Laden was even responsible himself, he was Saudi and he was only in Afghanistan and even then from what I gathered over time, the US demanded he be handed over early on, without much proof he was responsible, so it does not seem like the attacks on Afghanistan were ever legitimate, I didnt think it was legiitmised in the U.N. and revenge attacks seem to amount to nothing but dead innocents.
in the end, whether Bin Laden was responsible or not, it turns out he was holed up in Pakistan, that is apparent to me, could only have come with the support of the pakistani military and secret service, which from many things I have heard are complicit in supporting the war against the US and elsewhere against India, why not flatten Pakistans military capacity? flatten its nuke sites and then take their military apart piece by piece?

ChickenDish

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Vietnam taught the US that such an idea was utterly foolish, which was compounded by experience in South America with the various rebel/para groups. Any guerrilla force that retains even an element of public support is virtually impossible to destroy, and the Afghans were already aware of how to fight from both their experience with Russia, and more importantly, by being trained by US special forces or US intelligence operatives.

Which doesn't counter what I stated previously.

etc etc etc? You would place the US on the same level as Russia or China for civil rights violations, and xenophobia? the rest I could see some similarities, but those two I listed are nothing alike. It's a matter of scale... and context.

All democracies live under that illusion of having a say through our politics. Two parties or six doesn't change that illusion. As for Trump, he was a reaction to those who had gone before him, and also a reaction to the extreme PC/Woke culture that arose in the US.

I have no idea what you mean by your last sentence of that paragraph.

How? The removal of Saddam destabilized the whole region, and to be fair, it would have happened anyway. Change was coming to the region with the rise of fundamentalist Islam, and leaders like Saddam would have been removed by them eventually. Did the US presence make things worse? Yes. Definitely.

haha.. no, really? Wow, I didn't know that.

Vietnam taught the US what!? So what have the last 20 years in Afghanistan been, the Americans exacting revenge! Or them making the same mistakes they made with Vietnam.

So you think America's civil rights record is golden - huh? Let's forget guantanamo bay, their past record/legacy, support of various regimes/dictators, killing of non combatants, detention of families on the Mexican border ( children separated from parents), imprisoning of innocent people, support of "freedom fighters" and various other indiscretions. Let's not mention the BLM global movement that was a direct result of the civil rights violations of black people, attacks of peaceful protesters, banning of Muslims entering the country, rhetoric by certain groups wanting to cleanse America of "ALIENS, MUSLIMS, ASIANS, ANYONE NOT A WHITE AMERICAN" and all that other non infringements on civil rights. Guess I'm wrong, America is a shining light in the world.

A two party system with two parties different sides of the same coin is a total illusion, ours is not perfe t but its no illusion.

If your believe removing Sadam didn't destabilise Iraq and have a knock on effect in the Area, your on hard drugs and probably should do some research. Saying it would probably happen is a cop out and proves absolutely nothing.

Your right, we obviously disagree, I tend to believe the facts.

BluePlanet

johnsae2231 wrote: »

Knowing what psychological warfare/guerilla warfare entails the reason they are withdrawing is because they have probably gained a large amount of control over the taliban through agents/informants etc.

I doubt they are really even the Taliban anymore all the hardcore taliban have probably been killed and replaced with less hardcore members and agents.

That sounds baselessly optimistic.

Anyway, if it's going to be Mullah Omar's eldest son that takes the reigns, we can expect a ramping up of war as he is a battle hardened military commander, and that's probably the only life he knows.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/29/taliban-leadership-disarray-coronavirus-covid-peace-talks/

titan18

Sandor Clegane wrote: »

Still, it's incredible to think that after being there for so long the the Afghan government military are so lacking, 20 years is a long time, you'd think they could of trained the Afghans better, surely they had a plan for when/after they withdrew?

Stability doesn't make money for the guys financing this tbf.

Gatling

political analyst wrote: »

The Taliban were able to take Kabul in 1996 because the support that Najibullah's government received from the Kremlin ceased when the Soviet Union collapsed, e.g. the grounding of the Afghan air force by lack of fuel. .

At that stage there was little to fight over defend in Kabul after four years of constant war between multiple warlords for most part the country feel to the Taliban with little or no resistance,
At first they even stopped opium production till they realised they had nothing to replace poppies with and then how much money they could make for themselves flooding the market with heroine .
If they start traveling in large convoys they can can easily be dealt with from the air

johnsae2231

political analyst wrote: »

Why would a substantial element of the Afghan public support the Taliban? That's like turkeys voting for Christmas!

Because what you see on western media is only a small narrow picture of what they want you to see, in reality there is probably a far bigger picture of what is really going on.

I don't know much about Afghanistan but I know from other conflicts around the world that is generally how things work.

johnsae2231

Knowing what psychological warfare/guerilla warfare entails the reason they are withdrawing is because they have probably gained a large amount of control over the taliban through agents/informants etc.

I doubt they are really even the Taliban anymore all the hardcore taliban have probably been killed and replaced with less hardcore members and agents.

kildare lad

political analyst wrote: »

Why would a substantial element of the Afghan public support the Taliban? That's like turkeys voting for Christmas!

It might be the only life a lot of men know , I'd say after decades of war they just want peace and stability , women have no say in the matter so they don't count in Afghanistan

kildare lad

FileNotFound wrote: »

Honestly depends on what you think their aim was?

They did get Bin Laden and most of the AQ leadership, Bush stayed in power and they got to have a go at Iraq whatever their reasoning was.

Maybe it was a success?

Was it though, Taliban soon to be back in power , 2.6 trillion dollars the war cost , 3000 allied soldiers dead , that's excluding cost and deaths in Iraq . I'm sure there's thousands more missing limbs and the veteran rate of suicide is 22 people a day . Tens of thousands of afghanis dead , Al Queda gone but we gained Isis . Bush got 3 times the amount of Americans killed when he invaded Afghanistan and iraq compared to what was killed in 9/11 . We've had countless terrorists attacks in Europe which look like continuing indefinitely.

The irony of boths wars was that it's was implemented by Vietnam war era draft dodgers and chicken hawks . They no problem sending young men to die but when cheney ,bush and Co had their chance to fight in Vietnam , they were no where to be found . Americans are really very gullible when it comes to all this " Freedom " and "patriotism" nonsense .

political analyst

The Taliban were able to take Kabul in 1996 because the support that Najibullah's government received from the Kremlin ceased when the Soviet Union collapsed, e.g. the grounding of the Afghan air force by lack of fuel.

However, the Western powers are not going to have the same fate as the Soviet Union. Therefore, it doesn't necessarily follow that the events of 25 years ago will repeat themselves.

political analyst

Deleted User wrote: »

Vietnam taught the US that such an idea was utterly foolish, which was compounded by experience in South America with the various rebel/para groups. Any guerrilla force that retains even an element of public support is virtually impossible to destroy, and the Afghans were already aware of how to fight from both their experience with Russia, and more importantly, by being trained by US special forces or US intelligence operatives.

Why would a substantial element of the Afghan public support the Taliban? That's like turkeys voting for Christmas!