Current Affairs Afghanistan

[Ruairi77]

Hahaha not because they were an elite blitzkrieg military force; it's because the Afghan army literally couldn't be arsed stopping them.

The Taliban aren't a 'traditional' military threat and they wouldn't be as long as the US stationed any semblance of a force there.

right but Trump undermined the government and released the Taliban leadership.
I'm not sure what's so hard to get here.

 

[Ruairi77]

What 'bloody war'? 9 US troops died in the totality of 2020 - about as many people are killed by bloody wasps per year.

The Taliban were hiding in the hills, let's not pretend this had to happen by August 2021. It's ludicrous.

And how many Afghans?

edit
A quick google
In the month of December 2020
185 pro-government forces and 101 civilians were killed in Afghanistan in December.

 

[Tubey]

They aren't a traditional military threat? They just kept fighting most of the West for twenty years and were still standing afterwards, that was after winning a civil war, and after taking part in a campaign that beat the Soviet Union.

How is it you have learned nothing from the past twenty years? Yes, throw some more troops in there, that will sort them out.

No, they are not. I'd be stunned if you tried to argue they were.

They are a modern day VC; guerilla war fighters, taking advantage of certain terrain to drag out a 'war' through attrition. That's all they are - they took the country back unopposed, a few cave hermits with machine guns on jeeps.

What defeated the US in Afghanistan was ideology. Afghanistan quite simply was too disparate culturally and can't be unified under a democracy. In no way did the Taliban win this war by 'military might'.

 

[Tubey]

And how many Afghans?

Hm, how many more do you think will die - Afghans as a result of staying there 12 months and getting those who want to leave to safety, or those now perpetually under the rule of the Talisman seeking reprisals who will stone to death any dissenting voice?

I'm personally betting on the latter.

 

[peteblue]

What don’t I understand? We’re saying we can’t rescue everyone because we can’t secure an airfield. As somebody who spent ten years in the military I find this highly embarrassing (as well as highly unlikely). So what don’t I get?

Once the US goes, so does everyone else. Now if you have ten years in the military perhaps you can state how long it would take to get enough personnel into Kabul to operate, defend and maintain an airport surrounded by a city and civilians, on our own, after a date agreed by the USA to hand it over to the Taliban, without any US assets…and then what our losses would have been upon withdrawal. Had this been Bagram, a month or so ago, then fair enough, but then the withdrawal would have been bloody, would it not ….

 

[Ruairi77]

Hm, how many more do you think will die - Afghans as a result of staying there 12 months and getting those who want to leave to safety, or those now perpetually under the rule of the Talisman seeking reprisals who will stone to death any dissenting voice?

I'm personally betting on the latter.

you're right, but if US/NATO troops withdraw in August 2022 leaving the Taliban in charge, that happens anyway.
If they stay beyond 31 August 2021, that happens anyway.

it's a terrible situation but extending it won't solve anything.
If you want to have a go at Biden, have a go for the screwups in the actual final withdrawal, not the whole wider process.

 

[tsubaki]

No, they are not. I'd be stunned if you tried to argue they were.

They are a modern day VC; guerilla war fighters, taking advantage of certain terrain to drag out a 'war' through attrition. That's all they are - they took the country back unopposed, a few cave hermits with machine guns on jeeps.

What defeated the US in Afghanistan was ideology. Afghanistan quite simply was too disparate culturally and can't be unified under a democracy. In no way did the Taliban win this war by 'military might'.

Why on earth do you think they were not a "traditional military threat"? The US had five years of 50000+ troops in country, with tens of thousands of more NATO troops, thousands of contractors and hundreds of thousands of Afghan troops as well - all either fighting, supporting the fighting or protecting against the Taliban. As military threats go they are pretty much the standard successful Afghan military threat.

Come to think of it, why on earth do you think the VC weren't a "traditional military threat"? The US had hundreds of thousands of troops in Vietnam and the VC ended up on the winning side.

This new General Tubey is even more wrong than regular Tubey is.

 

[Tubey]

you're right, but if US/NATO troops withdraw in August 2022 leaving the Taliban in charge, that happens anyway.
If they stay beyond 31 August 2021, that happens anyway.

it's a terrible situation but extending it won't solve anything.
If you want to have a go at Biden, have a go for the screwups in the actual final withdrawal, not the whole wider process.

No, the difference is you get thousands out who are otherwise pending a public execution in September.

 

[wainy]

Once the US goes, so does everyone else. Now if you have ten years in the military perhaps you can state how long it would take to get enough personnel into Kabul to operate, defend and maintain an airport surrounded by a city and civilians, on our own, after a date agreed by the USA to hand it over to the Taliban, without any US assets…and then what our losses would have been upon withdrawal. Had this been Bagram, a month or so ago, then fair enough, but then the withdrawal would have been bloody, would it not ….

We already have 1000 troops in the airport. It would be a matter of days to mobilise a few thousand more. The army and, to a lesser extent, the raf will have trained for this scenario
countless times. They need to hold a perimeter, not lay seige to Kabul.
Put it this way, if we can’t do this when we already have a foothold in the area, then god forbid anything more serious should ever happen. Qatar can be used for as forward base for Tankers/Bombers for air support should it be needed.
Regardless it’ll never happen, we, nor any of the other countries involved, have the stomach for it. Angers me to see the last 20 years have essentially been for nothing.

 

[Tubey]

Why on earth do you think they were not a "traditional military threat"? The US had five years of 50000+ troops in country, with tens of thousands of more NATO troops, thousands of contractors and hundreds of thousands of Afghan troops as well - all either fighting, supporting the fighting or protecting against the Taliban. As military threats go they are pretty much the standard successful Afghan military threat.

Come to think of it, why on earth do you think the VC weren't a "traditional military threat"? The US had hundreds of thousands of troops in Vietnam and the VC ended up on the winning side.

This new General Tubey is even more wrong than regular Tubey is.

I don't think you know what "traditional military threat" means.

 

[Ruairi77]

No, the difference is you get thousands out who are otherwise pending a public execution in September.

how do you get them out?

 

[tsubaki]

I don't think you know what "traditional military threat" means.

I don't think you know anything, so there you go.

 

[Tubey]

how do you get them out?

By not setting an arbitrary deadline for withdrawal. It could and should have been far better organised.

I accept Biden didn't see the Afghan army collapsing. Fine. Its a mistake but an understandable one. But once it did, he had to change course. He hasn't due to a desire to play the part of a political strongman.

Indeed, that's the irony here. He's acting like Trump.

 

[peteblue]

We already have 1000 troops in the airport. It would be a matter of days to mobilise a few thousand more. The army and, to a lesser extent, the raf will have trained for this scenario
countless times. They need to hold a perimeter, not lay seige to Kabul.
Put it this way, if we can’t do this when we already have a foothold in the area, then god forbid anything more serious should ever happen. Qatar can be used for as forward base for Tankers/Bombers for air support should it be needed.
Regardless it’ll never happen, we, nor any of the other countries involved, have the stomach for it. Angers me to see the last 20 years have essentially been for nothing.

While I agree with a lot of what you say, Kabul airport cannot be defended without great loss of life and can be attacked from a myriad of covered positions within the confines of the city…but I fully agree with your final sentence….

 

[Shevin Keedy]

@Tubey are you watching the match and posting in the match thread while analysing foregn policy and military strategy in here?

Hats off if so; that is commitment to the cause.