Forum menu
Iran is so happy now.
Is it? The US has cut its losses, and Iran now has a hostile Taleban regime along its eastern border instead of a too-weak-to-threaten government that’s propped up by the US at vast expense.
There will be a period of stability there now that the West has lost their strategic location where they could keep an eye on Iran etc from a high point.
The balancing power there is China and if Taliban is to destabilise or cause troubles to Iran then they would be in for a rough ride for another few thousand years ... delaying their plan to dominate world with their ideology. Unlike the West China is at their doorstep. Their escape routes are via ****stan or Central Asia only. i.e. in the East China, West Iran and South India (they wouldn't accept them)
Also as long as the West do not criticise the dictators in Central Asia etc there will be a period of peace.
A humanitarian disaster in waiting and not just because of the barbaric practices of the Taliban.
Pretty much sums up the next few months and years. I really feel for the average citizen over there and I’m especially worried for the young women and children who have had a taste of freedom and now likely face a life of subjugation and radicalisation.
Pretty much sums up the next few months and years. I really feel for the average citizen over there and I’m especially worried for the young women and children who have had a taste of freedom and now likely face a life of subjugation and radicalisation.
Those Afghan families who worked for the West should be given asylum as first priority. These are the ones that have been "westernised" and willing to adopt to a new way of life.
... and I’m especially worried for the young women and children who have had a taste of freedom and now likely face a life of subjugation and radicalisation.
It works both ways some may or may not be radicalised but I suspect many will suffer mentally if they cannot adopt to the radical lifestyle.
the west via ****stan funded , armed and trained the Mujaheddin funneling the money via ****stand. this was during the time Bin laden was one of the "freedom fighters" as the Mujaheddin were called then
Its completely hairsplitting and rewriting history to claim that the west did not fund and train him and a lot more.
without western support for the Mujaheddin they would not exist in the same way now
Bin Laden was bringing money from Saudi circles to distribute to the Arab Afghans: he was a bag carrier and operator of training camps for jihad-vacationing Saudi youth, not a fighter or military leader.
Ah, fair, how foolish of me, clearly a cuddly lamb...
Of the kind so favoured by the Saudi establishment no doubt
Its completely hairsplitting and rewriting history to claim that the west did not fund and train him and a lot more.
without western support for the Mujaheddin they would not exist in the same way now
^^^ This and the entire Islamic world.
Because Soviet Union was in the process of controlling the region but US intervened to destablise their control by supporting the warlords/mujaheddin/whatever etc (Was Biden the advisor at that time?)
Can’t see many will be willing to continue to contribute this to a Taliban led “government”. A humanitarian disaster in waiting and not just because of the barbaric practices of the Taliban. Saudi has been mentioned and let’s face it their brutal regime is “Sharia” based and is not much different from the Taliban’s
Well if there's not much difference, the West deals with Saudi so why not the Taliban?
I'm guessing the Taliban are run by arsehole "alpha males"with guns and lots of attitude. Will there be bloodshed while they work out who will be the new emperor?
Well if there’s not much difference, the West deals with Saudi so why not the Taliban?
... because Taliban has the mountain to shelter them. They can dictate the terms and they have their big bros behind them. Saudi is just desert flat land near to the sea and expose to invasion.
West was doing well by chipping away their strength until the withdrawal.
I’m guessing the Taliban are run by arsehole “alpha males”with guns and lots of attitude. Will there be bloodshed while they work out who will be the new emperor?
No bloodshed as they have already worked out their hierarchy and they are very united. Bloodshed more towards the warlords who they will divide and conquer. I give them 3 years to solidify their strength before something happen in the west. I bet they already have cells established in the west only waiting for the right moment.
the West deals with Saudi so why not the Taliban
Saudi has oil and buys a lot of guns
The flight tracker just shows globe masters after one another. looks like operations slash and burn is well under way.
Really feel for anyone who has been seen to have helped the western movement. The Taliban will have been spying for years.
Also looks like they have been on a media training course doing interviews on the radio.
I see a blanket ban on reporters and an internet black out comming followed by revenge. the banks have ran out of cash already so I guess that's been nicked by the leaving government.
jivehoneyjive
Holy shit! How bizarre that this name should reappear right now – makes you think…
Not a name I expected to see back on here. Not under that name anyway.
Really feel for anyone who has been seen to have helped the western movement. The Taliban will have been spying for years.
They have to. They have learned the lesson of Bin Laden and will not let that happen again.
Also looks like they have been on a media training course doing interviews on the radio.
They are brilliant at that.
Very good at sweet talking as they have been trained for thousands of years in trade to survive.
Very intelligent people so underestimate them at your peril as they can learn very fast. Just because they don't speak English etc does not mean they are inferior.
I was not surprised at all with the Taliban strategy of encircling Afghanistan. Doesn't take a genius to see the way they cut out the supply or escape routes but it is the speed at which it happened.
Complete moral vacuum of leadership
https://twitter.com/Charlie533080/status/1426787567073177602
Complete moral vacuum of leadership> https://twitter.com/Charlie533080/status/1426787567073177602
These are the people (assuming legit and not spy etc) that should be given asylum and not those that crossed the channel with boats. Those people are already safe the moment they stepped on EU soil, that's the different. The threat to those who worked for the West is real. They will be hunted down like an animal and probably their entire family will be treated like slaves.
… because Taliban has the mountain to shelter them. They can dictate the terms and they have their big bros behind them. Saudi is just desert flat land near to the sea and expose to invasion.
I think you are misunderstanding what I meant by "deal with". I was talking about "doing business with".
I think you are misunderstanding what I meant by “deal with”. I was talking about “doing business with”.
Firstly, the West is much more accommodating to Saudi because of the "black gold".
Secondly, Saudi (Kingdom) would rather have peace than to deal with the hassle. Even if they wish to fight they have nowhere to hide.
Hence, both are willing parties to enjoy whatever is there.
The Taliban on the other hand cannot be negotiated with. What they want the world will not or cannot give. i.e. what is there to negotiate when they only accept and dictates their own terms? It's like negotiating with yourself looking at the mirror. Besides, what is there for them to loose? Nothing, and they are not afraid of the West with the mountain behind them.
<ArmChairGeneralMode>
Right back at the arse end of 2001 it was clear the ones with the most to gain and most to therefore loose were women. The Coalition forces should have moved to make the entire native security and military structures run, armed and populated by women, then treated any encountered armed, non coalition males as an active enemy combatant and killed them.
</ArmChairGeneralMode>
Can see this not being popular but, like you (and your wife/mother/daughter), I'm safe behind a keyboard.
Two questions and a bit of context that the powers that be choose to keep quiet.
1. Has any external 'developed' country ever succeeded in imposing any form of government on Afghanistan long-term?
2. How many 'puppet' governments put in place by 'developed' countries have stayed in power for any length of time after the threat of massive military force has been removed?
Also, look at Afghanistan before 1979. Sure, I'll bet there were very conservative attitudes in the sticks beyond the cities, but this video of Afghanistan in the 60s doesn't look like the 'intractable fundamentalist hell hole' that many would like to write it off as.
Sure, I’ll bet there were very conservative attitudes in the sticks beyond the cities, but this video of Afghanistan in the 60s doesn’t look like the ‘intractable fundamentalist hell hole’ that many would like to write it off as.
Yes, but Lebanon, Vietnam, etc. were the same. You have a wealthy, internationalized elite living in the cities, but the majority of the population are living in poor rural areas. Their loyalties will be primarily to their village or region, not to a nation-state, definitely not to a bunch of western-educated bureaucrats living in the capital city. Westerners think of the Vietnam War and Korean war in terms of a capitalist-socialist struggle. For the locals, it was a civil war and the communist side could portray itself as nationalists fighting to expel the foreigners. Same in Afghanistan, the Taliban now have legitimacy as the guys who expelled the infidels who sent drones to murder innocent civilians at weddings, etc.
Also, look at Afghanistan before 1979.
"Bitter Lake" is an interesting watch, if you've not seen it.
It wasn't the case of not wanting to 'westernise' but rather the trillions were spend on military oppression rather than infrastructure, housing, hospitals, schools, etc.
NB always interesting to spot new names appearing when these sort of discussions occur on STW.
NB always interesting to spot new names appearing when these sort of discussions occur on STW.
You know what STW stands for, right? 🙂
the trillions were spend on military oppression rather than infrastructure, housing, hospitals, schools, etc.
There was a lot of money provided for infrastructure, etc., but you can't build that without getting local officials involved. The entire bureaucracy is corrupt and salaries don't get paid so money for infrastructure gets siphoned off. Unless you put armed guards on every site, equipment just gets stolen. If the guards don't get paid, they'll just steal the stuff themselves and sell it to the Taliban, who had money from growing opium. Military aid is probably much easier to account for because a lot of it is just provided as equipment, and it's a lot easier to do an audit of a military base than tour construction sites in remote areas.
but rather the trillions were spend on military oppression rather than infrastructure, housing, hospitals, schools, etc.
The money pouring into Afghanistan has been a massive "grift" for many US corporations since the invasion. there's plenty of folk who've made a fortune off the backs of people "far far away in another country". Not much, if any, of it stayed in Afghanistan
Also, look at Afghanistan before 1979. Sure, I’ll bet there were very conservative attitudes in the sticks beyond the cities, but this video of Afghanistan in the 60s doesn’t look like the ‘intractable fundamentalist hell hole’ that many would like to write it off as.
iirc at some point in the 70's there was a socialist coup/government, and a proxy war began between the USSR and the US. At the same time Saudi started pumping billions of dollars into the promotion of wahhabism, which added the religious radicalism into the ongoing war.
Fundamentalist hellhole was not fundamentalist hellhole before fundamentalists took over and made it a hellhole shocker.
Although I get the point, it was once outside people started interfering and in some cases facilitating.
Pretty much as in every "modern" military failure ("foreign adventure" for fans of the Suez Crisis), the aggressor is undermined by the inability to collect facts and disseminate them to decision makers in an unbiased form (See General Petraeus' bullshit summary about Afghanistan circa 2011). The decision makers bollocks it further by "deliberately" "misreading" the facts and spinning bullshit to their audience and avoiding the reality that they have lost - or kick the can down the road - "Tony, Gordon, Dave & Theresa say 'hi!'"
This then seems to be followed by "policy makers" directing tactical military activity for tactical goals, as the ludicrously naive , nebulous strategic goals disappear into the mist of jingoism, lies and cultural hegemony from whence they came. Victory returns to just being a cough sweet.
Indochina bought to you by JFK, Johnson & Nixon, via France really should be on the syllabus.
Although I get the point, it was once outside people started interfering and in some cases facilitating.
That was my point!
Not much, if any, of it stayed in Afghanistan
Plenty of that money got stolen by Afghan officials. Whether it stayed in Afghanistan or was moved to banks in safer countries is a different question.
Watching that YT reminded me of some more adventurous mates in that period who travelled through eg Lebanon, Iran and Afghanistan. None came back with bad stories and one liked Afghanistan so much he got a star and crescent moon tattoo. It seems opium farming is more lucrative than hashish, maybe the WFO or UN need to be looking at this.
Ultimately it's a sorry shit fest, but it's hardly surprising that invasion and occupation doesn't work.
The absolute mess that the US and the UK have made all over the middle east particular in the last 20 years is a disgrace. The US and the UK have no all right to go in anywhere.
All they have done is make hardline groups stronger and polarised.
Ultimately it’s a sorry shit fest, but it’s hardly surprising that invasion and occupation doesn’t work.
The absolute mess that the US and the UK have made all over the middle east particular in the last 20 years is a disgrace. The US and the UK have no all right to go in anywhere.
All they have done is make hardline groups stronger and polarised.
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11 Bush 'had' to take a stand or be pilloried by his domestic audience. Unfortunately, probably to to the intelligence failures and resultant arse-covering, there didn't seem to be all that much to go on. Hence the broad message of the speech was "we are going to fight someone, somewhere over this". I remember my sense of foreboding as he gave that speech.
The absolute mess that the US and the UK have made all over the middle east particular in the last 20 years is a disgrace. The US and the UK have no all right to go in anywhere.
What are the options? Leave 'em to it, or intervene better? Can't think of any others. If it was my country I'd want "intervene better" rather than be left to my fate (and as others have pointed out, most of these folks are just like us and not nutters living in caves or whatever). How we do that from here I haven't a clue.
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11 Bush ‘had’ to take a stand or be pilloried by his domestic audience. Unfortunately, probably to to the intelligence failures and resultant arse-covering, there didn’t seem to be all that much to go on.
No leader could not respond to an attack like that. It didn't take long to identify who was behind the attacks (the F.B.I. had already identified al Qaeda as responsible for the attack on the U.S.S. Cole and might have preempted the WTC attack if the C.I.A. hadn't been refusing to cooperate.) Osama bin Laden was hiding in Afghanistan as a guest of the Taliban, who refused to hand him over. The Taliban had no legitimacy as a government, so it was a broadly supported international decision to go into Afghanistan to destroy al Qaeda. No U.S. President could have done that part of it much differently.
The problem was that the Bush administration had no real plan about what to do after the Taliban were thrown out and never figured out how to deal with ****stan. Without ****stani cooperation, there was no chance of stabilizing Afghanistan. Then Bush got distracted by Iraq. The chaos in Iraq pretty much guaranteed that Afghanistan would fail.
johnx2
Free Member
The absolute mess that the US and the UK have made all over the middle east particular in the last 20 years is a disgrace. The US and the UK have no all right to go in anywhere.What are the options? Leave ’em to it, or intervene better? Can’t think of any others. If it was my country I’d want “intervene better” rather than be left to my fate (and as others have pointed out, most of these folks are just like us and not nutters living in caves or whatever). How we do that from here I haven’t a clue.
tbh, probably leave them to it, but don't put them behind a blockade. Leave them open to the world and the worlds influences and trade. It'll take 20/30 maybe even 50 years. but they'll catch up.
Intervening isn't really an option now. The US and the UK have lost. (And have utterly lost any moral high ground they pretended to have)
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11 Bush ‘had’ to take a stand
Certainly Bush played a role in how we arrived at the current situation, but there are many players who will forever avoid such scrutiny...
The current UK Ambassador to the US, Karen Pierce for example:
Karen Pierce said “I am honoured to have been asked to represent the UK in the US. I think it is the UK’s single most important relationship. There is a deep bond between Britain and the US, built on many pillars. We have a fantastic cross-Government team across the US and I look forward to working with them to strengthen and even further deepen the special relationship between our two countries and peoples”
Karen Pierce has been the United Kingdom’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York since March 2018. Prior to this role, Karen served as the Director General for Political Affairs and Chief Operating Officer of the Foreign and Commonwealth in London, from 2016.
Karen joined the Foreign & Commonwealth Office in 1981. Her first role was in Tokyo between 1984 and 1987, after which she returned to the UK to work in the Security Policy Department. Karen worked in Washington as the Private Secretary to the British Ambassador to the United States between 1992 and 1995.
Between 1996 and 2006, Karen held several positions in London including Team Leader for Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova, Deputy Head of Eastern Adriatic (Balkans) Department, Head of Newsroom, Head of EU Department (Bilateral) and concurrently Head of Afghanistan Political Military Unit after 9/11 before returning to the Balkans as Balkans Coordinator from 2002 to 2006.
In 2006, Karen moved to New York for the first time to be the Deputy Permanent Representative and Ambassador at the UK Mission to the UN. In 2009, she returned to London to become the Director of South Asia and Afghanistan Department and the UK’s Special Representative for Afghanistan and ****stan. In 2012, Karen started her second multilateral role, this time in Geneva, where she was the Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the UK Mission to the United Nations, World Trade Organization and Other International Organisations until 2015. Between 2015 and 2016 Karen was the UK’s Ambassador to Afghanistan.
https://twitter.com/SirSocks/status/16727692586
The whole situation was inevitable. My understanding is that there were huge swathes of rural Afghanistan that were never under any real government/US control.
US and the UK have made all over the middle east particular in the last 20 years is a disgrace
Try 100 years or more - from dividing up the arabian peninsular with a ruler to supporting Saudi because of the oil. From the balfour declaration to allowing isreal to annex other countries land and to create a huge ghetto in gaza. from Suez to Iraq etc etc
I have a bad feeling about how this is gonna go.
https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1427202316512514050
tjagain
Full Member
US and the UK have made all over the middle east particular in the last 20 years is a disgraceTry 100 years or more
I'm aware of the history.
Just watching that on twitter, There are reports of young men, have tied themselves onto planes, falling off into the city as the planes take off...
Did you see the earlier shots of the US Army using AH64s as crowd control along the runway in front of the Globemasters?
Just watching that on twitter, There are reports of young men, have tied themselves onto planes, falling off into the city as the planes take off…
There's footage. Avoid. 🙁
What are the options? Leave ’em to it, or intervene better?
Ever noticed how Muslim countries where the majority of the population don't live in abject poverty don't tend to become breeding grounds for extremists?
With obvious exceptions where a jilted rich kid throws a tantrum because the US military don't take him seriously (aka Bin Laden).
That footage on the ground is absolutely mental! I've no desire to watch the other stuff 😳
I suspect most of those people have very, very good reason to fear the worst if they're desperate enough to try and hitch a lift on the outside of an aircraft. I wonder how many people the US and UK have abandoned to a truly terrible fate?