Forum menu
on one level yes of course. any premature death is sad and wrong. However being sent to far off places to kill and be killed is a part of being a serviceman and given the history of the last 30 years its pretty obvious they would end up in a futile situation like this so they really should have had their eyes open to the risk
Are the women and children in education and working as part of the new Afghani 'normal' also collateral damage?
My view is that western military intervention to stabilise other countries comes with the responsibility of not leaving them less stable.
Makes sense Kelvin. Just seems horrific to stir up a tonne of shit and then leave a lot of innocents and people that helped in the hands of an extremist group.
beamers
Full Member
Struggling to feel sympathy for people that couldn’t see the blinking obvious.Any sympathy for the friends and families of the 456 British service personnel killed in Afghanistan?
Would have sympathy for them yes, guess there'd be more than a few that i wouldn't though.
Isn’t it pretty much the case that they’ve done what the Trump administration planned to do, just a little bit slower and less chaotic? (ie, the shit that we’re seeing right now, would have just happened worse)
When the Biden admin announced they were slowing the withdrawal they were castigated for it.
Indeed, there is a vast number in the US glad to be out, and see the resulting carnage as an inevitable consequence of a warring state, no responsibility for massively contributing to that.
Just seems horrific
It is.
Much as I hate to sound like I'm agreeing with the chewbot, getting out and accepting the country would be ruled by the Taliban has (seemingly) been Biden's position for over a decade now. Maybe he's right, maybe all we've ever done is delay this unfolding catastrophe by staying in, and all that staying in any longer could do is delay it a bit longer. I don't know. It doesn't seem "right" to me though.
I do know that Rory Stewart is worth a listen/read to understand what we might have possibly done differently, and what we really need to be doing now to help with the aftermath. Twitter is easiest.
The buffer states have always got the worst of it, unless they roll over!
Does anyone really believe nations such as our's have been engaged in military action to defend women's rights in a country thousands of miles away from ours.
Calling America (and it's allies) the worlds police is not wholly accurate. They are only involved in counties/territories that are important to their interests. There are plenty of cooperative and benign/strategically unimportant countries with as bad and worse records they choose not to police.
Looking at the evacuation I noticed that, again, majority are young men/men who are able bodied
To be fair they may be the Taliban's first targets (see Srebreniza, no idea how to spell that) especially if they are young able bodied men who previously worked with NATO...
so they really should have had their eyes open to the risk
Aye the soldiers had a choice not to go 🙁
To be fair they may be the Taliban’s first targets (see Srebreniza, no idea how to spell that) especially if they are young able bodied men who previously worked with NATO…
They have a choice of either fight or perish. Somehow many of them seem to be clinging to false hope that running away is a better option. Probably because they think it is better to switch sides which some can but not all.
As for mineral deposits in that region it is huge! During the oil exploration (actually the people there have been using oil in that region for many centuries) in the 40s and 50s the Chinese govt found a huge deposit of other minerals in that region to be substantial but was not the right time to explore them, now perhaps is the time for them to harvest the deposits. Well, the next environmental damage will start from there ... the water will be polluted and it will affect all nations downstream right down to SE Asia. Next pandemic waiting to happen?
plus-one
Free Member
Aye the soldiers had a choice not to go 🙁
I musta been lucky and skipped that national service we all had to do..
The army is very much a choice.
They have a choice of either flight or perish.
Fixed that for you. The Taliban will be in total charge soon. To fight them now is to perish.
I've often listened to Rory Stewart when it comes to Afghanistan, he just reminds you that nearly everything else you've heard is uninformed bullshit.
As for Biden, I suppose it's better to have your Jimmy Carter moment at the beginning of your term rather than at the end. Though on saying that, I feel I'm being a little harsh on the peanut farmer.
Biden has shown himself to be a complete moron, (though we knew this already, he just got a pass because there was an even bigger moron in the White House before him.)
Fixed that for you. The Taliban will be in total charge soon. To fight them now is to perish.
There is nowhere to run or flight as Taliban started constricting the country with their surge.
Biden has shown himself to be a complete moron, (though we knew this already, he just got a pass because there was an even bigger moron in the White House before him.)
He is, especially considering his CV with experience as advisor in that region during the Afghans Soviet war.
There are risks of life to many jobs and you've more chance of dying or being injured in construction or farming than in the Armed forces but yes you could call it an occupational hazard. Maybe they could've done something different but it is their choice.
would you say the same for the ~150 NHS staff who've died of Covid in the last year...
My view is that western military intervention to stabilise other countries comes with the responsibility of not leaving them less stable.
Maybe - but the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan was not intended to stabilise the country. It was not a humanitarian intervention to begin with.
The problem came after having bombed the shit out of the Taleban government, destroyed Al Qaeda, and captured ringleaders (as well as many innocent farmers) - what would happen next for the US? Go home - and let the country become a platform for future terrorist attacks? Cut a deal with the least worst Taleban leaders and get them stay in office so long as they promise not to do anything anti-US in the future? Or try to support an anti-Taleban government to stabilise the country - but knowing the Taleban (or some iteration of it) will never go away? The US tried option #3 and then a mix of #3 and #2 for many years - and is now choosing option #1.
d42dom
Full Member
There are risks of life to many jobs and you’ve more chance of dying or being injured in construction or farming than in the Armed forces but yes you could call it an occupational hazard. Maybe they could’ve done something different but it is their choice.would you say the same for the ~150 NHS staff who’ve died of Covid in the last year…
It's no really the danger part of it I've got an issue with.
It’s no really the danger part of it I’ve got an issue with.
fair enough, probably not the right thread anyway
I musta been lucky and skipped that national service we all had to do..
The army is very much a choice.
I wish all the "something must be done" lot remember that when the stories of life under the Taliban come out.
Choosing to serve doesn't give you the right to pick and choose the conflicts you are sent to, that's what politicians do. Sadly many politicians would run a mile from service and actively undermine those who do.
I work with a lot of ex-servicemen in my job, several of whom served in Afghanistan.
General feeling of dismay and anger at this happening. Many lost friends out there and seeing it all be for nothing has hit them hard.
And concern of course for the interpreters, many of whom they kept in touch with and are all currently trying to flee the country.
I did 3 tours of Afghanistan whilst in the RAF, was sat 100 metres away from where the battle of bastion happened.
I've sat and watched the MERT cab lift of at all times of the day collecting wounded or dead soldiers and bringing them back to the hospital on camp.
I've seen the looks on my mates faces after they have been sent out to collect parts of other soldiers that have been blown up.
I've also seen the aftermath when back in the UK and guys have had no support after dealing with some of the things they saw over there.
Tonight, sat here in my lounge feeling sick to the pit of my stomach wondering how it all came to this and really.... What was the ****ing point.
RIP to all of those service personnel that lost their lives.
Let's also not forget all of the Afghan people that lost their lives too.
It all makes me feel incredibly sad.
Sadly many politicians would run a mile from service
Why "sadly"?
Army is a big employer just some folks without prospects wanting a job ffs !!
Given a choice I’m sure they’d happily wander round the world doing drills/training etc.
this shows that the main issue was the advice given to Biden and Johnson was hopelessly optomistic. I suspect some senior militay folk are now going to find themselves in trouble for this.
~given what Biden was told taking the troops out quickly seemed reasonable. trouble is what he was told was false. You cannot make good decisions without good information. He got bad information so made a bad decision
RIP to all of those service personnel that lost their lives.
Let’s also not forget all of the Afghan people that lost their lives too.
It all makes me feel incredibly sad.
Pretty much sums it up and there will be a lot more deaths of Afghan people in the coming weeks and months.
Would a slower retreat of US forces make any difference in the long run or just delay the inevitable.
The US tried option #3 and then a mix of #3 and #2 for many years – and is now choosing option #1.
IMO Afghanistan wanted the West to be their army while they deal with the political or administrative (money etc) stuff and continued with their way of live (slowly modernise). It will take at least 5 generations to see some improvement in mentality change (build up the confidence of the people as the people are broken at the moment unless they are radicalised). During this time a system can slowly put in place to reduce the "wild west shootout" culture. All this provided that the neighbouring countries remain stable. That's why 20 years is just a very short time. Most of the central Asia countries have the strongmen in charge to keep things in control and without them the region will easily succumb to radicalisation. It is not a matter of if but when once the strongmen depart or die. Therefore, it is in the interest of the West not to stick their nose into the affairs of the strongmen in that region. Forget about the human rights etc as that concept is seen as diluting or corrupting their way of life. The purpose of being in that region is, again, to keep those radicals in check even if it means keep them on the edge. It is a slow grinding process and a battle of wits and endurance, a tactic they all know in that region so nobody makes a move. Hence, "peace" with undercurrent ...
Would a slower retreat of US forces make any difference in the long run or just delay the inevitable.
Just a delay of the inevitable. There should be no retreat at all for at least 5 generations as they need help in building up their confidence first.
~given what Biden was told taking the troops out quickly seemed reasonable. trouble is what he was told was false. You cannot make good decisions without good information. He got bad information so made a bad decision
Bay of Pigs scenario perhaps?
2 to 3 thousands of years ago Chinese emperor was fighting a losing battle in that region even after so many attempts, until they got fed up and sent in their heavy army to put an end (keep them at bay more like) to the "insurgents". Peace lasted for few generations until the collapsed Chinese dynasty given the insurgents confidence to dominate to region again ... the situation repeated over and over until today. Insurgents in those days came from the south and north ...
What a mess. Just reading some stuff about how we, US and Afghans themselves have messed up, it just seems it was/is hopeless and always will be.
Interesting Twitter thread by Paul D. Miller, also relevant to some of the posts made in this thread so far:
As Afghanistan collapses, I see a few myths taking root. I'd like to respond to some of them.
And a thread on the hopelessness of trying to suppress poppy cultivation https://twitter.com/jeffreypclemens/status/1426930889271877633
Other stuff about training up an army to use modern western weaponry... first job is to teach the recruits to read. Corruption diverting soldiers/police's wages and food away from them. All that western tech now in the Taliban's hands with trained operators, and even if they can't use/sustain it they can sell it to Russia/China.
NATO contracts were given out to up to 50 years. NATO missions go on for a long time such as KFOR (Kosovo) which is also still going. NATO were not due to pull out of Afghanistan for a long time yet.
What a mess. Just reading some stuff about how we, US and Afghans themselves have messed up, it just seems it was/is hopeless and always will be.
The west did not make a mess by being there but they lack endurance and wits to remain there. There is no way a system can be changed in one generations.
Would a slower retreat of US forces make any difference in the long run or just delay the inevitable.
Just delay the inevitable. The border region with ****stan is unconquerable. The area is filled with arms. All the bad guys had to do was wait in their caves until the yanks pulled out.
The problem is the sheer amount of military hardware, blood already shed, hardened fighters and regional players with their own agendas.
Looks a complete mess tbh.
The UK is at fault, the US especially and there doesn’t seem to have been much fight in the Afghan army - supposedly had 300,000 troops compared to 80,000 of the Taliban but looks to have given up without any fight.
Just listened to Biden. Lots of re-writing history of course, but basically unless a planeload of Americans gets downed leaving Kabul, I get the impression he will weather any short term political storm in the US. Comparisons of images with Saigon are visually the same, but in terms of visceral connection with the public it is very different: Vietnam was very much a 'holy crusade' and not 'reluctant self defence', and in Vietnam: c.58k US dead (out of a pop of c.200million), Afghanistan: 2.5k US dead (out of pop of 330m). So, save a massacre or plane downed at Kabul airport, or a major terrorist attack on US soil clearly linked to Aghanistan, he'll get away with it.
Not saying it is right, of course, just that my guess is that politically, it will be forgotten almost as quickly as the Taliban took over...
The west did not make a mess by being there but they lack endurance and wits to remain there. There is no way a system can be changed in one generations.
I wonder how we could ever maintain endurance/resolve on a matter for the duration needed (80+ years?), in face of political attrition and public opinion at home. China is the only country I could envisage being able to.
Vietnam: c.58k US dead (out of a pop of c.200million), Afghanistan: 2.5k US dead
Why do people only ever measure these wars in US or UK dead?
The UK is at fault, the US especially and there doesn’t seem to have been much fight in the Afghan army – supposedly had 300,000 troops compared to 80,000 of the Taliban but looks to have given up without any fight.
Why is this the fault of the UK and the US?
"Not saying it is right, of course, just that my guess is that politically, it will be forgotten almost as quickly as the Taliban took over"
That's why he did it now, to get it out of the way over a year before the mid terms.
Should have stayed in whatever limited capacity, there is the moral obligation and I'm afraid the cost (In all senses of the word) will be far greater in the long run. Spending billions to train the ANA was always a red herring, though good business for some.
Basic security that can provide a modicum of normality, alowimg the economy to continue to grow and for some of the population to get an education would have at least left some Afghans with hope for the future.
Instead we've sent a nation back to the middle ages.
doesn’t seem to have been much fight in the Afghan army – supposedly had 300,000 troops compared to 80,000 of the Taliban but looks to have given up without any fight.
Not paid, not supplied, not fed, corrupt leaders/middle, no belief in the cause to risk death fighting for it, deployed to some area you have no connections/loyalty to. Just swap jobs and work for the Taliban, put up with their rule, survive. Most recruits won't be quality people (not that they are to blame for that), but given these stories it's quite hard to blame them.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/13/world/asia/afghanistan-rapid-military-collapse.html
"Every nation has the government it deserves" ?
Can’t say I disagree with anything Biden said. Reading between the lines the message was that he wasn’t willing to carry on lining the pockets of corrupt Afghan politicians and generals who don’t give a shit about the people they rule.
They should have setup and funded female only militias and political institutions. They would have put up more resistance and wouldn’t have been so corrupt and self-serving.
Fella on the Radio today said that the Afghan Army training by the West was repetitive and low-level. Each successive group just taught the Afghan soldiers basic rifle skills, basic first-aid, etc. Before going away and the next lot doing the same again.
They should have setup and funded female only militias and political institutions. They would have put up more resistance and wouldn’t have been so corrupt and self-serving.
Afghan's aren't Kurds
The fundamental issue is that the investment didn't create a society that Afghan's were prepared to fight for. The leaders aren't there.
The reasons may be complex but it's the reality.
It's unlikely that there will be a "resistance" to the Taliban. If there isn't it's pointless making another intervention as there isn't the appetite for the pain that change will necessitate.
It's a tragedy for those who embraced the opportunities the investment created but if an Afghan isn't prepared to fight to keep his sister in education and out of a burqa then why should the lad or lass from the UK sink housing estate?
for some of the population
the ultimate problem, you can't just nation build for some of the people.
"Can’t say I disagree with anything Biden said."
That's because he forgot to mention that the USA spent a decade funding the mujahedin sowing the seeds of what was to become the Taliban.
Blaming the Afghans for this shit storm is shameful. a nation that has been under constant foreign occupation for 40 years (Taliban=****stan).
"The fundamental issue is that the investment didn’t create a society that Afghan’s were prepared to fight for"
I've commented on the competence of the ANA a couple of times but over recent years they have died in their thousands whilst US casualties have been very low. So it's not really fair to characterise Afghans as not being prepared to fight for their sisters to get an education as plainly thousands have given their lives.
They were prepared to fight whilst the US military had their backs. Now they have been abandoned the choice isn't to fight or not it's to die or not.
It's a shitshow, that's for sure, but there would/could never be a good time to withdraw western armed forces.
US gets involved in foreign conflict - possibly for good reason - and takes some allies with them but, despite examples of what happens when you don't have an exit plan, they don't have an exit plan.
The only surprise in this is the speed at which the Taliban have taken control.
I wonder how we could ever maintain endurance/resolve on a matter for the duration needed (80+ years?), in face of political attrition and public opinion at home. China is the only country I could envisage being able to.
80+ years is not enough. 100 years minimum and 200 years there is hope.
China and Russia have already given their views. i.e. no intervention in Xinjian while Russia says no radicalisation of Uzbeks and Tajikistans (historically they gobble up one another to form a major force that cause problems in that region). The Talib are willing to negotiate because they want the technologies for more devastating effect. Remember Talib are in for the long haul and have time on their side so long as they keep growing and someone is going to continue their legacy.
West leaving can be seen Biden's old tactic of targeting Russia & China. i.e. I bet US will aid the Talib again when Russia and China exert too much dominance or influence over Asia. What they all don't realise is that as they all focus on each other, the Talib will use this opportunity to
employ their divide and conquer tactic again where they will be the main beneficiaries of the fight between the West and Russia/China. They will be armed from both sides and that's where they start to dominate them one by one. The tactic will be similar to that employed many centuries ago with great effectiveness. Yes, the Talib has a great plan for the world and with time on their hands. They are now trying to get central Asia on board as many in that region have already been radicalised. The seeds are sowed. One wrong move from the regional strongmen will mean a door opens for a replacement ideology. They know all those strongmen will not live forever. Oh ya they will target the weaker nations first, consolidate their power then move on to the next target.
Afghan’s aren’t Kurds
Actually if the Afghan women are trained well they could probably be a force to reckon with as being women in those region mean the steak is higher for them. Being women there can only mean one thing. For the pleasure of men and slave. But they are also prone to redicalisation.