The War in Afghanistan

Husky_Khan said:
Small protest of Women against the Taliban policies in the streets of Kabul.

Click to expand...


These are actual feminists I can get behind and support. They actually have legitimate worries and dangers to face. Western feminists are so starved for something to fight against they make up garbage and nonsense issues. I remember a year or two back when in Iran, a march against the government resulted in thousands of arrests yet at the time all I remember seeing were people criticizing Trump for Solomani getting offed.
 
Last edited:
Considering how little responsibility Biden & the rest of the establishment are willing to take for this debacle (ie. none whatsoever) in-between hiding in their favorite vacation spots, where will they direct that blame? Republican neocons are slamming them for losing (I've read the GOP deleted its statement crediting Trump's Doha Agreement already) while the Trumpian populist wing is pointing out how this could've all been avoided if Biden had just stuck to said agreement. So the other party isn't willing to take it either and given how horribly Biden & company have come across when they dare emerge from their hidey-holes at all - I still can't believe the old bastard actually dropped a 'the buck stops with me' line while blaming literally everyone else for this mess in his big speech - I don't think it'll stick anyway.

So. I guess that leaves the soldiers themselves? Should I expect Hollywood to finally be let off their leash and start churning out movies depicting present-day American soldiers as baby-eating brutes, as they did in the '70s, while businesses start removing all mention of how they're 'veteran owned and operated' and the fedgov's 'support the troops' messaging shifts to 'we don't support losers & failures'? It might seem like a bad idea to trash and demoralize and alienate your own military even as America's enemies are emboldened abroad and tensions back home keep climbing toward a boiling point, but if the West Wing LARPers running the show thought they could unilaterally alter a signed agreement with the 'Ban and the latter wouldn't do anything about it because ??? then maybe they'll be dumb enough to do this too.

Well, I guess one alternative to that is blaming all Americans in general. Incidentally Tom Nichols has never served a day in any branch of the US Armed Forces and is not, as far as I know, one of the 5 or 6 or 7 thousand soldiers being flown to Kabul right this second, so if I were him I'd probably shut the fuck up instead of publishing over a thousand words about how America didn't win because the average Americans are too soft and un-serious as a people to win (and finding time to squeeze in some bitching about masks, super-spreader events & fall plans in there). But what do I know, I'm just some plebe from an allied country and not one of the supremely enlightened neocon/neolib intelligentsia with a teaching position at Harvard & the Naval War College! I can imagine his opinion must have its fair share of sympathizers in the American elite, it's not like they're already lacking in contempt for the people they're increasingly not even pretending to represent or care about, so what's a little more mixed with some chickenhawk droppings for good measure.
 
Bacle said:
Click to expand...


Fun Fact: As part of the Doha Agreement, the Taliban committed to protecting U.S. personnel in Afghanistan until the withdraw and have stuck to that agreement. There were no combat related deaths in Afghanistan of U.S. service members in 2020 or 2021 as a result, with the Taliban foiling several attempts by ISIS-K to attack U.S. bases. To be blunt: We have every reason to trust them, they have stuck to their side of the agreement and even now are going at pains to maintain a working relationship in order to get us out of there as quickly as possible.

I think it says a lot that a U.S. soldier has more reason to trust the Taliban than our Afghan "partners" and our own Government.
 
PsihoKekec said:
Troops there don't have much more ammo than their combat loads and considering that the airport is surrounded by urban area, Talibans would only need machine guns to prevent resupply. So while troops and their air support would be able to exact a hefty toll there is a chance that they would be overrun before US forces could establish a bridgehead at Bagram and push through to them.
The Taliban leadership is unwilling to pay the price though, they won the war and see no point in throwing it all away for a battle of spite, they probably consider the situation at the airport hilarious.
Click to expand...
Makes sense.
Though, we can air drop supplies via planes not just helos.
 
Yeah because kt would entail us INVADING AGAIN.
Also, the northern alliance is back to fight the Taliban
 
Aldarion said:
In that case you had no business attempting to do anything in Afghanistan.

EDIT: I'd say major part of the problem is that United States are an empire that prefers to pretend not being one. So instead of acting in a logically coherent manner of an actual empire, you guys go around exporting "human rights", "democracy" and other such bullshit. No wonder all US-supported projects have constantly failed ever since World War II.
Click to expand...

The fundamental problem is that western Neo-liberals believe thier worldview is something that naturally arises in conditions of free choice, not an ideology that rooted in a certain culture and is enforced and imposed by the elite.
 
Last edited:
AnimalNoodles said:
The fundamental problem is that western Neo-liberals believe thier worldview is something that naturally arises in conditions of free choice, not an ideology that rooted in a certain culture and is enforced and inposed by the elite.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That is a problem with a universalist ideology of such type - kinda like Muhammad's successors trying to get everyone into the universal caliphate to "save their souls". At that point, you are dealing with religious fundamentalists, not rational actors.
 
Looks like the evacuation is going to be a weeks long operation.


Along with the estimated 4 or 5 thousand Americans that were in or around Kabul, nearby US military bases in the region have also prepared for roughly 22,000 Afghans to potentially be quartered in facilities there... Plus large numbers of third country nationals as well.
 
Val the Moofia Boss said:
I see little reason why Biden would pull any stunt that could possibly start a battle in Kabul. If a fight breaks out, it's the Iran Hostage crisis again but 10x worse (and with hundreds of hostage casualties this time) and no amount of censorship on the MSM will cover it up.
Click to expand...
If the Taliban hold to their word, helo flights to designated evac points should not be under any threat at all.

Now the ISIS-K areas are a different story, but Taliban controlled areas should, if they mean to hold to their word, be safe for US helo's to travel to for evac purposes.
 
Zachowon said:
I mean, you can also fly low and fast, drop and go.
The Army has mastered air drops enough to take the risk with Ammo only
Click to expand...

Which involves being in MANPAD range for hours, given Kabul is deep inside Taliban territory; we're also talking about slow, large transports operating on a shoestring logistical line. The Army has mastered such drops in the context of a low threat environment, which would not exist here at all.
 
History Learner said:
Which involves being in MANPAD range for hours, given Kabul is deep inside Taliban territory; we're also talking about slow, large transports operating on a shoestring logistical line. The Army has mastered such drops in the context of a low threat environment, which would not exist here at all.
Click to expand...
It doesn't mean being in MANPAD range for hours. We have aircraft capable of this.
Just not as easily
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top