Afghanistan - 20 years on

Soldato
Joined
16 Aug 2009
Posts
7,728
20 years, tens of thousands of human lives and trillions of dollars for zero measurable improvement for the country or any of its citizens.

20 years on the hamster treadwheel and finally the americans step off. Just like the Russians before them and oh, just like us 150 years ago. Well, well. Who couldn't have seen that one coming. Its an exact repeat of what occured when the russians departed.

America has finally gotten its catharsis from terrorist incidents on its soil so thats that, until the next time when we go through the same thing all over again and by which time everyone has forgotten all about what went before. And so back onto the treadwheel again.
 
Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
10,054
Location
Leeds
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58068299

Yep, it's well and truly over for Afghanistan again. I wonder who'll be the next nation to have a pretend war so they can spend billions testing out new equipment and wasting lives.

I'm pretty sure we invaded Afghanistan because the Taliban were literally harboring Bin-Laden and refused to hand him over to the US for trial, it wasn't a "pretend" war, over 3,000 people were killed including 67 Brits in a terrorist attack which caused the US to invoke article 5 of the NATO treaty.
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Aug 2014
Posts
5,960
Already stories of the Afghan national army running from the Taliban .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-57720103

Can’t believe we just packed up our suitcases and left . At least give them air support
I can't believe we didn't negotiate a peace deal before leaving and with neighbouring countries so that if they breach it there is the threat of military force from them and us (maybe I'm naive to think this was possible) and we wasted all that time and money on training and equipping the Afghan military (poorly it seems) and they just flee, I seem to remember that the same happened in Iraq with their military when Isis was taking over parts of the country. Not providing air support is irresponsible, the Afghan government have asked for this after all.

I am in favour of ending wars instead of letting them drag on forever (and only using war as a last resort, I don't think it's a good way of resolving problems and costs a lot in terms of lives, time and money), but there are things we can do to make sure it's not a disaster and we don't leave them in the lurch.
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
90,824
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58068299

Yep, it's well and truly over for Afghanistan again. I wonder who'll be the next nation to have a pretend war so they can spend billions testing out new equipment and wasting lives.

Looks like the ME is on the brink of seeing wider disruption several other countries like Lebanon things are coming towards a crisis, Afghan is only going to fan the flames of regional conflict and facilitate destabilisation in the region.

Pretty sure the US and Biden knew that, probably hoping for it as ultimately it just helps the US economy.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
I'm pretty sure we invaded Afghanistan because the Taliban were literally harboring Bin-Laden and refused to hand him over to the US for trial, it wasn't a "pretend" war, over 3,000 people were killed including 67 Brits in a terrorist attack which caused the US to invoke article 5 of the NATO treaty.
I fear we're completely doomed to witness history repeating again and again.

Once they have Afghanistan back under their control, and a safe space for their training camps, etc, then the next objective as always is renewed operations against other nations, including the West.

These people literally will not be happy until the entire world is living under the strictest form of shariah law.

That's not to say I agree with our invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Because I don't. But this cancer is going to fester and spread, and there appears to be very little way to deal with it. By all accounts, these extreme islamists are well-supported. Including by large parts of the general populace. What can you do about that..
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2011
Posts
21,590
Location
ST4
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58068299

Yep, it's well and truly over for Afghanistan again. I wonder who'll be the next nation to have a pretend war so they can spend billions testing out new equipment and wasting lives.

Friend of mine lost an arm, a leg, an eye and suffered severe burns near Lashkar Gah. Can't imagine he's feeling too happy right about now.
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Apr 2014
Posts
29,257
Location
Dominating rooms with symmetry
I'm pretty sure we invaded Afghanistan because the Taliban were literally harboring Bin-Laden and refused to hand him over to the US for trial, it wasn't a "pretend" war, over 3,000 people were killed including 67 Brits in a terrorist attack which caused the US to invoke article 5 of the NATO treaty.

I wasn't denying that any of that happened but you can't tell me top-ranking officials and generals genuinely thought we could pull out and the country would just continue as normal?

A pretend war was probably the wrong term but in the end what has really been achieved? Just because Bin-Ladens name isn’t on the tin doesn’t mean they’ll be any less dangerous, if anything they could be more determined now.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
90,824
Looking at the map of contested areas, etc. there is no way the Afghan government can hold the country without massive external support, they either have to pull back and solidify about half the country with those who aren't in support of the Taliban, etc. and probably concede half the country or likely lose the lot.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Aug 2019
Posts
2,583
I can't believe we didn't negotiate a peace deal before leaving and with neighbouring countries so that if they breach it there is the threat of military force from them and us (maybe I'm naive to think this was possible) and we wasted all that time and money on training and equipping the Afghan military (poorly it seems) and they just flee, I seem to remember that the same happened in Iraq with their military when Isis was taking over parts of the country. Not providing air support is irresponsible, the Afghan government have asked for this after all.

I am in favour of ending wars instead of letting them drag on forever (and only using war as a last resort, I don't think it's a good way of resolving problems and costs a lot in terms of lives, time and money), but there are things we can do to make sure it's not a disaster and we don't leave them in the lurch.


Pretty sure air strikes have been and are being carried out by the US, B-52s have been circling on station.
 
Associate
Joined
21 Dec 2017
Posts
64
Pretty sure air strikes have been and are being carried out by the US, B-52s have been circling on station.
If you look at the geography, not sure how viable this is in the medium to long term. Iran and Pakistan won't allow US to launch airstrikes by aircraft passing through their air space so an agreement with one of the former Soviet Central Asian republics will be required. Not aware there is any such agreement at present.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
90,824
If you look at the geography, not sure how viable this is in the medium to long term. Iran and Pakistan won't allow US to launch airstrikes by aircraft passing through their air space so an agreement with one of the former Soviet Central Asian republics will be required. Not aware there is any such agreement at present.

Russia has mooted limited support for the US using Tajikistan, though that in itself poses problems, due to the security concerns. It may also change to where India provides air support but that presents a whole new dynamic. Very messy situation which I think is likely to slide the whole region into a whole new lot of pain.
 
Back
Top Bottom