Afghanistan - 20 years on

Associate
Joined
2 Jul 2003
Posts
2,436
We wouldn't need conscription, people would be right out there with whatever they have to hand :p

This country was populated by people who like a fight and I don't think that has ever been lost.

And the Afghans don't?!?! It's down to their command structure either falling apart or switching sides. Kind of akin to the French after the allied retreat to the Nazis, it wasn't the men at the pointy end who were at fault.
The Iraqi army fell apart sharpish too. The issue the 'winning side' had afterward was those people went on to form the backbone of insurgent groups or militia. I wonder if we'll see the same happen in areas the traditionally weren't too fond of the Taliban?
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jun 2012
Posts
11,259
They had 300,000 trained soldiers well equipped by NATO. However, they all surrendered to 75,000 Taliban with the capital going down without any fight at all.

I read that a lot of so called gov forces were actually taliban in disguise, don't know how accurate that is but I would make sense.
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Posts
4,344
Location
North West
I read that a lot of so called gov forces were actually taliban in disguise, don't know how accurate that is but I would make sense.

And most likely that a lot just wanted an easy way to earn ok money in a market lacking jobs. When the crunch time came, they didn't want to fight and went for the easier option.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
37,804
Location
block 16, cell 12
And most likely that a lot just wanted an easy way to earn ok money in a market lacking jobs. When the crunch time came, they didn't want to fight and went for the easier option.

Even the civilians in Syria etc were prepared to rise up if needed and die.

But conversely had assad not been supported by Russia etc it would have been a similar end result there, a country run by jihadis.

Thankfully assad had the army and enough support to endure.
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Jul 2003
Posts
9,595
I see we are sending more troops to help with the evacuation.

Wonder what would happen if the taliban start executing civilians while we still have troops on the ground. I doubt they will as I bet they can't believe their luck at the moment, they seem to have taken the city without resistance using a small group of fighters. But it would put the UK / US governments in a very tricky situation if atrocities are carried out while they have enough troops on the ground to stop it.

If the taliban allow flights to continue and don't attack US / UK forces then this could be the way for the least bloodshed (for us anyway) but its tragic for the poor sods left behind. What a shambles :(
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Posts
4,344
Location
North West
I see we are sending more troops to help with the evacuation.

Wonder what would happen if the taliban start executing civilians while we still have troops on the ground. I doubt they will as I bet they can't believe their luck at the moment, they seem to have taken the city without resistance using a small group of fighters. But it would put the UK / US governments in a very tricky situation if atrocities are carried out while they have enough troops on the ground to stop it.

If the taliban allow flights to continue and don't attack US / UK forces then this could be the way for the least bloodshed (for us anyway) but its tragic for the poor sods left behind. What a shambles :(

tin-foil hat on but what if the non Taliban groups commit atrocities and blame the Taliban in order to gain international support to help punish / fight back on the Taliban.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Jun 2005
Posts
24,023
Location
In the middle
I see we are sending more troops to help with the evacuation.

Wonder what would happen if the taliban start executing civilians while we still have troops on the ground. I doubt they will as I bet they can't believe their luck at the moment, they seem to have taken the city without resistance using a small group of fighters. But it would put the UK / US governments in a very tricky situation if atrocities are carried out while they have enough troops on the ground to stop it.

If the taliban allow flights to continue and don't attack US / UK forces then this could be the way for the least bloodshed (for us anyway) but its tragic for the poor sods left behind. What a shambles :(
I think US/UK forces will just defend the airport until everyone who is going to get out has done, then withdraw. I doubt they would get involved with anything going on outside.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2007
Posts
12,090
Location
London, UK
Members here have already showed you about defending him.

You don't understand. It's not about when. It's the security Biden has in place for the people to leave safely.

He hasn't done anything.
And again "May I ask why you defend a person in a country that you don't live in or can vote for?"

No they haven't and so again show me where I have defended him. It should be easy right, you've said I defended him so you've read it and can easily quote it.
 
Associate
Joined
20 Nov 2016
Posts
764
The democrat and Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib says this

"That’s what this is: the horrible consequences of endless war and failed US policy going back to the 1980s when we backed the Taliban against the Soviets"

Just shows have thick these idiots are.
Ironic
 
Don
Joined
7 Aug 2003
Posts
44,302
Location
Aberdeenshire
And most likely that a lot just wanted an easy way to earn ok money in a market lacking jobs. When the crunch time came, they didn't want to fight and went for the easier option.
They’re saying the Pashtun and the likes that were in the army basically just left their units and went home to their tribal areas. Give it a few weeks and they will start a civil war against the taliban in their areas.
 
Associate
Joined
2 Jul 2003
Posts
2,436
Even the civilians in Syria etc were prepared to rise up if needed and die.

But conversely had assad not been supported by Russia etc it would have been a similar end result there, a country run by jihadis.

Thankfully assad had the army and enough support to endure.

Or had he stepped down a more peaceful transition could have occurred. The radical groups only rose to prominence after a lot of bitter fighting.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
37,804
Location
block 16, cell 12
Or had he stepped down a more peaceful transition could have occurred. The radical groups only rose to prominence after a lot of bitter fighting.

Peaceful transition to what?

The area was already awash with jihadis who would have ridden roughshod over the civilians. Don't forget the Al quaeda/terrorists who had come over from Iraq etc as part of the isis push.

Assad holds the army together, without them it would be impossible to completely have stopped isis.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2007
Posts
12,090
Location
London, UK
You only need to read veterans pages like Funker 530 and see the majority of comments saying this was inevitable the minute the troops left. The Afghan army is a joke, it was never going to hold back the Taliban, lots simply took the pay when it was still getting paid but were ready to join the Taliban the minute they arrived and lets not forget that the Taliban isn't an invading army, its Afghans simply taking back the country from invading armies.
 
Back
Top Bottom