Afghanistan
- Thread starter Sherzad
- Start date
I don't see why not, these conflicts make strange bed fellows - they almost went to war in the 90s but both now see US as a common enemy. Also Iran has hosted various al-Qaeda figures in the past for whatever reason, so there's any number of things that could trump ideology. I have seen it said that when bin Laden first conceived of the idea for al-Qaeda in the mid-80s he envisaged a non-sectarian group which would potentially include Shi'a.
That said the timing of this report and the largely American and anonymous 'sources' it's based on make any details in it suspect.
@berbatrick - http://www.longwarjournal.org/archi...d-the-talibans-insurgency-since-late-2001.php
Should also be noted that the Taliban's alleged cooperation with Iran is a chief source of criticism they receive from ISIS.
Should also be noted that the Taliban's alleged cooperation with Iran is a chief source of criticism they receive from ISIS.
Can't find anything yet but I'll let you know if/when I do.
It's so weird, given the stance of Pakistani groups towards Shias.
The Iranian ties are probably a bit exaggerated. Iran is known to like to "host" certain Al-Qaeda figures in case one of their diplomats gets kidnapped in one of the Gulf states, then use their AQ guests as leverage to swap them out. Saif al-Adel, who was the number 3 in old school Al-Qaeda (pre-2003) spent well over a decade in Iran after 9/11.
This is supposed to be a photo of Mullah Omar, I guess from some time in the 80s before he founded the Taliban:
Can anyone recommend any good articles(Long reads) or books on the soviets time in Afghanistan ?
I'm guessing Metal Gear Solid isn't that factual.
I'm guessing Metal Gear Solid isn't that factual.
That definitely looks like him.This is supposed to be a photo of Mullah Omar, I guess from some time in the 80s before he founded the Taliban:
The whole mission in Afghanistan was just a revenge mission. The Taliban even offered to send OBL to Saudi of they were provided evidence of his involvement in 911. Dubya and Saudi didn't want to lose face, so they launched a war.
Nobody in this entire conflict was sincere. The leadership class in Afghanistan is no better than the Taliban, they're all backward savages, it's just some of them like to dress in trousers and other in salwars. The Americans were never sincere about re-building Afghanistan, they just wanted a quick win. NATO allies were not serious about security, the Italians used to pay the Taliban not to attack their patrols, other NATO forces used Taliban as local bodyguards for convoys of goods. India got involved to try an strategically encircle Pakistan. Pakistan was forced to support an anti Taliban war, they betrayed everyone and played both sides. Not only did they support NATO they also supported the Taliban, especially anything that would harm Indian efforts to get a foothold in the country.
Ultimately the people of Afghanistan continue to suffer.
Nobody in this entire conflict was sincere. The leadership class in Afghanistan is no better than the Taliban, they're all backward savages, it's just some of them like to dress in trousers and other in salwars. The Americans were never sincere about re-building Afghanistan, they just wanted a quick win. NATO allies were not serious about security, the Italians used to pay the Taliban not to attack their patrols, other NATO forces used Taliban as local bodyguards for convoys of goods. India got involved to try an strategically encircle Pakistan. Pakistan was forced to support an anti Taliban war, they betrayed everyone and played both sides. Not only did they support NATO they also supported the Taliban, especially anything that would harm Indian efforts to get a foothold in the country.
Ultimately the people of Afghanistan continue to suffer.
The Taliban weren't sincere in their offer and frankly, their continued control of Afghanistan would've merely meant an extension of allowing Al-Qaeda free reign to continue plotting attacks in the west.
You genuinely think the Taliban were going to hand over Bin Laden to the US? At best...they would have forced him to leave Afghanistan...but, hand over the then hero of jihadists worldwide to the kuffar?
I think you're right about most of what you say, and would also add that any slim chances of success were further complicated once barely a year after starting in Afghanistan, US focus was shifted to the stupidity that was Iraq.
I just also don't remember the Taliban conditionally accepting the UBL rendition, but read an old story just now. Also hard to judge whether it was genuine in its intention, but most importantly I don't think there was political climate in the US at the time to accept anything other than rendition to the US on the quickest time-table possible.
According to some of what i've read in the past (can try and dig it up if you like), the Taliban were not happy with the influence of the Arabs and foreigners in Afghanistan. I reckon given a face saving way out they would have pushed them out. Look at who got left behind during the war. As the NA forces moved forwards, the Afghan Taliban went home, the foreigners were left to get shot at.
They simply weren't incentivized to push AQ out. Bin Ladin and his posse were well integrated into the ideology of their Taliban hosts.
I've read similar, even as part of accounts of US commanders involved in the initial months of the conflict, that there was much tension between the Pashto locals and the Arabs, Uzbeks, etc. Just unsure if it extended to the top, and the Omar - UBL relationship.
I think we can sit here today and think that it would've been the "rational" thing for the Taliban to have handed him over, and stayed in power. But maybe they had other thoughts/strategy/beliefs about the situation. As a last thing, because they weren't tied at the hip like we started off saying, could they be confident if even if they wanted to that they've could apprehended UBL? Maybe they were worried about turning the foreign fighters against them, and that representing the end of their government anyways.
The Taliban don't control Afghanistan, although they never did in total, but they're still pretty significant, don't you think?
Well in 2001 they controlled nearly all of the Pashtun part of Afghanistan. Today they control a relatively small sliver.
US just dropped the largest non nuclear bomb on Afganistan.
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?in...stan/&tw_i=852558316945498112&tw_p=tweetembed
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?in...stan/&tw_i=852558316945498112&tw_p=tweetembed
On an ISIS tunnel complex.
Hopefully no towns or villages within a few miles of the target site.
It'll probably turn out to be a civilian trade route that was essential to supply towns while avoiding AQ and ISIS.
This seems more like show to me.
Hey NK look what we have and it is coming your way...
Unless it could drop the bomb from well outside NK airspace, they C130 delivering the device would be a sitting duck for their Air Force and anti-aircraft systems.
Just chuck it over from Seoul?... after evacuating...
Seoul is probably the big city I'd least like to be in right about now.
Don't be taking the piss the now
Mine too. Lovely city though.
Don't be taking the piss the now
After Liverpool, aye.
Are AQ now morphing into ISIS?
Afghans are theologically (religion) different. I would have thought it would be difficult for ISIS to make any significant progress amongst Pashtuns.
Afghans are theologically (religion) different. I would have thought it would be difficult for ISIS to make any significant progress amongst Pashtuns.
In Afghanistan they have ISIS-K (Khorasan).
So testing the bomb for the fat boy?
You can say that again.
Yanks second best again. Aghanistan bomb 21,000 1bs, but the RAF Grand Slams in 1945 were 22,000, used against U-boat pens and viaducts.
Bet they couldn't bounce this one either!
However, experts say it has struggled to build a wide political base and the indigenous support it expected in Afghanistan.
BBC
They've been doing pretty well since 2015ish, to the point where they have been successfully challenging the Taliban for recruits.