LeChuck
CE Specialist
Thumbs up from me.
Damn fine plan B.Same as it's always been, as well as a reconciliation / peace deal with the Afghan Taliban, that is tied to the removal of foreign troops. The Taliban need reassurances that foreign troops are leaving in order to participate, therefore the removal of troops has to be contingent on Taliban participation in the peace process. Short of that, we will be trapped in a feedback loop of violence.
In which case why don't you support an international force to secure the country and start a proper political process. There can't be one as long as any of the problematic political actors ranging from Assad to ISIS still have power to not participate.
Because I don't trust the US who is in bed with the Wahhabi terrorists.
what is your plan for Afghanistan?
See? And you'll say the same thing about the Wahhabi terrorists in Syria. You'll help them gain power like you did in Afghanistan, and then say, "oh well we should just accept them".Same as it's always been, as well as a reconciliation / peace deal with the Afghan Taliban, that is tied to the removal of foreign troops. The Taliban need reassurances that foreign troops are leaving in order to participate, therefore the removal of troops has to be contingent on Taliban participation in the peace process. Short of that, we will be trapped in a feedback loop of violence.
Plan A was quite feasible as long as there weren't outside actors (the ISI) ruining it by supporting the Taliban.Damn fine plan B.
Plan A was believing that Afghans would appreciate the benefits of democracy, and given the sweep of world history that was a reasonable belief to Western eyes like ours. Democracy doesn't hold the same appeal for everyone it appears, so we need plenty of plan Bs, and not just in Afghanistan.
Why are you providing f-16's apart from other hardware to those who run the ISI then ?Plan A was quite feasible as long as there weren't outside actors (the ISI) ruining it by supporting the Taliban.
To some extent, but it's clear that the ideological will to fight for democracy just isn't there in the same way as it is in other parts of the world, their priorities are religious and ethnic. That's not to say the West was wrong to try and create conditions for democracy in Afghanistan, or Iraq, but now we need to learn to deal with things as they are. Hence I approve of talking to the Taliban.Plan A was quite feasible as long as there weren't outside actors (the ISI) ruining it by supporting the Taliban.
Pakistan is pretty much bifurcated between the military and political sides.Why are you providing f-16's apart from other hardware to those who run the ISI then ?
In the short term annihilating AQ obviously came first, I was talking about how the way forward was seen after that. I try to know what your getting at, but perceived isn't the right word. If the US perceived AQ were in Afghanistan they were right, and if they perceived the Taliban were anti-democracy they were right again. In any event the long-term plan didn't work, so as Raoul says, there needs to be talks and boundaries agreed, whatever side you're on.Plan A wasn't to enforce democracy. It was to annihilate the Taliban for their perceived involvement in 9/11. It was an elongated and prolonged revenge mission.
Yeah, maybe. At the same time I think I read some time ago that the Taliban leadership would have surrendered the AQ leadership if they knew what they do today, about the consequences I mean. I also understand that these foreign AQ soldiers weren't popular at all with local Afghans.Trouble is, AQ would've returned immediately if the US left after booting them out. They tend to relish setting up shop in failed states.
Well, the F-16s are being flown by Raheel not Nawaz Sharif.Pakistan is pretty much bifurcated between the military and political sides.
and neither is sharif, both are kaminasWell, the F-16s are being flown by Raheel not Nawaz Sharif.
Just saw thisand neither is sharif, both are kaminas
Fire up the dronesIt's apparent the head of the Taliban was greased by a drone strike just inside Pakistan. While the Taliban hasn't conformed his death, a shura is convening to pick his replacement.
It's going to be even easier to kill the next guy than Mansour--unless it's Siraj Haqqani. More movement, more communication and a shift in the system of cut outs and carriers. No Taliban head will be able to carry out his duties with as low profile as Omar did.Fire up the drones
I'm sure they will cough up another leader to take charge shortly. More ominously the security situation seems to have deteriorated over the past year or two, especially in big cities and places like Helmand, Nangarhar etc.It's going to be even easier to kill the next guy than Mansour--unless it's Siraj Haqqani. More movement, more communication and a shift in the system of cut outs and carriers. No Taliban head will be able to carry out his duties with as low profile as Omar did.
The new guy. Let's hope he's a Gorbachev type perestroika hipster who wants to strike a peace deal and not more of the same.It's going to be even easier to kill the next guy than Mansour--unless it's Siraj Haqqani. More movement, more communication and a shift in the system of cut outs and carriers. No Taliban head will be able to carry out his duties with as low profile as Omar did.
How do you know this ? Do you know what was actually negotiated in Secret by Karzai and his backchannel in Pakistan ?The Taliban are willing to negotiate for years. Their demands are just not acceptable for the West. And while i am not a fan to see them govern a big chunk of Afghanistan, there is just no viable alternative. That kind of peace deal would have been possible for a long time.
I was actually there at the time and am a bit bemused by what people think they know by hopping onto a search engine.yes. of course I know every detail about secret negotiations. Who doesnt?
How about you use google and you´ll find plenty of reports about talks and negotiation attempts from 2008 onwards.
Go on.yes. of course I know every detail about secret negotiations. Who doesnt?
How about you use google and you´ll find plenty of reports about talks and negotiation attempts from 2008 onwards.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-ammunition-idUSKCN100312Waste fears as Afghan soldiers cash in on spent ammo
Zahir Jan, a scrap metal dealer in the southern Afghan province of Helmand, pays about 175 Afghani ($2.55) per kilo of spent cartridge casings and has no trouble finding supplies from poorly paid soldiers and policemen looking for extra cash.
If they don't have enough on hand, he says they're happy to fire off their weapons for 5-10 minutes until he has what he needs.
Gunmen attack American university in Kabul, students flee
is it for foreigners or Afghans?That sucks. I was there a couple of years ago. Very nice University (comparatively speaking).
It's generally for Afghans - both men and women although most of the faculty are imported from other countries.is it for foreigners or Afghans?
What were you doing there, if I might ask?I was there a couple of years ago.
Visiting the University.What were you doing there, if I might ask?
First Helmand, Then Afghanistan
A trip through the country’s beleaguered south reveals demoralized soldiers, corrupt local officials, and sweeping Taliban gains in previously peaceful towns. How did Obama’s “good war” go so wrong?
Losing in Afghanistan
New Data from the Pentagon Reveal the Fallacies in U.S. Strategy
(...)
One assumption in U.S. policy has been an unwavering faith that the United States can ultimately force an acceptable outcome in Afghanistan. Early in the conflict, the country sought outright defeat of the Taliban. Later, as the feasibility of that objective was called into question, it embraced a more modest goal of leaving Afghanistan with a security force of its own, capable of defending the country against the Taliban.
(...)
By a variety of indicators, ISAF and the Afghan government it supports are losing the war.
(...)
For years, available evidence has suggested that decisive victory over the Taliban is not possible.
(...)
Even as the prospects of a victory in Afghanistan have waned, the United States and its partners have continued to fight, and it appears that ISAF is now fighting to avoid ultimate failure. Yet this too is surely a losing proposition. It is time to engage seriously with the question of whether the benefits of delaying a withdrawal outweigh the costs of doing so.
(...)
A Taliban commander told AFP the Russian support had helped the insurgents overrun the northern city of Kunduz in October for the second time in a year.
Taliban representatives in recent months have also held several meetings with Russian officials in Tajikistan and Moscow, sources say.
The world has turned 720 degrees, hasn't it.Is Russia backing the Taliban? Anything on this in Russian language media @antihenry?
Russia, Iran ties with Taliban stoke Afghan anxiety
https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-iran-ties-taliban-stoke-afghan-anxiety-040857785.html
Its a pretty obvious strategy.Is Russia backing the Taliban? Anything on this in Russian language media @antihenry?
Russia, Iran ties with Taliban stoke Afghan anxiety
https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-iran-ties-taliban-stoke-afghan-anxiety-040857785.html