Afghanistan: Mission Accomplished

[N_igma]

Not really on a wind up, it does seem there are a number of similarities between two groups using the cover of religion combined with violence to exert power over their communities, dictating what are acceptable behaviours, pastimes etc.

The IRA never used religion as a justification for their actions. Indeed I can point you in the direction of many Protestants who were IRA members. A constant aim of the IRA throughout its existence is the formation of a 32 county socialist republic based on the principles of the Proclamation of 1916 which guarantees civil and religious liberties for all regardless of sex, creed, nationality etc. That is in stark contrast to the narrow theocracy which the Taliban wish to enforce on its people.

Did the IRA have community support? Yes they did. But don’t most successfully paramilitary groups also have community support? They wouldn’t last if they didn’t. Another massive difference is that the rule of law never broke down here so the IRA, even if they were fundamentalists couldn’t enforce that onto the people whilst the police and army still controlled the courts etc. The Taliban are acting with impunity over the in vast swathes of the country. There really is no comparison.

 

[TopCat]

The evacuation of Kabul seems predicated on the airport staying open and useable. This seems dunderheaded to me.

 

[ska invita]

Their predecessors, the mujahadeen, which the Taliban was part of, did get training and weapons from the US when they were fighting the Russians.

Armed and trained before then so as to entice a Russian invasion - the Afghan Trap - iirc.
US policy is all over this for decades.


No pronouncements from that election winner Tony Blair or Lord Mandelson? I wonder if Sir Starmer has any opinion.

 

[Flavour]

The evacuation of Kabul seems predicated on the airport staying open and useable. This seems dunderheaded to me.

Yeah it'd be the first target I'd go for too but also likely to be the most heavily defended place

 

[kebabking]

Yeah it'd be the first target I'd go for too but also likely to be the most heavily defended place

It probably is, it's certainly the most defensible.

Rumour has it that the embassies are going to the airport, and that some form of international military presence will remain there so it can be maintained as a bridgehead for support going in, and evacuation going out.

The US is sending about 3,000 troops to manage the evacuation, the UK about 600, others will partake as they need to.

My rough guess is that pretty much all of Afghanistan, bar Kabul, will 'fall' to the Taliban in the next two weeks, but as with 2001, falling to is at least as likely to mean the local power structures changing sides as it does any kind of battle/surrender/desertion to an enemy force. Sensing which way the wind is blowing, and having a relationship with competing power structures is a standing requirement for anyone at mid-level in any Afghan organisation...

Kabul will probably last till October/November, with an even money split between a choreographed 'fall of Saigon' evacuation, a palace coup with changing sides and a bloodbath, and a genuine Taliban military victory.

 

[not-bono-ever]

The Talib would be foolish to block the escape route for foreigners- they need a tail between the legs exit on telly, not blood and dead expats

 

[RainbowTown]

The Talib would be foolish to block the escape route for foreigners- they need a tail between the legs exit on telly, not blood and dead expats

Knowing their brutality they would probably make do with all of that. And then some.

 

[Yossarian]

The US is sending 3,000 troops to secure the airport during the evacuation, I think the Taliban would sooner let them catch their flights out than confront them.

 

[gosub]

Armed and trained before then so as to entice a Russian invasion - the Afghan Trap - iirc.
US policy is all over this for decades.


No pronouncements from that election winner Tony Blair or Lord Mandelson? I wonder if Sir Starmer has any opinion.

I'm sure if the price is right Tony will pontificate.


Don't judge him. That's God's job apparently

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

The US is sending 3,000 troops to secure the airport during the evacuation, I think the Taliban would sooner let them catch their flights out than confront them.

The UK is sending 600. I presume kebabking is currently desperately trying to get his NHS app to ping him...

 

[not-bono-ever]

Knowing their brutality they would probably make do with all of that. And then some.

They are not stupid and yahoosb (sp) knows the value of keeping some detente with the yanks.

 

[kebabking]

The UK is sending 600. I presume kebabking is currently desperately trying to get his NHS app to ping him...

I wouldn't mind seeing Afghanistan for one last time actually, but this will be no place for a middle-aged shiny-arse...

We'll see how China moves in the next couple of years - Afghanistan, even under a Taliban 'government' that has an understanding with China is a failed state with plenty of room for groups hostile to China - but I wouldn't be remotely surprised if we're back there in time.

(It's important for watchers to understand that when we see 'taliban have taken/control X district' we could be talking about an area the size of North Yorkshire, with 10,000 inhabitants, and where 'have taken' means a dozen taliban blokes drove through it after the dozen ANP bloked there fucked off, or just took their uniforms off and said 'we're the Taliban now'. The number of actual battles has been small...)

 

[Idris2002]

It probably is, it's certainly the most defensible.

Rumour has it that the embassies are going to the airport, and that some form of international military presence will remain there so it can be maintained as a bridgehead for support going in, and evacuation going out.

The US is sending about 3,000 troops to manage the evacuation, the UK about 600, others will partake as they need to.

My rough guess is that pretty much all of Afghanistan, bar Kabul, will 'fall' to the Taliban in the next two weeks, but as with 2001, falling to is at least as likely to mean the local power structures changing sides as it does any kind of battle/surrender/desertion to an enemy force. Sensing which way the wind is blowing, and having a relationship with competing power structures is a standing requirement for anyone at mid-level in any Afghan organisation...

Kabul will probably last till October/November, with an even money split between a choreographed 'fall of Saigon' evacuation, a palace coup with changing sides and a bloodbath, and a genuine Taliban military victory.

I used to know someone who'd been out there. She told me that all the Afghans she knew were dedicated archivists - any bit of official paper would be kept, no matter which regime issued it, just in case it might be useful when the time came to changes sides.

 

[jeff_leigh]

We'll see how China moves in the next couple of years - Afghanistan, even under a Taliban 'government' that has an understanding with China is a failed state with plenty of room for groups hostile to China - but I wouldn't be remotely surprised if we're back there in time...)

Do you think the Uyghurs will use Afghanistan as a base to launch operations from ?

 

[steveo87]

Would it be possible?

Afghanistan appears (albeit on a map) to be a long way from China. Especially the parts of China I'd have thought you'd want to 'get at'.

 

[kebabking]

you think the Uyghurs will use Afghanistan as a base to launch operations from ?

I don't see why not - we know there has been a very low level (sub PIRA) campaign by a number of groups over the last 20-odd years, and that there has been a steady trickle of refugees into Tajikistan and eastern Afghanistan...

China has been putting big resources into the border, but it's a mountain range, and they are using soldiers and border guards from other areas of China because of the unreliability of locally recruited/conscripted people - so they don't know the area.

Tajikistan tries to move the refugees on, or least makes them be quiet, out of fear of China, bit where they go after that the Tajiks don't care.

 

[Spandex]

Afghanistan appears (albeit on a map) to be a long way from China. Especially the parts of China I'd have thought you'd want to 'get at'.

Afghanistan has a border with China. The Wakhjir Pass through the Hindu Kush leads to Xinjiang province, where the Uyghurs come from.

 

[steveo87]

Oh I see, thanks.

 

[Colin Hunt]

Do you think the Uyghurs will use Afghanistan as a base to launch operations from ?

In theory they could. However that area of Afghanistan and the areas of Xinjiang that border it are incredibly remote. Good for radicalising Uyghurs and getting them to fight on the Taliban's side, but pretty unlikely to lead to attacks in China, and certainly not in parts of China beyond Xinjiang. I tend to believe that most of the Uyghurs in that area are simply trying to survive rather than build a movement, but a cross-border insurgency campaign can't be ruled out.

Uyghurs are a difficult issue for the Taliban; some groups such as the Haqqani network have collaborated with China to root them out in the past, while in some areas Uyghur fighters have been important to Taliban gains. And of course the Taliban is going to want Chinese investment and that could come with certain conditions attached.

 

[platinumsage]

 

[jeff_leigh]

Uyghurs are a difficult issue for the Taliban; some groups such as the Haqqani network have collaborated with China to root them out in the past, while in some areas Uyghur fighters have been important to Taliban gains. And of course the Taliban is going to want Chinese investment and that could come with certain conditions attached.

Doesn’t surprise me what you say about the Haqqani Network from what I’ve read about them they seem to be a quite pragmatic

 

[Humberto]

I know people know this stuff, but it was anti-communist US belligerence that created this mess. The country and it's people have been variously used to lure in enemy superpowers to their doom, as a means to keep arms industry sales afloat and as a justification for expanding the USA's bloated state military spending.

 

[N_igma]

I think it’s important to note that Afghanistan’s ‘borders’ don’t actually mean anything to many Afghans. As usual, they were arbitrarily drawn up by the British during the colonial era. There are Pashtun tribes both sides of the ‘border’ between Afghanistan and Pakistan where there are tonnes of unmanned mountainous crossings. It allows the easy trade of weapons, money, drugs and people from one side to the other. Afghanistan’s mountainous and hazardous terrain is one of the reasons it’s nearly impossible to control the region.

 

[Humberto]

The media always try to horrify you about the Taliban. But the 'government' Nato member governments put in place was corrupt as fuck and organised criminals. Corruption and poverty at it's worst. The British government will say "so many Afghan girls were educated", but the ease with which the Taliban (mainly farmers/young men who don't want their families to be taxed for crossing the street, caught up in endless decades of civil war, and vilified for starving) and turning to some kind of state/community are bombed by brave British and American drone bombers.

 

[krtek a houby]

Great bunch of lads

 

[AmateurAgitator]

A constant aim of the IRA throughout its existence is the formation of a 32 county socialist republic

I'm not convinced by this. A section, or certain versions/factions, of the Ra have always been socialist sure, but there have always been other factions that were in no way socialist as far as I'm aware. I mean Martin McGuinness was a nationalist not a socialist. And I don't think Tom Barry's and Dan Breen's collaboration with the Nazis was in any way socialist. Then theres the fact that O'Duffy was an IRA leader at one point - are you saying he was a socialist?

So was socialism an aim of the IRA? Not in the entirety of the IRA.

 

[Humberto]

What?

krtek

 

[Raheem]

On the TV now, a conversation among some Afghan men.

"On the other side of the world, they are trying to get to Mars, and look how we live here."

They had just driven for a week to trade two goats for some bags of rice.

 

[krtek a houby]

What?

krtek

Forget about it.

Was making a facetious comment about how it's not just the media who horrifies this self about these genocidal incels, it's said actions of the fundies.

 

[krtek a houby]

I'm not convined by this. A section, or certain versions/factions, of the Ra have always been socialist sure, but there have always been other factions that were in no way socialist as far as I'm aware. I mean Martin McGuinness was a nationalist not a socialist. And I don't think Tom Barry's and Dan Breen's collaboration with the Nazis was in any way socialist. Then theres the fact that O'Duffy was an IRA leader at one point - are you saying he was a socialist?

So was socialism an aim of the IRA? Not in the entirety of the IRA.

Was an aim of the official IRA, but not so much the Provisionals, iirc