Afghanistan: Mission Accomplished
- Thread starter toblerone3
- Start date
You don’t need armour plating if you hope to be martyred though.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
tbh the quality of the american propaganda didn't help: see for example thomas h johnson's 'taliban narratives'. for other sources of taliban support, see eg this 2009 report https://carnegieendowment.org/files/taliban_winning_strategy.pdfWar crimes from Western and Western-backed forces in Afghanistan were widespread and rarely punished, which seems very relevant to any discussion of how the Taliban gained strength and why support for the Afghan government remained weak. It's not the first insurgency where the killing of civilians boosted recruitment.
In 2015, an American AC-130 gunship destroyed a hospital in Kunduz and circled back to fire on survivors fleeing the burning building - 42 people were killed and the US personnel involved only received letters of reprimand. In the years after the US loosened the rules engagement in 2017, 800 children were killed in airstrikes.
How US-Funded Abuses Led to Failure in Afghanistan
As U.S. forces continue their withdrawal from Afghanistan, postmortems on the 20-year U.S.-led military intervention are underway.www.hrw.org
2hats
Dust.
Open in a private browser window or kill the obstructive element via developer tools (some browsers provide direct 'block element' options). Thread text below...
A thread about the Taliban & sharia law. Everyone knows the Taliban run a brutal and oppressive legal system. But there are different ways a legal system can be bad and understanding how the Taliban's is bad, and how it isn't, is crucial for understanding their enduring appeal 1/
The Taliban's version of sharia law is misogynistic, placing extreme restrictions on women's lives, & imposes brutal criminal punishments. This obviously very bad. People often call it a strict interpretation, but this is misleading. If you strictly applied sharia you wouldn't 2/
be stoning people to death etc (will explain later). It's a radical interpretation of sharia law As the scenes in Kabul show, a lot of Afghans are justifiably terrified of this. But many Afghans support the Taliban, hence their success. So do they want to lock women in their 3/
homes and stone people? Some do, but many others don't, and tacitly support, or decline to oppose, the Taliban anyway. Why? (NB: this is not an argument about morality. Obviously you can say that such people are still culpable, but it doesn't help us understand the situation) 4/
Apart from whether its rules are just, the other measure of a legal system is whether it's "just" on its own terms. Are rules applied consistently? Can people enforce what limited rights they have? Do judges rule for the party with the strongest claim, or the biggest bribe? 5/
On this measure, the Taliban's legal system scores well, at least in comparison with the other legal regimes on offer in Afghanistan. The Taliban's central pitch to the population has always been a legal system that's harsh but fair. In the 90s, when the country was ruled by 6/
competing warlords, after a decade of mass displacement and a complete collapse of the state, you can see why this would appeal. Small farmers had their land appropriated by the warlords' goons. Merchants couldn't get their invoices paid. There was looting and kidnap rackets 7/
In the context, many found the Taliban better than the status quo. A functioning legal system, even one as oppressive as the Taliban's, allows people (or at least men) to function economically better than no legal system, or a hopelessly corrupt one. 8/
Why is this important? First, it's crucial to developing a strategy that could defeat the Taliban. I don't know what such a strategy would be, but building a kleptocratic colonial regime in league with drug cartels was probably the worst option. Second, it helps us avoid 9/
exoticizing the Taliban. Building an alternative legal system and demonstrating its superiority to the official one is a classic insurgent strategy. The IRA did it in Ireland in the 1910s/20s. It takes form of sharia in Afghanistan because that's the available cultural script 10/
But we won't understand it if we treat it simply as a product of an alien culture This analysis of the Taliban has been common for years. US understood & tried to build a justice system but failed as the political system they created was too corrupt. A recent study is a book 11/
by Frank Ledwidge, Rebel Law, which I use when teaching this topic. Unfortunately it contains a few bits of colonialist nostalgia, but the overall analysis is good and I like the fact that he presents the Taliban and other islamist insurgencies in a comparative frame (using 12/
the IRA example) rather than treating them purely in terms of ideology. I reviewed it for the LSE Review of Books if anyone's interested. End/
blogs.lse.ac.uk
Addendum: explaining my earlier comment on stoning. Yes, this is a punishment from classical Islamic law. But if you strictly applied the law (as it existed for a millennium until the 1970s), you wouldn't do it, as procedural law rendered it effectively inapplicable. The only 14/
acceptable proof was confession, or 4 adult free male Muslim witnesses of impeccable morality, who had witnessed the actual penetration "like the pen in the mascara pot." Obviously unlikely such witnesses would exist (if they had seen it, would they pass the morality test?) 15/
If they did, jurists said they were not obliged to testify, and it was morally better if they didn't. False accusation was punished with 80 lashes, and a witness in a failed prosecution was liable to this. If the prosecution succeeded, the witnesses had to throw the stones 16/
So the jurists couldn't have made it any clearer the penalty shouldn't be used. Even if someone confessed they must repeat it 4 times while the judge encouraged them to retract.Some jurists even said that climbing out of the stoning pit and running away counted as retraction 17/
Similar procedural hurdles were applied to other harsh penalties like amputation. Even death penalty for murder was discouraged. When British took over India their main complaint was that sharia was too lenient. So whatever Taliban are doing, they aren't applying sharia strictly
I hope no idiots read this thread as an endorsement of the Taliban or sharia law. It should be obvious that I don't support either. I do study the history of sharia law and think that understanding things is important
pps - when the British in India found sharia too lenient, this was by comparison to 18th-century English criminal law, which imposed the death penalty for all kinds of trivial things. It wouldn't look lenient by our standards today!
The Taliban's version of sharia law is misogynistic, placing extreme restrictions on women's lives, & imposes brutal criminal punishments. This obviously very bad. People often call it a strict interpretation, but this is misleading. If you strictly applied sharia you wouldn't 2/
be stoning people to death etc (will explain later). It's a radical interpretation of sharia law As the scenes in Kabul show, a lot of Afghans are justifiably terrified of this. But many Afghans support the Taliban, hence their success. So do they want to lock women in their 3/
homes and stone people? Some do, but many others don't, and tacitly support, or decline to oppose, the Taliban anyway. Why? (NB: this is not an argument about morality. Obviously you can say that such people are still culpable, but it doesn't help us understand the situation) 4/
Apart from whether its rules are just, the other measure of a legal system is whether it's "just" on its own terms. Are rules applied consistently? Can people enforce what limited rights they have? Do judges rule for the party with the strongest claim, or the biggest bribe? 5/
On this measure, the Taliban's legal system scores well, at least in comparison with the other legal regimes on offer in Afghanistan. The Taliban's central pitch to the population has always been a legal system that's harsh but fair. In the 90s, when the country was ruled by 6/
competing warlords, after a decade of mass displacement and a complete collapse of the state, you can see why this would appeal. Small farmers had their land appropriated by the warlords' goons. Merchants couldn't get their invoices paid. There was looting and kidnap rackets 7/
In the context, many found the Taliban better than the status quo. A functioning legal system, even one as oppressive as the Taliban's, allows people (or at least men) to function economically better than no legal system, or a hopelessly corrupt one. 8/
Why is this important? First, it's crucial to developing a strategy that could defeat the Taliban. I don't know what such a strategy would be, but building a kleptocratic colonial regime in league with drug cartels was probably the worst option. Second, it helps us avoid 9/
exoticizing the Taliban. Building an alternative legal system and demonstrating its superiority to the official one is a classic insurgent strategy. The IRA did it in Ireland in the 1910s/20s. It takes form of sharia in Afghanistan because that's the available cultural script 10/
But we won't understand it if we treat it simply as a product of an alien culture This analysis of the Taliban has been common for years. US understood & tried to build a justice system but failed as the political system they created was too corrupt. A recent study is a book 11/
by Frank Ledwidge, Rebel Law, which I use when teaching this topic. Unfortunately it contains a few bits of colonialist nostalgia, but the overall analysis is good and I like the fact that he presents the Taliban and other islamist insurgencies in a comparative frame (using 12/
the IRA example) rather than treating them purely in terms of ideology. I reviewed it for the LSE Review of Books if anyone's interested. End/
Book Review: Rebel Law, Insurgents, Courts and Justice in Modern Conflict by Frank Ledwidge
In Rebel Law: Insurgents, Courts and Justice in Modern Conflict, Frank Ledwidge explores the role of courts and law in insurgencies and civil wars. This is an intriguing, engaging and comprehensive…
blogs.lse.ac.uk
Addendum: explaining my earlier comment on stoning. Yes, this is a punishment from classical Islamic law. But if you strictly applied the law (as it existed for a millennium until the 1970s), you wouldn't do it, as procedural law rendered it effectively inapplicable. The only 14/
acceptable proof was confession, or 4 adult free male Muslim witnesses of impeccable morality, who had witnessed the actual penetration "like the pen in the mascara pot." Obviously unlikely such witnesses would exist (if they had seen it, would they pass the morality test?) 15/
If they did, jurists said they were not obliged to testify, and it was morally better if they didn't. False accusation was punished with 80 lashes, and a witness in a failed prosecution was liable to this. If the prosecution succeeded, the witnesses had to throw the stones 16/
So the jurists couldn't have made it any clearer the penalty shouldn't be used. Even if someone confessed they must repeat it 4 times while the judge encouraged them to retract.Some jurists even said that climbing out of the stoning pit and running away counted as retraction 17/
Similar procedural hurdles were applied to other harsh penalties like amputation. Even death penalty for murder was discouraged. When British took over India their main complaint was that sharia was too lenient. So whatever Taliban are doing, they aren't applying sharia strictly
I hope no idiots read this thread as an endorsement of the Taliban or sharia law. It should be obvious that I don't support either. I do study the history of sharia law and think that understanding things is important
pps - when the British in India found sharia too lenient, this was by comparison to 18th-century English criminal law, which imposed the death penalty for all kinds of trivial things. It wouldn't look lenient by our standards today!
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
yet the elect of the new model army, who were strong believers in predestination, still wore such even tho they had god on their side
JimW
支那暗杀团
Very suited to shepherds' feet in flip flops.
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
One presumes it's in US Dollars, I can't imagine the afghani being easy to exchange at the airport
I doubt they're worried about the Taliban using it so much as flogging it to the Chinese, I would imagine anything even remotely valuable has been/will be blown up. I suspect the US Army Engineers will probably enjoy that bit, they can't get the opportunity to blow up something like a Apache all that often.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
these reports suggests you're being rather sanguine
White House says 'a fair amount' of US military equipment is in Taliban's hands
"We don't have a complete picture, obviously, of where every article of defense materials has gone," National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said.
www.businessinsider.com
Here’s all the US military equipment that likely ended up in Taliban hands
The Biden administration says the Taliban has captured a significant amount of U.S. military equipment supplied to Afghan security forces.
taskandpurpose.com
True, but they probably realised relying on god totally could be a bit dodgy, the other side had a cavalier attitude.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Aye. The notion that they'd leave all their tanks and guns sitting there for the Taliban to waltz into is insane.
RainbowTown
Well-Known Member
Meanwhile, here's dopey Joe's latest take on the unfolding, tragic mess.
Barely 8 months into his Presidency and he's already catching up with Trump as the most harebrained President of the modern era.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
from the top link in my 1088Aye. The notion that they'd leave all their tanks and guns sitting there for the Taliban to waltz into is insane.
and from the second link
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
barely 18 months
that's the most harebrained post on this thread, being as the election was in november 2020
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
I suspect the majority of Cromwell's men in the New Model Army were more in it for the 17th Century version of $10 a day rather than strict adherence to Puritan doctrine. The reason for John Bunyan's conversion for example is he was hung over after a session and so swapped sentry duty with a mate, who then got shot in the head in his place...
RainbowTown
Well-Known Member
Yes, now corrected.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
I know, I read that. These are Taliban claims over years and would include stuff captured on the battlefield or overrun positions. So far I've seen no pictures of them driving around in American Tanks and Humvees. Of course it's possible that the odd one or two have escaped a grenade in the engine bay or the attention of US engineers, but I wouldn't reckon they've captured useable euipment in particularly significant amounts as a result of the current withdrawal.
Smokeandsteam
Working Class First
If only it was containable to Urban. In fact it's broadly representative of liberal/left thought as Varoufakis' (someone I previously had some time for) 'hang in their sisters' tweet so nauseatingly demonstrated. Our side is fucked by these types again and again.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
have you just not be looking online plenty of video around of them driving around in us equipment
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
this 2014 document might be a start https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/18712...ational-Structure-of-the-Taliban-Movement.pdf
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Fair do's. It seems they're nicking them from the ANA.
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
Yeah I was wondering that, especially in relation to how much the orders not to do certain things will actually be obeyed in the cities and then out in the country/villages. What's their military structure and command like? Lots of ex-military in their command ranks like IS, or is it different?
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
Bit of a difference in training and experience between hot wiring a truck and maintaining, flying and fighting an Apache.
Although, now you mention it.
[Spolier]
RainbowTown
Well-Known Member
barely 18 months
that's the most harebrained post on this thread, being as the election was in november 2020
Yes, it was a typo mistake which I've now corrected. It should have read 'barely 8 months instead of 18'.
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
How the Taliban did it: Inside the ‘operational art’ of its military victory
The Taliban of 2021 is not the same as the Taliban of the 1990s. This Taliban is now adept at integrating military and non-military instruments of power in pursuit of its political objectives.
www.atlanticcouncil.org
Unbeatable: Social Resources, Military Adaptation, and the Afghan Taliban - Texas National Security Review
Following the 9/11 attacks, the Afghan Taliban were obliterated in a lightning war prosecuted by the United States. Their Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan ceased to exist as a physical entity, and the Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, fled to Pakistan. Within five years, however, the Taliban...
tnsr.org
A380 these on a quick search and look seem worth a read.
not-bono-ever
meh
Good luck inheriting a load of humvees and tanks - they need a new engine every few thousand miles
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
not sure you needed to make this point twice.
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
quite sure they got a few hundred trusty toyata Hilux's about
which has not featured in almost every conflict in the last 40, surprised it not appeared on. a flag yet
Similar threads
