Afghanistan: Mission Accomplished

[Spymaster]

Well, history is full of scary invaders. Incumbent populations, however, don’t tend to just stand to one side for them and just let them get on with it. Particularly when the invading outsiders also say they intend to change the social order in radical, undesired ways. And double particularly when the invaders also threaten half the existing population (metaphorically half, at least) with subjugation, torture, rape and death. Incumbent populations actually have a history of desperate resistance against that sort of thing. On the other hand, if the incumbent population includes a high proportion of sympathisers and collaborators with the invaders and if the invaders are actually quite culturally attuned to the incumbents then, well, that might be a different story.

So my position is naive, how?

Sounds like we agree.

 

[kabbes]

So my position is naive, how?

Sounds like we agree.

You seemed to be saying that the Taliban’s invasion had been so rapid simply because the local population feared them, and not at all because a significant proportion of the local population actually view them as a welcome option (in the context of their alternatives).

 

[Spymaster]

Four functions:

physically run the airport - ATC, crash response, marshalling aircraft, keeping the infrastructure going.

running the NEO - administering who can go, who gets on what flight, medical support etc...

Security for the airport - it's an airport, it has a huge perimeter, and as you've seen, people running onto the runway tends to end badly.

There is a limited operation of driving down into Kabul and meeting up with, and retrieving, people who need to get out. This, as you can imagine, is a bit tenuous, and requires some inventiveness and buttering up the Talibs.

There's no fuel at Kabul airport, you either arrive with enough fuel to get to somewhere safe, or you rely on tanking.

Each aircraft can spend no more that 30 minutes on the ground - they land, go to the pan and load up with whoever is there (broadly each nation is bringing its own people home - there's a US line, a UK line, a French line etc... but if a nation runs out of people who can go right now, and the next has people, they'll lob them on).

The 30 minutes includes unloading whatever you arrived with - which is fuel for generators, food, water, and reinforcements.

Get to fuck!

You make it sound like a complicated process.

Surely we should just load everyone onto planes and ship them off to wherever they fancy rather than murder them on the runways and buzz them with helicopters?

 

[MickiQ]

Well I'm pretty sure they'd rather end up here than be stuck in Afghanistan.

Depends on whether their Govt springs for somewhere decent or they get housed at Pontins I suppose

 

[Spymaster]

You seemed to be saying that the Taliban’s invasion had been so rapid simply because the local population feared them, and not at all because a significant proportion of the local population actually view them as a welcome option (in the context of their alternatives).

Kind of, but not quite. You've conflated two positions.

Posters like maomao , bimble , and others, are setting-up positions that require us to believe that the Afghan population would prefer Taliban rule to allied occupation.

Do you agree with them?

 

[Spymaster]

Kind of, but not quite. You've conflated two positions.

Posters like maomao , bimble , and others, are setting-up positions that require us to believe that the Afghan population would prefer Taliban rule to allied occupation.

Do you agree with them?

As an aside to this kabbes , do you think that the invasion was a war crime; that the participants should be tried appropriately as war criminals; and that British and American officers should be shot/hanged/liquidated elseways?

 

[brogdale]

Very low morale in the ANA, catastrophic idiocy from Ghani, ignoring the int from Biden, Europeans (including UK) blindly following the US and assuming they would make it work.

Lots of factors told the formations and structures previously on the government side that they would lose - like clever people everywhere they decided it was better to lose quickly/change sides/get bought off than it was to fight a protracted war, then lose.

Its a mirror image of what we did in 2001 - many changed sides having read the tea leaves, we bought off some and intimidated others, and just rolled through. They are simply showing us a compliment by doing exactly the same.

brogdale it appears that the Int predicted exactly (roughly) this - no one thought they'd hold/win, the timing just depended on which model you used to work through what would happen. Politicians are saying that no one predicted this, but the truth is that everyone (CIA, US Mil, Mi6, UK Mil DGSE etc.., and everyone who had any real dealings with the Afghan state) predicted this, told politicians, but they simply weren't interested because it clashed with their quick/easy/cheap psychological requirements.

Politicians, their need to blame others, and the whole 'when their lips are moving' stuff.

This might shed some light?

Biden Assured Allies in June U.S. Would Ensure Kabul’s Stability

President Joe Biden told key allies in June that he would maintain enough of a security presence in Afghanistan to ensure they could continue to operate in the capital following the main U.S. withdrawal, a vow made before the Taliban’s rapid final push across the country, according to a British diplomatic memo seen by Bloomberg.

Biden promised U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson and other leaders at the Group of Seven summit in Cornwall, England, that “critical U.S. enablers” would remain in place to keep Kabul safe following the drawdown of NATO forces, the note said. British officials determined the U.S. would provide enough personnel to ensure that the U.K. embassy in Kabul could continue operating.

 

[maomao]

As an aside to this kabbes , do you think that the invasion was a war crime; that the participants should be tried appropriately as war criminals; and that British and American officers should be shot/hanged/liquidated elseways?

As an aside do you believe the US and British armies are entirely innocent of war crimes in Afghanistan? Remember the invasion itself wouldn't have to be illegal for this to be true.

 

[Kevbad the Bad]

As an aside to this kabbes , do you think that the invasion was a war crime; that the participants should be tried appropriately as war criminals; and that British and American officers should be shot/hanged/liquidated elseways?

Well it might stop them doing it again.

 

[Spymaster]

As an aside do you believe the US and British armies are entirely innocent of war crimes in Afghanistan?

No.

Have I ever posted anything that makes you think otherwise?

 

[maomao]

No.

Have I ever posted anything that makes you think otherwise?

Well your refusal to believe that a significant proportion of the Afghan people appear to prefer the Taliban at this moment in time suggests you're a little blind to the death and destruction visited upon them by the western allies.

 

[kabbes]

Kind of, but not quite. You've conflated two positions.

Posters like maomao , bimble , and others, are setting-up positions that require us to believe that the Afghan population would prefer Taliban rule to allied occupation.

Do you agree with them?

I genuinely have no idea — I’m really not in a position to say. My guess is that there are many people who preferred allied occupation, many people who prefer Taliban rule and a vaster number that wish a plague upon both their houses. I wouldn’t like to guess, though, at the relative numbers. Maybe it’s too complicated for outsiders to understand, like people who welcomed allied occupation but became very disillusioned by it.

 

[Spymaster]

Well your refusal to believe that a significant proportion of the Afghan people appear to prefer the Taliban at this moment in time suggests you're a little blind to the death and destruction visited upon them by the western allies.

Well I appreciate your back-pedal from "popular victory" to "significant portion", but now you need to quantify the latter, no?

 

[Spymaster]

I genuinely have no idea — I’m really not in a position to say. My guess is that there are many people who preferred allied occupation, many people who prefer Taliban rule and a vaster number that wish a plague upon both their houses. I wouldn’t like to guess, though, at the relative numbers. Maybe it’s too complicated for outsiders to understand, like people who welcomed allied occupation but became very disillusioned by it.

Nothing to disagree with here.

 

[kabbes]

As an aside to this kabbes , do you think that the invasion was a war crime; that the participants should be tried appropriately as war criminals; and that British and American officers should be shot/hanged/liquidated elseways?

I don’t know if the invasion was a war crime but if it was, the crime was committed by those who directed the armies, not those given the tactical responsibilities for making it happen.

 

[maomao]

Well I appreciate your back-pedal from "popular victory" to "significant portion", but now you need to quantify the latter, no?

Selective quote there my posts weren't contradictory.

And to quantify: 'enough to win'

 

[Spymaster]

I don’t know if the invasion was a war crime but if it was, the crime was committed by those who directed the armies, not those given the tactical responsibilities for making it happen.

Again; agreed.

 

[Spymaster]

Selective quote there my posts weren't contradictory.

And to quantify: 'enough to win'

Consider this a fart on this ^^^ useless post

 

[maomao]

Consider this a fart on this ^^^ useless post

How about this then:

https://asiafoundation.org/publication/afghanistan-in-2019-a-survey-of-the-afghan-people/

A year or two out of date but illuminating.

 

[Dandred]

The Taliban are also Afghanistan people.

 

[maomao]

How about this then:

https://asiafoundation.org/publication/afghanistan-in-2019-a-survey-of-the-afghan-people/

A year or two out of date but illuminating.

What you laughing at? It's an in depth survey of Afghan opinions. In 2019 a majority of Afghan people felt that reconciliation with the Taliban was possible. Doesn't suggest fear to me.

 

[Spymaster]

How about this then:

https://asiafoundation.org/publication/afghanistan-in-2019-a-survey-of-the-afghan-people/

A year or two out of date but illuminating.

Which bits of that 333 page document do you feel support the silly assertions that you've made here?

 

[Dogsauce]

Despite the history of these cunts, going door to door looking for collaborators/villains after taking control of a country isn’t (in general) anything particularly unexpected or necessarily massively sinister is it? Any army would do that for their own security.

 

[maomao]

Which bits of that 333 page document do you feel support the silly assertions that you've made here?

Questions 2.5 and 2.10 in particular (page 72 on). There's an index you know.

 

[planetgeli]

Despite the history of these cunts, going door to door looking for collaborators/villains after taking control of a country isn’t (in general) anything particularly unexpected or necessarily massively sinister is it? Any army would do that for their own security.

Oh ffs are you trying to give Spymaster ammunition here?

Not necessarily sinister? A day after announcing an amnesty? A day after killing someone for being a relative of a foreign journalist?

The Taliban are, y'know, a bit fascist. Not just any fucking army doing something for security.

 

[little_legs]

 

[Spymaster]

Questions 2.5 and 2.10 in particular (page 72 on). There's an index you know.

Cheers. I'll take a look at the weekend.

Got a precis of why it supports your idea that the Afghan people will be happier with the Taliban than the western occupation?

That would help a bit.

ska invita could perhaps help you out here?

 

[Gramsci]

I'd go a bit further than you and say that it's wrong for multiple reasons to say that the Taliban follow medieval practices. Firstly because the term 'medieval' refers to the Middle Ages in Europe, and extending that term to the rest of the world is tough because the history of the rest of the world doesn't conform to Europe's historical timeline until much later, with the advent of colonialism. For example, the age of classical Islam in the Middle East could be said to have lasted until the 1870s, and someone's life would've been little different in 1850 when compared to 1400. The same critique could be applied to much of the world outside of the most developed capitalist countries of Europe, so the use of the term medieval when speaking about countries outside of those developed capitalist countries is awkward.

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, in the classical period of Islam (which I'd say lasted until around 1877) very few of these so-called medieval practices would have been carried out. For example, the level of evidence required for a person to be stoned to death for adultery went far beyond the level of evidence required to be convicted under contemporary English common law. As such, truly brutal punishments would have been very rare. The question we should be asking is why are the Taliban, and regimes like them, carrying out such punishments with little regard for the classical Islamic rules of evidence?

My answer would be that they have no use for the procedural hurdles that these evidentiary requirements create, because they are an authoritarian regime that rules by fear, with a particular emphasis on the subjugation of women. Also, as I said in an earlier post in this thread, actual engagement with the sources of Sharia and Hanafi fiqh is incredibly limited in Afghanistan because much of the population is illiterate.

See above. Calling the Taliban medieval actually does a disservice to classical Islamic law, which, while not progressive by modern standards, was streets ahead of English law until well into the 19th century (on women's rights, capital punishment, and many other things).

For what it's worth, the thread is good in parts but really falls down in some places too. For example, the 'clash of civilisations' framing of the issue, the simplistic solution, and the determination to link Deobandis with Wahhabis.

Thanks for this post.

I read zahir twitter post.

I also read this book review linked below. Written shortly after fall of first Taliban government.

That among other things puts forward argument that Taliban weren't that good on Islam ideology . Taliban can be seen to have similar characteristics to groups opposed to what they saw as urban elites as seen in Pol Pot regime. The way in Afghanistan elites made sure they reaped the economic benefits of Western intervention. Whilst rural areas didn't see these benefits. So not so much class of civilizations as poor rural neglected area versus decadent urbanisation.

The twitter post is arguing that Taliban are not medieval throw back but part of Deoband form of Islam that was response to British Imperialism.

Not having a go here on this argumentative thread. But what is the difference between Deobandism and Whabbahism?

I think the article I've linked is saying the brutal ongoing war means that the more subtle Deobandism is lost. That Taliban used parts of it. When faced with actual rule moved from persuasion to authoritarian terror.

So in some ways they aren't really Deobandist.

Not having a go here. Just wonder what you think.

 

[Yossarian]

This says 240,000 (of which 71,000 were civilians) but these are US army figures and only count confirmed and recorded deaths and are likely to be massive underestimates.ho

Yep, we have the officially acknowledged figures - and officially acknowledged incidents like the burning of Korans, pissing on dead Taliban fighters, that US soldier who walked off his base in the middle of the night and massacred nine Afghan children and seven adults - which are bad enough, how is going to look for a lot ordinary Afghans through a lens of unreliable information, conspiracy theories, Taliban propaganda etc.?

A decade ago, during the US troop surge, it was apparently very widely believed that the US was working with the Taliban.

"Why are they not able to beat the Taliban?” Dost asked. “Ordinary people are thinking that America started a game here, a drama” with the Taliban in a leading role. “If they kill the star of this drama, the drama will be finished,” Dost told me. The Americans had to be drawing out the game for their own strategic purposes, he said. There was no other way to explain such stunning failure.

The Secret Alliance

A strange conspiracy theory takes hold in Afghanistan. I remember the first time an Afghan told me that the United States and the Taliban were working together. It was February 2010, and I was in Zormat, an old trading town in the lap of snow-covered mountains, between Kabul and the Pakistani...

newrepublic.com

 

[TopCat]

Well yes, of course there'd be more complex issues at play in many cases. Are you suggesting that because some youngsters joined up for ideological reasons, that the majority of Afghans welcome them back?

Do you think the Ghani led government had more legitimacy? If so, why?