Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Sep 24 01:27:26 2021

Utopia Talk / Politics / Panjshir resistance
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Aug 20 18:03:10
The remnants of the Afghani army who refused to surrender, along with the former Vice president (now acting president), and son of the old Norther Alliance leader Shah Masoud are holed up in the natural fortress of the Panjshir valley. Allegedly they had started to move hardware and supplies there before Kabul fell and they have made their first move and taken Pul-e hHsar.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Aug 20 18:53:59
time for Rambo III part 2
Rugian
Member
Fri Aug 20 19:17:53
And on, and on, and on it goes...
Dukhat
Member
Fri Aug 20 19:40:56
That’s pretty near kabul. If they can coordinate well enough, maybe they can accomplish something. The Taliban is spread very thin right now. 75,000 troops for a country of 40 million.
Pillz
Member
Sat Aug 21 15:38:25
Biden strikes against or invades Iran over Afghanistan by the end of his term
jergul
large member
Sat Aug 21 21:58:42
Afghanistan reverting back to tribalism now that foreign invaders are gone? Colour me surprised.
Hrothgar
Member
Sun Aug 22 09:38:07
"foreign invaders"? More like military tourists imo. At least for about 15 years of the 20.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Aug 22 09:58:28
Afghanistan had 30k troops that they could rely on, the "commandos". They were left for dead in some battles and told to surrender. Even when the last battalion was preparing a last stand in Kabul, they were told to stand down and surrender all their heavy equipment.

The entire command structure, or what ever there was of a command structure evaporated as those core troops where willing to fight to the end. Tell us about the lack of bravery among the Afghani troops. To fight under a leadership that is no more, is suicide. Retreat, survive and join the real resistance.
obaminated
Member
Sun Aug 22 14:10:17
About 70k afghan troops died in this war. That's more than Americans in Vietnam. They were fighting. We had about 3k troops plus another 6k from nato and the peace was being kept. To say it's a 20 year war is fucking stupid. That's like saying Germany, Japan and Korea have all been 70 year wars. We keep troops in places to keep the peace after we have won the peace and ensure it stays that way. We weren't doing any major military operations in Afghanistan for several years. It was literally keeping a presence. Fucking stupid and what will happen now will be horrific.
Allahuakbar
Member
Sun Aug 22 15:19:45
This is bad. Can't we work together against the infidels?



Follow this account if you want to read "rebel" news
http://mobile.twitter.com/PanjshirProvin1
Pillz
Member
Sun Aug 22 17:54:22
Mexitard living up to his namesake
Dukhat
Member
Mon Aug 23 12:48:44
Obaminated is not wrong in this instance but where was this rage when Trump announced the withdrawal in 2020 and when he continued to draw down troops in the face of the Taliban violating the agreement? Are things only bad because Biden does them?
Forwyn
Member
Mon Aug 23 22:23:39
I mean, the withdrawal to 2.5k didn't cause mass desertions and a heavy armament of the enemy, only recently rivaled by his Democratic predecessor's intentional armament of Syrian jihadis
murder
Member
Wed Aug 25 14:21:50

"About 70k afghan troops died in this war. That's more than Americans in Vietnam. They were fighting."

That's a load of crap. Most of the dead Afghan troops died in terrorist attacks and ambushes. They weren't fighting anybody.

All the positive reports about the performance of Afghan soldiers were lies. ALL of them.

murder
Member
Wed Aug 25 14:24:34

"Retreat, survive and join the real resistance."

Retreat from an inferior force to join the "resistance". lol :o)

Rugian
Member
Wed Aug 25 14:38:50
"Retreat from an inferior force to join the "resistance"."

Aka the New Republic approach from the Star Wars sequels.

Who knew the Afghans were JJ Abrams fans?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Aug 26 02:43:25
You don't flee from inferior forces though, do you? If the Taliban are so inferior compared to ANA, then why didn't the USA already deafeat them? The outcome of a war isn't decided on the back of napkin. Besides, information has now come out that, even those napkin calculations your country and everyone else was being fed, were all lies.
Habebe
Member
Thu Aug 26 03:16:08
Nimatzo ,"then why didn't the USA already deafeat them? "

Different goals and timelines.In short they were willing to wait us out while we also offered up inadequate governance.

Let Russia ans China take a.crack at city building in the ME.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Aug 26 03:57:17
They had a superior strategy, they knew the strategic weakness inherent to the social and political system of your country. As the Taliban put it, "the USA may have all the clocks (fancy hardware), but we have all the time."

My point was for murder, they were not an inferior force, especially not compared to ANA and the Afghan government, when not even the mighty USA etc. and so on.


Seb
Member
Thu Aug 26 05:21:07
Forwyn:

"I mean, the withdrawal to 2.5k didn't cause mass desertions"

Incorrect - desertions began immediately after the Trump deal and accelerated once Trump started putting it into actions.

That's when local commanders started negotiating surrenders individually. The Taliban waited until just before the final withdrawal to actually advance to ensure you would be in no position to resist.

https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/why-did-afghan-army-evaporate

Seb
Member
Thu Aug 26 05:22:29
Murder:

If you deploy forces piecemeal such that they reply on air re-supply then you do not have a superior force.

You have 1000 inferior forces.

Defeat in detail is not exactly a novel concept.
Seb
Member
Thu Aug 26 05:24:41
Building the Afghan Army in the operational model of the US army was fucking stupid move if you planned to withdraw - particularly if your planned to withdraw all the civilian mechanics.

It beggars belief that in 20 years you never sought to build a sustainable Afghan domestically run logistics and supply chain to support the Afghan Armies operations. That's an American failing.
Paramount
Member
Thu Aug 26 13:22:30
Someone attacked the airport in Kabul today. Was it the Panjshir resistance who did it?
Paramount
Member
Thu Aug 26 13:30:19
There are reports that says that 10 US soldiers were killed and about 60 civilians.

Will Biden change his mind now and stay and fight?
Paramount
Member
Thu Aug 26 14:10:24
Biden can’t let this pass and run away. America and freedom was attacked. The US has to invade Afghanistan again.
Average Ameriacn
Member
Thu Aug 26 14:34:25
12 Americans dead, this is Biden's Benghazi, lock him up!
murder
Member
Thu Aug 26 15:20:51

"You don't flee from inferior forces though, do you? If the Taliban are so inferior compared to ANA, then why didn't the USA already deafeat them?"

Fucking lawyers.

Forwyn
Member
Thu Aug 26 15:30:44
"Incorrect - desertions began immediately after the Trump deal and accelerated once Trump started putting it into actions.

That's when local commanders started negotiating surrenders individually."

Then they deserve the mocking. lol
Dukhat
Member
Thu Aug 26 17:10:31
More like Obama was focused mostly on the security situation and expected Hillary to build up the country a bit before leaving.

instead we got Trump who always did what he wanted despite the facts on the ground. So the army did what it could and focused on what it could despite the state department and Afghanistan funding being wound down.

Plenty of money for winning the war of violence, but no money for winning the peace. Typical story written mostly by idiot Republicans after Eisenhower.
Habebe
Member
Thu Aug 26 17:59:21
Shitty ending, but fuck it were out, be happy.
murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 06:43:17

We're never really out.

Seb
Member
Fri Aug 27 08:50:32
Forwyn:

If you are set up in a local base, being regularly attacked by Taliban, your commanders (who control your resupply) will not let you fight back because the Americans are insisting you stick to the peace treaty, you are not being provided with air transport and air support to go on the offensive, and you know that shortly there will be no re-supply or air support because the Americans are pulling back theirs *and* the civilian contractors the Afghan helicopter and airforce relies on, and you have no way to fight your way out - what exactly are you supposed to do?

Sit there for six months letting the Taliban whittle you away and then decide whether to try and fight on, or surrender?

Blow the last of your ammo breaking the cease fire and then die?

Or cut to the chase now and surrender?

Equipping and deploying the Afghan ground forces in such a way that is dependent on a large helicopter air transport capability and attack jet force - but failing to actually equip the Afghan armed forces with such a capability they can sustain locally, is a fucking stupid idea if you plan to withdraw.

As is forcing them to not return fire for 6 months while they are being killed by the Taliban.
murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 09:44:28

The Afghans didn't fight because they were too busy booking their flights out of the country.

Seb
Member
Fri Aug 27 10:01:11
murder:

So, three nights ago I got to sit in a series of phone calls being handled by a volunteer network in the UK, between the family of one of the afghan negotiators and former MP; who had been stopped by the Taliban on the way to the airport, a major in the British army, FCDO officials, and the deeply distressed negotiator/former MP who was holed up in her house with the Taliban outside.

I'm not sure what you expected a 55 year old woman to do to fight the Taliban, her children (>10) or her husband (crippled with war injury) or father (much older).

It's very easy to be an armchair rambo, full of false swagger, and advocating nuking countries - things that will never happen and that you will never have to experience the consequence of.
Habebe
Member
Fri Aug 27 10:09:59
"We're never really out."

With mirror on ceilings , pink champagne on ice, we are all juat prisoners here of our own device.
murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 10:32:01

Habebe: Yes. Exactly. :o)

murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 10:40:53

"I'm not sure what you expected a 55 year old woman to do to fight the Taliban, her children (>10) or her husband (crippled with war injury) or father (much older)."

Pick up a rifle and shoot. There are 40 million Afghans and ~ < 100,000 Taliban. The "oppressed" and the oppressors have equal military equipment at their disposal. And they had better equipment before they surrendered it. What I expect them to do is fight. Or die. Or STFU and deal with the outcome they chose.


"It's very easy to be an armchair rambo, full of false swagger, and advocating nuking countries - things that will never happen and that you will never have to experience the consequence of."

Japan would like to have a word.

And yes it's easy. Almost as easy as rag tag militants fighting a superpower for decades despite being limited to the most rudimentary of military gear and training.

Somehow you manage to reconcile that reality with the supposed helplessness of the Afghan people in the face of the mighty Taliban war machine.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Aug 27 10:45:04
The irony here being that murder is himself the offspring of people who fled circumstances far more benign than this.

People with no skin in the game, say the darnedest things!
murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 10:50:16

"The irony here being that murder is himself the offspring of people who fled circumstances far more benign than this."

Actually yes. My grandmother sent my dad to the US because word was that the Batista government was looking for him.

But my dad never sat around bellyaching that the US government didn't send in soldiers to fix the problem for him.
Seb
Member
Fri Aug 27 11:06:13
murder:

"The "oppressed" and the oppressors have equal military equipment at their disposal"

You want a 10 year old to "pick up a rifle" (they are just lying around) and shoot at an organised group that have quite significant levels of fire power and training.

The Taliban are not a bunch of goatherds with antique rifles - they have been trained and supplied by Pakistan military intelligence forces for ages; something you have done nothing about.

"Japan would like to have a word."

You will never drop a nuclear bomb on Afghanistan.

murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 11:12:29

"You want a 10 year old to "pick up a rifle" (they are just lying around) and shoot at an organised group that have quite significant levels of fire power and training."

Yes. And no the Taliban are not organized.


"The Taliban are not a bunch of goatherds with antique rifles - they have been trained and supplied by Pakistan military intelligence forces for ages; something you have done nothing about."

Yes and yes. Nonetheless they are not a fighting force. They are roving thugs with guns and they run from fights when faced with significant resistance.


"You will never drop a nuclear bomb on Afghanistan."

Of course not. The lawyers run the fucking war department now. We spent 20 years in Afghanistan and probably killed < 5000 enemy combatants per year ... which is a great return on a trillion dollar investment.


murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 11:15:49

The US probably did more damage when we firebombed Tokyo in WWII than we did in 20 years in Afghanistan.

US taxpayers should be demanding their money back.

Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Aug 27 11:26:01
"But my dad never sat around bellyaching that the US government didn't send in soldiers to fix the problem for him."

Because the USA were supporting Batista? The more you explain that dumber this sounds. I thought your problem was the cowardly people fleeing, like your dad. Why didn't your dad stick around and fight? Have you explained for your dad how easy it would have been to resist Batista? Why did he listen to some woman and not act like a man?

You are such a dolt :)
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Aug 27 11:30:38
"Yes."

Tell that to your father if he is still alive. Explain to him what a spineless coward he was, that people like him deserved to be nuked. Explain that to him while you are reaping the benefits of his flight.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Aug 27 11:39:11
And since you are your fathers son, the probability is quite high that in the same circumstance you would flee like your father. I'm not gonna lie, I would too. I'm not insane and suicidal so I'm not gonna act all manly man in this performative way that you are. Fuck the Taliban and Batista, sayonara fuckers!
murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 11:43:19

"Because the USA were supporting Batista?"

No, because it's not someone else's job to defend your freedom ... or secure it in the first place.


"Why didn't your dad stick around and fight?"

It's far too extensive and complicated to detail here. He did ... from outside ... first with the CIA and then without. He also operated in several other countries mostly with the CIA. Eventually US policy changed that was pretty much that. Except for (possibly) illegal activity and some undercover work without government sanction.

And some other crap. All of it amounted to shit primarily because very few people bothered to fight. Which brings us back to Afghanistan.


"Have you explained for your dad how easy it would have been to resist Batista?"

Batista? No. Castro? Yes. It was a regular topic of discussion in my household growing up. He didn't share my view on warfare.


"Why did he listen to some woman and not act like a man?"

He was Cuban, not Iranian. We respect our mothers.

murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 11:46:31

"Tell that to your father if he is still alive. Explain to him what a spineless coward he was, that people like him deserved to be nuked. Explain that to him while you are reaping the benefits of his flight."

He's not alive. He died years ago of heart failure ... and I can tell you that right up until the end he suffered from survivors guilt because others had died fighting and he had not.

And because in the end their deaths had amounted to nothing.

murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 11:50:27

"I'm not gonna lie, I would too."

I had already deduced that by the way you're trying to get under my skin. It's very telling. You're clearly taking personally something that wasn't directed at you ... because you felt the shoe was your size.

You're going to need professional help to deal with that.

Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Aug 27 11:59:26
"No, because it's not someone else's job to defend your freedom"

You are so lost, you said he didn't expect the USA to come in and help him against the Batista regime. It is a shameless pivot from having spent quite a lot of time calling people cowards for not fighting, but now suddenly it is the fact that some (?) Afghanis expected help from the USA.

Your father fled, according to you, just at the mere WORD that Batista was looking for him.

"It's far too extensive and complicated to detail here."

Of course of course, your father's cowardice is "complicated", but the things you are seeing on the TV from the safety of the life your father's cowardice has earned you, they are all so simple as you said.

"first with the CIA and then without. He also operated in several other countries mostly with the CIA. Eventually US policy changed that was pretty much that."

Oh, so now that the USA was willing to help he expected the USA to help him fight?

"He was Cuban, not Iranian. We respect our mothers."

So ALL Cubans are pussies?

"He didn't share my view on warfare."

Because you are a child with a child's view on warfare. Your father sounds much smarter than you.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Aug 27 12:08:53
"You're clearly taking personally something that wasn't directed at you ... because you felt the shoe was your size."

We are both the children of immigrants, well I am an immigrant myself, but I was 6 and had not say in the matter, so our origin stories are very similar. My father was threatened and mistreated by regime goons, bunch of his friends were summarily executed etc. and so on. It never occurred to me that he was a coward. I am very thankful actually for his and my mother decision to leave.

But! I do not respect you and your opinions and think you are pretty stupid to say the least. There is nothing you can say that I would take personally. I just enjoy unraveling the no skin in the game hypocrisy.

Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Aug 27 12:17:13
In summary
Murder's father fled from Cuba because his mother told him to. And then he only started to fight with the help of the CIA and US government.

And here murder is whining about Afghanis fleeing, and asking the USA to help them, from the safety of the life his father created for him.

I am not trying to get under your skin, I am just shoving a mirror in front of your face.
Habebe
Member
Fri Aug 27 12:43:23
No shame in leaving home for a better life.My moms family, well all I know is they were on the mayflower, and related to Great Jon Mathis of the great jon mathis Island fame.

But my dad's family sort of fled the Nazis, or rather another great war which seemed inevitable.
murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 14:33:11

"Oh, so now that the USA was willing to help he expected the USA to help him fight?"

WTF are you talking about? He was helping them, not the other way around. He had no interests in other countries.

murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 14:34:58

"So ALL Cubans are pussies?"

Yes. That's correct. We all respect our mothers.

murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 14:38:56

"I am not trying to get under your skin ..."

Dude you are at cringe levels of trying to defend your own perceived inadequacies and those you perceive in others around you. I'm surprised that you haven't punched your screen yet.

Seb
Member
Fri Aug 27 15:37:11
Murder:

"Yes. And no the Taliban are not organized."

This is simply incorrect.

"Nonetheless they are not a fighting force. They are roving thugs with guns and they run from fights when faced with significant resistance."

What, like the US forces running from Afghanistan right now?


They clearly are a significant fighting force for the job.

The problem is you think the role of the military is to blow shit up, rather than exert control. You should read the art of war. Avoiding defeat by withdrawing and waiting out a superior enemy who does not have strategic patience is strategy. Full marks for superior tactical force, but you still lose the conflict.

"The lawyers run the fucking war department now."
No, even if the US lawyers said yes, your generals and your diplomats still recognise that dropping a nuke on Afghanistan would result in horrendous strategic consequences for the US that under no circumstances would it be worth the candle.

It is not because the evil lawyers are tying your hands, it is because it is an objectively stupid an self defeating move.

"He did ... from outside ."

Which is to say, he didn't. He got on a flight out.

" first with the CIA "

Which, according to you, should not have been doing that at all. Instead, your father should have been picking up a rifle in Cuba, and then being nuked by America - and you should have been born there, either being nuked by America, or picking up a rifle to fight while 10 or whatever.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Aug 27 15:45:30
"Dude you are at cringe levels of trying to defend your own perceived inadequacies"

If it was good enough for your father, it is good enough for me. If it is good enough for all those Cubans who floated over to the USA on doors and in bathtubs, it's good enough for me. Deflect and project all you like buddy.
murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 16:38:46

"What, like the US forces running from Afghanistan right now?"

Yes exactly like that Seb. I guess a residual effect of a ghost empire is getting upset when the US won't empire for you anymore.


"Avoiding defeat by withdrawing and waiting out a superior enemy who does not have strategic patience is strategy."

Yeah, that's exactly what we're doing too.


"No, even if the US lawyers said yes, your generals and your diplomats still recognise that dropping a nuke on Afghanistan would result in horrendous strategic consequences for the US that under no circumstances would it be worth the candle."

Right. And there are apparently horrendous strategic consequences to dropping conventional bombs too. Hence to shift from 2000 lbs bombs, to 300 lbs SDB bombs, to 100 lbs Hellfire missiles, to trying to develop an even smaller 30 lbs version AGR-20, to occasionally forgoing explosives altogether and dropping concrete dummy bombs on the heads of terrorists ... but only if they were dumb enough not to surround themselves with their family ... and only if they provided 3 forms of ID.

Pretty soon we'll be firing fucking spitballs at them.


Here you go ... 20 fucking years and look at the estimated casualty numbers for the enemy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001-2021)

That's < 3,000 killed per year, and it's obviously not for a lack of supply.

There are literally more American deaths at the hands of other Americans in the US.

Go ahead and say with a straight face that this is warfare.

murder
Member
Fri Aug 27 16:44:58

"Which, according to you, should not have been doing that at all."

That's retarded. I never said that Afghans shouldn't have joined with the US in beating down the Taliban.

Different reason, but your ass is showing too. You can't empire anymore. We won't do it for you. You get angry.

Seb
Member
Sat Aug 28 04:39:12
Murder:

"Yes exactly like that Seb. I guess a residual effect of a ghost empire is getting upset when the US won't empire for you anymore."

Lol - so Japan and South Korea and Germany are US colonies?

You sound like one of those tiresome little trots that burble on about American crypto imperialism.

Sure, it's empire, whatever.


"Yeah, that's exactly what we're doing too."

No, you'd won. You haven't taken casualties in years. You are retreating and unilaterally surrendering the space bank to Islamic fundamentalists who will simply do again what they did last time: export terror.

"Go ahead and say with a straight face that this is warfare."

I'm not sure you understand what warfare actually is. You've bought into this idea that the only true form of warfare is total war in pursuit of genocide, and everything else is social work. This is Taliban thinking.
Forwyn
Member
Sat Aug 28 12:00:10
Seb's entire premise is based on a lie.

The Afghans have no air forces of their own and no way to maintain supply lines, waaaaaaah

Except the Taliban will use all of those vehicles they've captured to establish supply lines, and no whining about an inability to maintain those vehicles will change that.

Like you're inventing this excuse that the Afghan government couldn't contract foreign nationals for vehicle maintenance with a straight face, fucking lol
McKobb
Member
Sat Aug 28 12:33:30
So is it China's turn to invade Afghanistan?
Seb
Member
Sat Aug 28 12:54:07
Forwyn:


"Like you're inventing this excuse that the Afghan government couldn't contract foreign nationals for vehicle maintenance with a straight face, fucking lol"

Well, no, they couldn't for a number of reasons:
1. They almost certainly don't have the budget to do so.
2. They don't have the relevant export licenses etc. to do so.
3. The contractors almost certainly would not agree to do so - they operate out of US bases under US protection, which is why they were evacuated along with US troops.


"Except the Taliban will use all of those vehicles they've captured to establish supply lines"

The Taliban don't have to worry about the ... er... Taliban... planting IEDs on the roads. This has to be one of the dumbest things I've heard you say. Also the Taliban aren't relying on finikety western kit with bespoke batteries supplied by western based manufacturing hubs etc. so their supply requirements are a heck of a lot less in the first place.




Habebe
Member
Sat Aug 28 13:35:18
McKobb, Yeah, its like a rite of passage.
Forwyn
Member
Sat Aug 28 14:30:39
"1. They almost certainly don't have the budget to do so."

So they'll be overthrown. Lol. If you can't budget for defense salaries in the face of invasion you can't budget for Sebs.

"2. They don't have the relevant export licenses etc. to do so."

No one should give a fuck about a LOICENSE when the entity is fighting for existence.

"3. The contractors almost certainly would not agree to do so"

You really think there's a shortage of former E4 tank mechanics that would take $200k a year to sit in a base in Kabul?

Only if you fail to secure it.

"The Taliban don't have to worry about the ... er... Taliban... planting IEDs on the roads."

Or anyone else, so they all ran. lol
Seb
Member
Sun Aug 29 10:42:40
Forwyn:

1. Then we agree, they didn't have the resources to sustain the operating costs you designed the Afghan army to have.

2. Why does Boeing or whoever give a shit about Afghanistan fighting for their life? They aren't going to do tech transfer to Afghanistan without a DoD or whoever granting a license.

3. "You really think there's a shortage of former E4 tank mechanics that would take $200k a year to sit in a base in Kabul?"

Christ, do you actually think the American armed forces do anything more than basic in field repair? You ship your tanks off to private co's to fix.
Forwyn
Member
Sun Aug 29 11:43:28
"Then we agree, they didn't have the resources to sustain the operating costs you designed the Afghan army to have."

Lol no.

"In 2020, general government revenue for Afghanistan was 398 billion LCU."

http://kno...nce/General-government-revenue

"They aren't going to do tech transfer to Afghanistan without a DoD or whoever granting a license."

And your premise that they wouldn't have them is retarded.

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/08/defense-contractors-spent-big-in-afghanistan-before-the-us-left-taliban-took-control/


"do you actually think the American armed forces do anything more than basic in field repair? You ship your tanks off to private co's to fix."

Again, you're making shit up. Tank crews can and are expected to perform all scheduled maintenance, including known failures, such as tracks and recuperator blowouts. They do full engine strips and seals.

You really think we're shipping every Abrams back to Chrysler for a blown generator?
Seb
Member
Sun Aug 29 12:21:49
Forwyn:

The LCU stands for Local Currency Unit. For Afghanistan is the afghani, worth 1/86th of a dollar.

So their total revenues were about 8bn dollars in total. The total Afghan exports are about 1 Bn dollars.

Now western defence companies take dollar payments only. And oil is priced in dollars. The phrase you are looking for is "Instant balance of payments crisis"

Your link seems to be backing my point up in any case, it is not about the money; it is about whether they are prepared to operate if not under a US Aegis and protected by US troops.

"It’s unclear what will happen with some of those contracts as the U.S. evacuates operations in Afghanistan."

"The company recently said it will “continue to do everything we can to repatriate all employees *** required to leave Afghanistan***.”

When the State Department issues an evacuation order, that normally voids any insurance - and most companies will immediately pull staff out (whether they have contracts or not - such a thing normally being a trigger for breaking the contract).

" Tank crews can and are expected to perform all scheduled maintenance,"

Field scheduled maintenance. There is a reason you ship tanks back to factories. Ditto for helicopters and jets.

"such as tracks and recuperator blowouts."
Yes, minor stuff.

Seb
Member
Sun Aug 29 12:23:12
"You really think we're shipping every Abrams back to Chrysler for a blown generator?"

No, you regularly send them back to regional hubs operated by suppliers. Lifetime of a tank in the field before that is required is not a huge.


Seb
Member
Sun Aug 29 12:24:55
Your article is hilariously bad for your case, it's a list of contracts denominated in dollars, paid for by the US, easily exceeding AFghanistan's economy to pay them, to deliver services to the Afghans, and line after line about how those suppliers are now all pulling their staff back.

Forwyn
Member
Sun Aug 29 13:57:03
"So their total revenues were about 8bn dollars in total."

And their salary expenses for 300k soldiers amount to less than $600mil.

They could keep the army going on those revenues, certainly they had more income and existing infrastructure than the fucking Taliban.

Again, security first, you can make room for Sebs after you've established a secure state in which foreign expenditures can happen.

"it is about whether they are prepared to operate if not under a US Aegis and protected by US troops."

Not when Ghani and his other goons are funneling what little revenue they have into their personal exile funds. In a secure state, there is no reason to assume that lobbying funds and foreign business would dry up.

"When the State Department issues an evacuation order"

Yep. In a state of anarchy you can't have a government. Imagine that.

"Lifetime of a tank in the field before that is required is not a huge."

Hundreds of operational hours. Imagine what you can accomplish with that if you're not drugged up, useless Afghans.
Forwyn
Member
Sun Aug 29 13:59:53
You're really arguing that the 5:1 soldier ratio, the tax revenue, the technical headstart, to include tanks, helicopters, and planes, is irrelevant, because if you fail to properly secure your urban areas needed to sustain the income to maintain your lead, then it will deteriorate. lol

If the tanks failed, and the planes wouldn't fly, and the NV batteries died, you STILL had 300k soldiers who could load up in technicals with a week's rations in dry food and still the Taliban 5:1.

Literally all you have to do to match the Taliban is show up and climb in a pickup. Anything else puts you ahead.
Seb
Member
Sun Aug 29 14:05:15
Forwyn:

"you STILL had 300k soldiers who could load up in technicals with a week's rations in dry food and still the Taliban 5:1."

No, because they've been deployed in small groups, in hostile territory, reliant on air to ship in ammo, rations etc.

"Literally all you have to do to match the Taliban is show up and climb in a pickup."

Then why did the US and ISAF suffer so many casualties?

The Taliban don't do set piece battles.


Also, you kinda missed the point where they were being actively ordered not to retaliate while the taliban raided them.

Forwyn
Member
Sun Aug 29 14:21:40
"because they've been deployed in small groups"

Like Taliban cells?

"in hostile territory"

90% of Afghanistan was not hostile territory a month ago.

"reliant on air to ship in ammo, rations etc."

And yet the Taliban survive in caves.

"Then why did the US and ISAF suffer so many casualties?"

37 servicemembers dead in all of 2001 and 2002, to topple the Taliban government and send them to said caves.

~2400 servicemembers dead in 20 years, compared to 50k+ Taliban. Most of those deaths occurred during Obama's vaunted troop surge, in which we did terrorist outreach to try to get converts.

"You kinda missed the point where they were being actively ordered not to retaliate while the taliban raided them."

No point missed. Sebs interfere with stated missions all the time. There's a reason drawn out wars perpetrated by democracies so often fail.
Seb
Member
Sun Aug 29 15:21:54
Forwyn:

"Like Taliban cells?"

No, like a small platoon of soldiers whose mission is to defend and hold territory, that are trained and equipped to fight using equipment with a heavy supply footprint using tactics that rely on air power, signals and other tactical intelligence, and who can only get the ammunition and other materials to maintain their kit via air drop from a supply chain maintained by American companies who are being withdrawn.

"90% of Afghanistan was not hostile territory a month ago"

No, pretty much from the moment the US signed the deal and stopped the afghan army from confronting the Taliban, they've been free to go anywhere. Given the Taliban's MO is asymmetric warfare using IED's, roadside bombs and ambushes, that meant within months it was not particularly safe for the Afghan army to drive anywhere.

"And yet the Taliban survive in caves."
Aw.. you believe this... bless.

The Taliban survive in large camps in Pakistan where they are trained by the ISI.

"37 servicemembers dead in all of 2001 and 2002, to topple the Taliban government and send them to said caves."
Yeah, because the western groundforce footprint was almost entirely special forces and the bulk of the ground forces were Northern Alliance; and the Taliban hadn't started fighting a guerilla insurgency.

"~2400 servicemembers dead in 20 years, compared to 50k+ Taliban."
But all you had to do is turn up with a technical to overmatch the Taliban. They are supposed to be a guy in a sheet with a AK45 So I ask again, how is that the US suffered about 100 casualties a year to these guys when you arrived with air support, armoured vehicles and vastly superior weapons?

Could it be that actually it isn't as simple as turning up with a toyta and a rifle to beat them?

" Sebs interfere with stated missions all the time."

Lol. Trump is the one that ordered them not to retaliate.




Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Sep 05 14:04:07
Things are looking grim in Panjshir.
murder
Member
Mon Sep 06 05:01:01

Afghanistan is a story of tens of millions of people that were building a new life around the belief that the US was never going to leave. The US would always be around to beat back the Taliban and pump billions of dollars into the economy. It's like they thought they were a US territory.

This is what happens when you refuse to accept reality and adapt.

The script is going to have to flip with the "resistance" learning ambush warfare, theft, and sabotage, because they have no standing force left.
Rugian
Member
Tue Sep 07 09:06:18
"September 6, 2021

The Taliban completed its military conquest of Afghanistan and took control of the mountainous province of Panjshir after seven days of heavy fighting. The fall of Panjshir puts the Taliban in full control of the country and eliminates the final vestige of organized resistance to its rule.

The Taliban began its assault on Panjshir on Aug. 30, the day the U.S. military withdrew its last forces from Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul. The Taliban seized control of the Afghan capital of Kabul and 32 of the country’s 34 provinces on Aug. 16 after a three and a half month long offensive that began on May 1.

After the fall of Kabul, the National Resistance Front, led by former Vice President and National Directorate of Security chief Amrullah Saleh, and Panjshiri warlord Ahmad Massoud, organized inside Panjshir and several neighboring districts in Parwan and Baghlan province. Saleh and Massoud announced their opposition to the Taliban. Saleh organized thousands of members of the now-defunct Afghan National Defense and Security Forces, including Commandos, Special Forces and other units, and attempted to expand control beyond the Panjshir Valley. However, Saleh’s forays outside of Panjshir may have overextended his forces that would have been better used to defend the province and establish a secure base.

The Taliban attacked Panjshir, a mountainous fortress with few entrances and narrow passes, from multiple directions, and was initially repelled by the resistance forces. But the Taliban pressed its assault and was able to punch through the resistance’s defenses at the main pass in the south near the town of Gulbahar, and the pass at Khawak in the east.

The Taliban quickly advanced up the narrow road and took control of Bazarak, the provincial capital on Sept. 5. Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid, announced on Sept. 6 that Panjshir province “was completely conquered.”

Ahmad Massoud, whose father led the Northern Alliance against the Taliban in the 1990s and was assassinated by Al Qaeda just two days prior to 9/11, vowed to continue the fight against the Taliban and called on all Afghans to continue its resistance. Without his base in Panjshir, Massoud’s promise to effectively continue the fight against the Taliban is a difficult proposition. Massoud’s forces may be able to launch guerrilla attacks from the mountains, but its ability to challenge Taliban rule will be limited."

http://www...tan-after-seizing-panjshir.php
Rugian
Member
Tue Sep 07 09:07:44
On the one hand, that sucks for the Afghans.

On the other hand, the tears of neocon Democrats who had been hoping to create an American-backed FSA-style resistance are delicious.

I'm torn.
Dukhat
Member
Tue Sep 07 09:32:16
Neocon dems? You're just making up voodoo enemies. It's all "libs" even if they exist or not. You stupid brainwashed fuck.
Allahuakbar
Member
Tue Sep 07 09:43:41
The Taliban never before dominated whole Afghanistan, this is historic!

Next will be unity with Pakistan and good relations to Iran, who can then stop the Muslims? No one!
Rugian
Member
Tue Sep 07 09:53:11
Dukhat is so out of the loop that he doesn't realize that the neocons have largely defected to the Democratic party.

Lol Dukhat you idiot.
Habebe
Member
Tue Sep 07 10:10:36
Neocon "libs" is your regular Democrat (not the Bernie wing).
obaminated
Member
Tue Sep 07 10:53:01
Where is the plucky girl to step up, win a major battle against the taliban and lead the resistance?
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share