Red___Sword
Junior Member
I think not at all that railway is going to run through Afghanistan. It is much stable and safer to go through centre aisa ***stan formal CCCP republic than through Afghanistan.
Taliban Strategy in Afghanistan
- Thread starter solarz
- Start date
I think not at all that railway is going to run through Afghanistan. It is much stable and safer to go through centre aisa ***stan formal CCCP republic than through Afghanistan.
There will be place for both lines, hundreds of kilometers from each other and mostly with mountains in between.
Kurt
Junior Member
Actually conquering Iran would improve the situation in Afghanistan because of another supply route. Pakistan is unlikely to pose too much of a problem for the US because the US is still the dominant power and China has just a fraction of the US power, let alone the power of the US led alliance.
It is true that the US allies disagree on the idea of being able to convert Afghanistan by continued military presence and see no more goals to fulfill through occupation. The original idea of hunting down al Qaida in their strongholds and toppling the Taliban gouvernment have long been fulfilled. Problem is that the Afghani gouvernment structure in power seems to be a failure that won't cure as long as there is such a strong military back-up that saves them from their own irresponsibility.
It is true that the US allies disagree on the idea of being able to convert Afghanistan by continued military presence and see no more goals to fulfill through occupation. The original idea of hunting down al Qaida in their strongholds and toppling the Taliban gouvernment have long been fulfilled. Problem is that the Afghani gouvernment structure in power seems to be a failure that won't cure as long as there is such a strong military back-up that saves them from their own irresponsibility.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
this is not true
Taliban do not want to be in the "news", they are not movie stars however some of them may make for interesting characters
anyway, you need to understand whats going on here, Taliban are there for one reason, simply to kill as many foreign soldiers as they can as often as they can
Taliban need to get lucky only once, foreign soldiers have to be lucky all the time, you can see why they are not winning this war
a great many of the Taliban soldiers are described as ghosts, from returning soldiers from the frontline, they are not simply "suicide" bombers, they have engaged US Mariens and SAS head to head, they are not there for fun, they are serious business
on a great number of engagements when Western soldiers make contact, they do not know how many enemy there is or even where they are, they simply fighting the enemy without even seeing them, after engagment is over it is very rare to find dead bodys and capture any Taliban alive
returning soldiers speak of one thing, the sheer frustration of fighting in Afghanistan, it wears foreign armys down and always has done in history
Taliban have some excellent snipers, trained to perfection and have achieved many headshots on Coalition soldiers, the most prized gun the Drangonov sniper rilfe they use alot
Taliban is just a word, who are the "Taliban" we still dont know and we probably never will, they wait and wait and wait, they have all the time in the world, Afghan time is slow time, waiting for the perfect oppourtunity, they engage then break off then melt away
Taliban always work like a water tap, slowly slowly dripping and after long time your bucket is full of water, its been 12 years and still they are fighting in Afghanistan and its as bloody as ever, and the Casualtie figure is ever rising
you can have all the "eyes in the skys" you want, but when someone lives in a certain area they know the terrian like the back of thier hand they can play hide and seek better than any outsider will
Taliban are actually very clever bunch of fighter, just speak to the returning commanders and you will know why, Coalition actually has respect for some of them
Last edited:
solarz
Brigadier
LOL, I love your post. It demonstrates everything that's wrong with mainstream Western thoughts on Middle East issues.
Nevermind the fact that conquering Iran would be 100 times more difficult than fighting Iraq, why do you think that you'd be able to pacify Iran enough to create a safe supply route, when you can't even do that to Iraq or Afghanistan?
Even when faced with not one, but two wars that have demonstrated the failure of military conquests, you still fall back on this simplistic view.
Your second idea, that Afghanistan government is a failure because they're "irresponsible", is even more laughable. You come off as someone who preaches moral platitudes in a vacuum.
*OF COURSE* Karzai and his clique are "irresponsible". Who do you think they were/are? These were warlords and drug dealers who were installed into their position by a foreign power. It is in their very nature to deal in bribery and nepotism!
Even if Karzai and his clique were somehow moral saints, have you never heard of the phrase, "power corrupts"? In a law-abiding society like Canada, we have a variety of institutions to ensure that even the government can't get away with breaking the law. If Stephen Harper tries to sell opium or launder money, he would be arrested the same as Joe Schmoe. Who do you think is going to arrest Karzai in Afghanistan?
No, the problem is not that the Afghan government is corrupt. The problem is that the USA destroyed a legitimate (however tyrannical and backwater) government, and never built something to replace it. All they did was install a figurehead and tried to pretend that they brought in democracy by staging a few elections.
*THAT* is the real problem with Afghanistan.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
see all Afghans and Taliban want is peace, they want what everyone else wants, schools, hospitals, jobs etc etc
but what they will never agree to is a outsider telling them what they need and want, Karzais power doesnt even reach outskirts of Kabul, no one cares who he is or what he says, his band of curropt leaders take all the aid and the people get nothing, the people are fed up of Karzai he has done nothing, him and all his goverment offcials steal aid money and do not give back to the people
Afghanistan has one solution, that is China, its Chinas backyard and if China brings in re-construction and people start seeing results of this in thier daily lives then the war is over and peace comes to Afghanistan, simple and thats where this whole thing ends
the other player in this has to be Turkey, no Afghan will ever attack Turkish soldiers, Afghan and Turkoman go back very long time, to Turkish war of independence in 1924 when Afghan sheep herders and farmers traveled on foot to Turkey to help their fellow brothers defeat the Wester forces and establish modern day Turkey
speak to any Turkish national, they will tell you, that in schools today they are taught as part of the national ciriculam that they have only one friend, that is the Pathan or Pashtun people of modern day Afghanistan and Pakistan, because they helped fight Western powers out of Turkey after WWI, because Ottoman Empire was the last Caliphate
if Pakistan and Turkey join together, have the economic backing of China, I guarantee in 10 years Afghanistan will be a rich developing country
you cant go to Afghanistan with a gun and force people, Alexander the Great couldnt go it, Ghenghis Khan, British Empire (in 3 wars), Soviet Union and now Coalition forces all failed, this tells you one thing, that is, there is no military solution to Afghanistan and never will be
Last edited:
solarz
Brigadier
Do you have any source for those claims? As far as I know, the Taliban leaves plenty of its own bodies on the battlefield, and have yet to inflict any serious damage on the Coalition forces in direct engagements. The vast majority of Coalition casualties come from mines and IEDs.
In over 10 yeras of fighting in Afghanistan, the US has suffered only 1800 deaths. Compare this to 58,000 deaths in Vietnam and 36,500 deaths in Korea.
Kurt
Junior Member
Or your posts demonstrates a lack of understanding Western thought. What you claim I misunderstood is actually implied in my posts. People rather don't discuss subjects that are self-evident and I said nowhere that these acts are morally justified. You have some serious mindset issues that make you read things that are not written.
You don't seem to understand modern conquest. It's about creating compatible structures and to a lesser degree advantageous positions. Modern conquest is more about robbing intellectual property and securing alignment of supply sources. Controlling the whole Persian Gulf again, would give the US a massive leverage against any competitor. If you calculate the investment of wars against Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran in comparison to a war with China that will not be able to be a peer competitor with the Persian Gulf under US control, then this whole mess makes lots of sense. Read Brzezinski on the subject. Problem is that the US wants to push this plan, her allies have their own plans.
The Taliban were legitimized by having the best organized armed group thanks to the ISI and lots of warlords decides to join them rather than oppose them. But the Taliban were very Pashtu, so there was resistance in the north that lacked a similarly efficient organization. Now we have these disorganized nitwits as Afghan gouvernment powered by the CIA and with inflated numbers of armed men of questionable fighting value. Afghanistan is currently an example of how not to run things, but it is one out of many examples of failed and successful operations. As long as drones hover in the sky, the Taliban can't return to their former position of power because Afghanistan is a treacherous ground for everyone. That's the reason why all but the traditional monarchy will be doomed and it is very expensive to make Americans understand that. Iraq and Afghanistan enable operations against Iran that is the main target.
Please tell me how China wants to be a peer competitor after the US secured these geopolitical positions?
Last edited:
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
this is not 1967 and certainly not 1950, 2000 dead in 2012 for a Western power from any angle is a big death toll
not to mentioned the injured, sick and mentality disordered which runs the figure into the hundreds of the thousands
CottageLV
Banned Idiot
Is there currently a deadline to pull out like the one in Iraq? I mean a solid deadline.
I understand that people say US hasn't really pulled out in Iraq, since there are still more than 50,000 active troops there under the title of "logistics and training" personnel. But this shows that US cannot openly operate in the name of the military, but rather through the puppet government and with the help of black hands, like those of blackwater (or Xe, or academi).
---------- Post added at 01:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:19 PM ----------
Don't want to sound light hearted, but this is nothing in East Asia. We got nothing but lots of people. If a million die today, I got another billion.
I understand that people say US hasn't really pulled out in Iraq, since there are still more than 50,000 active troops there under the title of "logistics and training" personnel. But this shows that US cannot openly operate in the name of the military, but rather through the puppet government and with the help of black hands, like those of blackwater (or Xe, or academi).
---------- Post added at 01:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:19 PM ----------
Don't want to sound light hearted, but this is nothing in East Asia. We got nothing but lots of people. If a million die today, I got another billion.