Afghanistan

TheBigBean

Afghanistan probably merits its own thread as it is likely to rumble on, it is isn't trivial and it is difficult to put the entire blame on the Conservative party.

TheBigBean

The Guardian is reporting that the Taliban is trying to agree a more inclusive government.

pblakeney

TheBigBean said:

The Guardian is reporting that the Taliban is trying to agree a more inclusive government.

Checks diary. No, it is not April 1st.

photonic69

3,500 coalition deaths 2001 - 2021
15,000 USSR deaths 1979 - 1989
Afghan civillian and military deaths around 104,000

Anyone with any sense could have told you exactly what would happen, yet the West seems surprised by the resuargance of the Taliban. It's like taking your thumb off a hose pipe that was leaking. You ain't fixed it. It still leaks but now a little worse.

Unrest has been going on in that area for over 1,000 years. It will never be solved by external intervention. Manage it from outside if you can. If you can't then nuke 'em.

mrb123

pblakeney said:

TheBigBean said:

The Guardian is reporting that the Taliban is trying to agree a more inclusive government.

Checks diary. No, it is not April 1st.

I suspect that the Guardian and the Taliban may have rather different interpretations of the word "inclusive"!

First.Aspect

TheBigBean said:

The Guardian is reporting that the Taliban is trying to agree a more inclusive government.

Yes, we can take their word on that. Honourable people, the Taliban.

ugo.santalucia

photonic69 said:

3,500 coalition deaths 2001 - 2021
15,000 USSR deaths 1979 - 1989
Afghan civillian and military deaths around 104,000

Anyone with any sense could have told you exactly what would happen, yet the West seems surprised by the resuargance of the Taliban. It's like taking your thumb off a hose pipe that was leaking. You ain't fixed it. It still leaks but now a little worse.

Unrest has been going on in that area for over 1,000 years. It will never be solved by external intervention. Manage it from outside if you can. If you can't then nuke 'em.

Yes, Afghanistan was a disaster in the making... if the Russians couldn't "win" at a time when war crimes were overlooked, then nobody could.

oxoman

Have to agree with photo 100%

Ben6899

What? About nuking them? Is that before, or after, we extradite the millions of innocents?

TheBigBean

Clarissa Ward has dropped and done a few interviews. She was previously criticised for "parachute journalism that serves no purpose other than chasing higher ratings", but nonetheless quite ballsy, and interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIw7smlkIaU&t=488s

morstar

First.Aspect said:

TheBigBean said:

The Guardian is reporting that the Taliban is trying to agree a more inclusive government.

Yes, we can take their word on that. Honourable people, the Taliban.

At this exact moment in time, there are probably many decent people involved in what they see as a righteous returning of the country to own rule.

If the west have propped up a corrupt government, that is not an unreasonable position.

Once power is consolidated. That is when the corruption and more extreme ideologies will become the dominant force.

First.Aspect

morstar said:

First.Aspect said:

TheBigBean said:

The Guardian is reporting that the Taliban is trying to agree a more inclusive government.

Yes, we can take their word on that. Honourable people, the Taliban.

At this exact moment in time, there are probably many decent people involved in what they see as a righteous returning of the country to own rule.

If the west have propped up a corrupt government, that is not an unreasonable position.

Once power is consolidated. That is when the corruption and more extreme ideologies will become the dominant force.

I'm all for playing devil's advocate morstar. Before we continue, can I ask, are you female? If so shut the hell up your views are irrelevant.

Hope that helps.

PMark

The Soviets would have probably 'won' if the US hadn't of got a number of countries together to help supply the Afghans with modern weapons to defend themselves. Otherwise they were very unlikely to take down any Soviet aircraft.

But what the Soviets did manage to do is wipe out a lot of the population over 18, so you ended up with a young angry population after the war. There was talk in the US of funding schools in Afghanistan, but with the amount of money that had already spent on supplying weapons at that point, most didn't want to spend any more. Pity as it would of probably stopped the situation we find ourselves in today.

Although it probably wouldn't have made any difference to 911, the terrorists would of just found another sympathetic country in the region to settle in and plan their attacks.

DeVlaeminck

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

elbowloh

PMark said:

The Soviets would have probably 'won' if the US hadn't of got a number of countries together to help supply the Afghans with modern weapons to defend themselves. Otherwise they were very unlikely to take down any Soviet aircraft.

But what the Soviets did manage to do is wipe out a lot of the population over 18, so you ended up with a young angry population after the war. There was talk in the US of funding schools in Afghanistan, but with the amount of money that had already spent on supplying weapons at that point, most didn't want to spend any more. Pity as it would of probably stopped the situation we find ourselves in today.

Although it probably wouldn't have made any difference to 911, the terrorists would of just found another sympathetic country in the region to settle in and plan their attacks.

I think the Taliban have similarly been propped up with support and weapons from the likes of Pakistan.

TheBigBean

DeVlaeminck said:

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

Worth noting that IS and the Taliban were fighting against each other.

rjsterry

morstar said:

First.Aspect said:

TheBigBean said:

The Guardian is reporting that the Taliban is trying to agree a more inclusive government.

Yes, we can take their word on that. Honourable people, the Taliban.

At this exact moment in time, there are probably many decent people involved in what they see as a righteous returning of the country to own rule.

If the west have propped up a corrupt government, that is not an unreasonable position.

Once power is consolidated. That is when the corruption and more extreme ideologies will become the dominant force.

The Taliban are the extremists.

Here's a thread explaining some of the ideology and why it has proved so resistant to Western secular ideas.

https://twitter.com/DrJavadTHashmi/status/1427277284390711301?s=19

DeVlaeminck

Yes there seems to be an ever shifting of alliances doesn't there. The Taliban if course came to power replacing the Mujahedeen warlords who had defeated the Soviets.

I don't know a huge amount the history but the fear us that the Taliban's religious fervour gives them an advantage over opposition groups who may be divided by ethnicity, tribe, region etc. Still last time they were in power there were some areas where they didn't manage to conquer.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

DeVlaeminck said:

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

Worth noting that IS and the Taliban were fighting against each other.

are you on some PR campaign for the Taliban?

davidof

DeVlaeminck said:

Still last time they were in power there were some areas where they didn't manage to conquer.

They conquered those first this time around.

I notice June was LGBT+ month in Afghanistan. I guess it is too early to plan the 2022 edition?

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

DeVlaeminck said:

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

Worth noting that IS and the Taliban were fighting against each other.

are you on some PR campaign for the Taliban?

Why do you treat everything like a football fan?

TheBigBean

davidof said:

DeVlaeminck said:

Still last time they were in power there were some areas where they didn't manage to conquer.

They conquered those first this time around.

I notice June was LGBT+ month in Afghanistan. I guess it is too early to plan the 2022 edition?

They didn't defeat the northern alliance hence it being notable that the northern alliance is regrouping in the last remaining province.

pangolin

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

First.Aspect said:

TheBigBean said:

The Guardian is reporting that the Taliban is trying to agree a more inclusive government.

Yes, we can take their word on that. Honourable people, the Taliban.

At this exact moment in time, there are probably many decent people involved in what they see as a righteous returning of the country to own rule.

If the west have propped up a corrupt government, that is not an unreasonable position.

Once power is consolidated. That is when the corruption and more extreme ideologies will become the dominant force.

The Taliban are the extremists.

Here's a thread explaining some of the ideology and why it has proved so resistant to Western secular ideas.

https://twitter.com/DrJavadTHashmi/status/1427277284390711301?s=19

This was an interesting read. For those who hate the twitter format, click here:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1427277284390711301.html

The author is Dr. Javad T Hashmi, "Physician, Fmr. Fellow of Medical Ethics, & PhD candidate in the Study of Religion (Islamic Studies) at Harvard University" (you can find that out with 1 click but again, this seems to irritate people).

MattFalle

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

DeVlaeminck said:

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

Worth noting that IS and the Taliban were fighting against each other.

are you on some PR campaign for the Taliban?

Why do you treat everything like a football fan?

Well, it came home for Terry and his mates.

Perhaps Southgate could get some tips?

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

DeVlaeminck said:

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

Worth noting that IS and the Taliban were fighting against each other.

are you on some PR campaign for the Taliban?

Why do you treat everything like a football fan?

I don’t understand where you’re coming from when your posts on the taliban seem to take the view that they’re not that bad?

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

First.Aspect said:

TheBigBean said:

The Guardian is reporting that the Taliban is trying to agree a more inclusive government.

Yes, we can take their word on that. Honourable people, the Taliban.

At this exact moment in time, there are probably many decent people involved in what they see as a righteous returning of the country to own rule.

If the west have propped up a corrupt government, that is not an unreasonable position.

Once power is consolidated. That is when the corruption and more extreme ideologies will become the dominant force.

The Taliban are the extremists.

Here's a thread explaining some of the ideology and why it has proved so resistant to Western secular ideas.

https://twitter.com/DrJavadTHashmi/status/1427277284390711301?s=19

This overlooks the massive role that culture plays. For example, Iran may be a country with fairly extreme religious rules, but a significant portion of its population is quite cosmopolitan and liberal which is why the conservative rules are constantly being chipped away. In contrast, Pakistan is relatively more liberal in terms of its laws, buy way way more conservative in its culture. I'm not convinced which religious text is being followed makes that much difference.

For example, all over Pakistan there is segregation. I don't think this is a legal requirement, it's just a way of life, but then even somewhere like southern India, you wouldn't sit next to someone of the opposite sex on the bus.

To clarify, I'm not disputing that the Taliban are extreme.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

DeVlaeminck said:

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

Worth noting that IS and the Taliban were fighting against each other.

are you on some PR campaign for the Taliban?

Why do you treat everything like a football fan?

I don’t understand where you’re coming from when your posts on the taliban seem to take the view that they’re not that bad?

I'm trying to provide insight (to the extent of my knowledge) on the politics of the region. This is because other people might find it interesting or useful. So, no I'm not PR for the Taliban, but on the question of whether they will become IS, it is surely worth noting that they fought each other about this very question.

You seem to pick a team and then shout loudly against everything else ignoring any nuance.

TheBigBean

https://twitter.com/AmrullahSaleh2/status/1427607793708814361

https://twitter.com/AmrullahSaleh2/status/1427631191545589772

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

DeVlaeminck said:

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

Worth noting that IS and the Taliban were fighting against each other.

are you on some PR campaign for the Taliban?

Why do you treat everything like a football fan?

I don’t understand where you’re coming from when your posts on the taliban seem to take the view that they’re not that bad?

I'm trying to provide insight (to the extent of my knowledge) on the politics of the region. This is because other people might find it interesting or useful. So, no I'm not PR for the Taliban, but on the question of whether they will become IS, it is surely worth noting that they fought each other about this very question.

You seem to pick a team and then shout loudly against everything else ignoring any nuance.

I think that's unfair.

I think that parroting the Taliban saying to the international community in a moment of victory that they will be more committed to "inclusivity" whilst they are re-enacting laws about stonings for adulterers and other medieval punishments, murdering political opponents announcing that various high profile women are targets for them and withdrawing swathes of rights for women is hardly being "nuanced" or indeed providing any insight.

I think the Taliban's history is such that we don't need to give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things like that.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

DeVlaeminck said:

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

Worth noting that IS and the Taliban were fighting against each other.

are you on some PR campaign for the Taliban?

Why do you treat everything like a football fan?

I don’t understand where you’re coming from when your posts on the taliban seem to take the view that they’re not that bad?

I'm trying to provide insight (to the extent of my knowledge) on the politics of the region. This is because other people might find it interesting or useful. So, no I'm not PR for the Taliban, but on the question of whether they will become IS, it is surely worth noting that they fought each other about this very question.

You seem to pick a team and then shout loudly against everything else ignoring any nuance.

I think that's unfair.

I think that parroting the Taliban saying to the international community in a moment of victory that they will be more committed to "diversity" whilst they are re-enacting laws about stonings for adulterers and other medieval punishments, murdering political opponents announcing that various high profile women are targets for them and withdrawing swathes of rights for women is hardly being "nuanced" or indeed providing any insight.

I think the Taliban's history is such that we don't need to give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things like that.

It's exactly what you have just done, so perfectly fair. You've just launched into another strawman rant against something I didn't say.

I haven't parroted the Taliban. I did quote the Guardian, and that only relates to the possibility of an inclusive government. In that sense, it means men who are not Taliban.

I also posted a video of a CNN reported being told to move out the way because she was a woman and being told she will need to cover her face. She also explained why girls are unlikely to be educated, because there aren't any girls schools. But you missed all that.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

DeVlaeminck said:

The best hope in the medium term is that without direct external intervention on the scale they had with the Soviets 79-96 and the West 01-21 they will go back to internal squabbling and the unpopularity of a repressive Taliban regine will see it replaced with something less worse.

I can't see the Taliban suddenly becoming moderate - I suppose it's possible that they have learned a lesson that becoming a centre for global jihad risks upsetting Russia, China and the West and so they will settle for inflicting their particular brand of Shariah Law internally .
Probably whilst receiving some support from other countries for keeping a lid on any attempts by Isis, Al Qaida et al to use the area as an HQ.

Worth noting that IS and the Taliban were fighting against each other.

are you on some PR campaign for the Taliban?

Why do you treat everything like a football fan?

I don’t understand where you’re coming from when your posts on the taliban seem to take the view that they’re not that bad?

I'm trying to provide insight (to the extent of my knowledge) on the politics of the region. This is because other people might find it interesting or useful. So, no I'm not PR for the Taliban, but on the question of whether they will become IS, it is surely worth noting that they fought each other about this very question.

You seem to pick a team and then shout loudly against everything else ignoring any nuance.

I think that's unfair.

I think that parroting the Taliban saying to the international community in a moment of victory that they will be more committed to "inclusivity" whilst they are re-enacting laws about stonings for adulterers and other medieval punishments, murdering political opponents announcing that various high profile women are targets for them and withdrawing swathes of rights for women is hardly being "nuanced" or indeed providing any insight.

I think the Taliban's history is such that we don't need to give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things like that.

as I understand it the nuance is that the alternatives aren't much better and we don't invade (or majorly disapprove of) other countries for medieval punishments and murdering politcal opponents. I get that this does not make it right but are you not siding with the metropolitan elite and the other 38 million inhabitants either don't know or don't care that the Taliban are now in charge.

We invaded because of their active support for Al Qaeeda so if they say they are not going down that route then they will probably avoid serious repercussions from the international community