Afghan Army Analogy

I worked for General who was there for a year ,he told me that there is one of the largest deposits of rare metals in the back of beyond, no roads nothing. The Chinese will be there soon to take the lot

 

And the poppy fields....................https://www.unodc.org/documents/cro...Executive_summary_Opium_Survey_2020_SMALL.pdf

 

Irrespective of what's happening in Afghanistan (which I agree is the biggest shit-show since Saigon) this statement takes some beating...

In the same week that the BBC style manual redefined Homosexuality to remove same-sex attracted people (Trans-rights activism trumps Gay rights now, apparently); when they now talk about 'Pregnant People' as opposed to 'Pregnant Women' (trans-rights are now more important than women's rights); when they decorated their studios in EU colours during the Brexit debate, I am expected to believe that the BBC news channel are impartial and unbiased. Indeed that they are the 'most unbiased' news outlet in the UK.

And If I disagree with that statement then I must be an extremist!

I'm sure the rest of you have seen this tactic before: make a, seemingly 'plausible', sweeping statement and, before there's even a chance of debate, shut down that debate by demonising any opposition to your view before it even raises its head. It's nothing new, it's been around for a very long time and it is, indeed, the favoured tactic of a certain type of political activist; and they always, always claim to be politically neutral/unbiased when they make their sweeping statements.

So here's my take on this. Either you have no clue as to what has been happening over the last 10 - 15 years or you are being deliberately obtuse and/or provocative! I would suggest that it is you, my friend, that has no place in public discourse with an attitude like that, and I would further suggest you to stick to Gaslighting imbeciles on Twitter.

 

I did not ask for validation of my 'BBC haters' comment but thanks anyway. Politics is supposed to be banned here so the above should not last too long

Note I do not do Twitter at all. My Facebook content is couple (3-4) of factual groups with no political content at all.

 

Id'd via Twitter a 2015 commentary by an Oxford academic historian; it has a strategic theme and examines the history of that often invaded country: Misunderstanding War - The American Interest

The author has tweeted, appropriately:

 

Why is there puzzlement in the press: How could the system collapse so quickly?
Well, that is meticulously documented. Here are just two representative excerpts:

http://library.rumsfeld.com/doclib/sp/445
/2005-02-23%20To%20Condoleezza%20Rice%20re%20Afghan%20National%20Police.pdf

https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-17-62-LL-Executive-Summary.pdf

 

yes it is banned but obviously some people know how to use it in a subtle fashion and we who read through the subtle lines and just rise to the bait
or rather just explaining we are not as stupid as we might appear.

 

I've given up on trying to find any accurate reporting on anything.

My attitude now is if anything requires any direct action by me, I'll find out about it eventually.

 

It is very sad for the Afghan people.
I assume it is a very difficult country to cover militarily due to the geography and size
Many vehicles and weapons have found their way into the attacking forces.


just a wiki link but gives the gist
Afghan National Army - Wikipedia

 

All the training in the world is now to late

Afghanistan on brink of Taliban takeover as militants near Kabul - BBC News

 

An analysis from a NGO that was, may be still is based in Kabul: Is This How It Ends? With the Taleban closing in on Kabul, President Ghani faces tough decisions - Afghanistan Analysts Network - English

From a US political commentary website and the headline ‘It may never happen’: The $88 billion gamble on the Afghan army that's going up in smoke' and this phrase suggest to me - in a distant armchair - war exhaustion grew:

Link: ‘It may never happen’: The $88 billion gamble on the Afghan army that's going up in smoke

 

US government press conference scheduled in next hour.

They'll stress how important it will be going forward for the Taliban to respect women and LGBQT rights.

 

Even though the article appears on RT Kevin Hurley, ex-Met officer, writes on his last visit to Kabul as an adviser to the UN and his penultimate sentence:

Link: I recently worked in Kabul and weep for all my Afghan friends, who we’re abandoning to their deaths. Here’s why our mission failed

 

...And this is the obverse side of the same tactic. They show up, they get their feet under the table and they begin to make political comments. When you react to their politicising of the discussion they accuse you of doing exactly what they're doing and claim to be whiter than white. They also call for your comments to be removed and eventually they'll start to call for you to be removed. Standard political activist playbook!

One final thing, I've been on-line for a lot longer than most people here, long before the Net ever became public and I've been seeing these tactics for a very long time. One thing that has always struck me is that these political activists show up everywhere, they demand their rights to freedom of speech whilst denying you the same freedom of expression. However, they never, ever spend their own money to setup forums of their own where they can talk to their hearts content with the like-minded. Like parasites they always invade everyone else's space and they are never interested in a symbiotic relationship, just destruction of that which they oppose!

Out of dereference to all Adam's hard work to keep this forum going, this will be my last comment on this. But, It's your forum gentlemen and ladies do not let it be hijacked by political activists. And be under no illusion they are here. Because for these people, Orwell's dictum that "He who controls the past, controls the future" is most often read as a manual for action rather than a warning against authoritarianism.

 

Personally, I hope that our forces will not be required to go back in again. If they do, then the objective needs to be clear and attainable. If this involves dealing with the Taliban militarily, then they must be allowed to carry this out as they see fit and not have one hand tied behind their backs by those who believe you can make omelettes with out breaking at least some eggs in the process.

Let's not add another campaign medal to the previous four:

 

Really? I am a bit long in the tooth myself. This is the earliest post of mine (2002)that is still on an active forum.

Villers Bocage - Axis History Forum

I was around and posting for a few years before 2000 and here since 2004. .

Eggs, Suck, Granny etc.

 

The Taliban seem to be near to total victory. Given the number of Afghan civilians killed by both sides I do not think anyone was acting with restraint.

 

That's not a quote from me.

 

Fixed.
With age comes experience but also addled brain

 

Let’s be clear, the Taliban have played the long game, i.e. waited until the US led coalition forces have left, because they couldn’t win the short game. They have won nothing militarily, because they have not defeated the US led coalition. The latter have supported the democratic power and tried to train the Afghan Army et al. - 20 years worth of blood, time and effort invested. So, the coalition left Afghanistan with leadership, a trained army and presumably the hardware to fight with. It is now to up to that leadership, that army and the Afghan people to fight for the country they want. If they let the Taliban wrestle control, the Afghan people have got what they deserve (whether they want it or not).

No matter how bad things look now, if the Afghan’s want something different to the Taliban they will have to fight for it. Maybe they will have to play the long game.