macelena 1,070 Posted July 28, 2021 I doubt i will be the most pissed about it here compared to people who got to deploy there, but after the withdrawal, is there anything doable to help the ANA keep the Taliban at bay? Allied Carriers, Bombers, Drones? I would guess they are capable of working with NATO CAS after 20 years but I don't think we can assume anything here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Gepard 11,296 Posted July 28, 2021 There was a nice scene about this subject in the russian Afghanistan war movie "9th Company" One experienced soviet soldier explained a nobbie: "Look. This are the Greens, our f*cking afghan allies. If the fight with the enemy starts, they run away and you will find them 5 kilometers behind the frontline!" 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TROOPER117 146 Posted July 28, 2021 Nothing will help... for centuries armies have tried to conquer, eradicate, help or control that area of the world. No one has managed it yet, and I doubt anyone will in the future. It's up to the people there now to sort it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viggen 644 Posted July 28, 2021 (edited) 6 hours ago, macelena said: I doubt i will be the most pissed about it here compared to people who got to deploy there My deployment was nothing more than a glorified tax payer funded work vacation behind old Soviet minefields and rows of barbed wire. That said, I don’t think there’s much we can do to help the ANA, if the ANA isn’t willing to help itself. Writing has been on the wall for some time. The biggest enemy to the Taliban now is probably itself. It’s a much more ethnically diverse organization compared to its Pashtun origins, but Afghanistan’s people always turn on each other eventually. I do wish the best for the people there though. It’s a beautiful country. Edited July 28, 2021 by Viggen 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+daddyairplanes 10,241 Posted July 28, 2021 anything we can do? no, other than help the ones that helped us get out if they want to ninety percent of hte ANA doesnt give a shit about anyone other than themselves. the ten percent that are actually good soldiers just isnt enough to do much. hopefully a different group altogether pops up, knocks the taliban on their ass and sets up a loose confederation amongst the tribes. still a pipe dream, but more realistic than the current Afghan government being effective or possible existant a year from now. i always found it funny that we had better justification for the start of afghanistan, but iraq was more successful (ish) because that government and army could almost stand on its own. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted July 28, 2021 There has been some musing from the pres that the US will try to assist the Astan from afar.............and afar really does seem to mean that. Maybe they will stay in touch with MS Teams or Zoom! https://choice.npr.org/index.html?origin=https://www.npr.org/2021/05/17/997494815/the-u-s-looks-to-support-the-afghan-military-from-over-the-horizon Glad I saved this from 2014: Quote It is clearly not true, as is sometimes said, that its impossible to conquer Afghanistan - many Empires have done so, from the ancient Persians, through Alexander the Great to the Mongols, the Mughals and the Qajars. But the economics means that it is impossible to get Afghanistan to pay for its own occupation - it is, as the the then Emir said as he surrendered to the British in 1839, "a land of only stones and men". Any occupying army here will haemorrage money and blood to little gain, and in the end most throw in the towel, as the British did in 1842, as the Russians did in 1988 and as Nato will do later this year. In October 1963, when Harold Macmillan was handing over the prime ministership to Alec Douglas-Home, he is supposed to have passed on some advice. "My dear boy, as long as you do not invade Afghanistan you will be absolutely fine," he said. Sadly, no one gave the same advice to Tony Blair. It just seems to prove Hegel's old adage that the only thing you learn from history is that sadly no one ever learns anything from history. bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26483320 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PFunk 198 Posted July 29, 2021 The concept of "liberte, egalite, fraternity" is foreign to a part of the world that has only known conquest and tyrants for centuries. There are no Washingtons, Jeffersons, or Dantons in the Middle East or Southwest Asia because that sort of figure is an anathema to that culture. One of the things I learned over there as a student traveler in the mid-90s that made me despair for any real, lasting solution to the violence was that family and clan mean more than national identity. Under those circumstances, it is difficult to impossible to get people to rally behind a national flag, although Daesh had no trouble getting people to rally behind theirs because while it meant conquest and tyrannical rule, it was also an appeal to ancient family lines and traditions. Therefore, I was not surprised when the Iraqi army, trained and equipped by the Americans, abandoned their Abrams tanks and heavy emplacements at the mere sight of a bunch of guys in Toyota mini-trucks spray-painted in camo. Is it frustrating? Of course. It wasn't going to happen any other way, unfortunately. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Gepard 11,296 Posted July 29, 2021 Perhaps the west, especially the US americans must understand, that there are more ways of life than the american way of life. The export of democracy, freedom, women rights will always fail if the societies of the other contries are unwilling or unable to accept this ideas. In the best way we get "fake democracies", how we find them in the most countries of Africa or Asia. In the worst case we get failed states like Libya or Afghanistan. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PFunk 198 Posted July 30, 2021 I suppose this is true. Something for us to keep in mind the next time we get asked for help. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+daddyairplanes 10,241 Posted July 30, 2021 depends on what you mean by help. delivering disaster aid after a natural catastrophe is not only the decent thing to do (as a person or nation) but the best way to promote American ideals, especially if you dont use the efforts to promote American ideals fuckin up a functioning country, sitting there a few years without actually fixing the infrastructure, then hoppin on the next bird out isnt going to convince folks that are used to very opposite ways of life that apple pie is great. afghanistan is kinda worse, it really hasnt been a functioning country since the 1970s. might have had a chance in the early 2000s if corruption hadnt been allowed to flourish, but Haliburton couldnt let that pass now could they? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted August 12, 2021 I expect people are falling off their chairs with surprise. Quote Around 600 UK troops are to be sent to Afghanistan to assist British nationals to leave, the government has announced. It comes as the Taliban has seized the cities of Ghazni and Herat - taking control of 11 provincial capitals in less than a week. Military personnel will provide protection and help relocate UK nationals, Afghan staff and interpreters. On Friday the Foreign Office advised all British nationals to leave. It is estimated that around 4,000 British citizens are still in the country. Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said the security of British nationals, military personnel and former Afghan staff was the government's first priority and that it "must do everything we can to ensure their safety". https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58195286 Quote The US said it was sending military troops to the airport in Kabul to help evacuate a "significant" amount of embassy staff on special flights. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58184202 The evacuation from Embassies seems familiar.........cannot quite place it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
macelena 1,070 Posted August 13, 2021 Back when I was still fit and a paratrooper, one of the things we trained the most for were NEO (Non-combatant evacuation operations). From what I gather, heavy casualties were to be assumed. Wish them the best of luck. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+daddyairplanes 10,241 Posted August 13, 2021 On 8/12/2021 at 4:56 PM, MigBuster said: The evacuation from Embassies seems familiar.........cannot quite place it. hey look, our generation gets a turn at this game. although i dont think any Cessnas will be landing on carriers this time that said, i wonder if the Nam guys figured the place would go to hell in a hand basket soon as we left 4 and 5 years before we actually did 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
macelena 1,070 Posted August 14, 2021 12 hours ago, daddyairplanes said: that said, i wonder if the Nam guys figured the place would go to hell in a hand basket soon as we left 4 and 5 years before we actually did If there was so much shit being talked about the ARVN regarding "cowardice" and corruption before the Paris Peace Accords, I guess they could have seen it coming. I don't think they would have expected supply/funds to be cut off and B-52s not being sent back for Linebacker 3 or something like that though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallenphoenix1986 603 Posted August 14, 2021 This is the only way this shit show was ever going to end, was more a case of "when" than it was "if". 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted August 15, 2021 Bagram AB has gone and Kabul is surrounded so afraid not much Curbing of the Taliban will be taking place. Quote The chairman of the UK parliamentary foreign affairs committee has criticised Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab for remaining silent on the Taliban advance in Afghanistan. Conservative [The current governing party] MP Tom Tugendhat told the BBC: "This is clearly the biggest single disaster of British foreign policy since Suez [in 1956] and we're yet to hear a single word from the foreign secretary in the last week so I'm afraid I don't know what he thinks." He says: "It is pretty extraordinary that our focus has been on minor negotiations with Nato and European partners and allies who we've worked with and traded with very, very closely for the last 70, 80, 90 years - rather than on the lives on 28 million Afghans, several thousands of whom have genuinely risked their lives in order to save the lives of British soldiers or to serve the interests of the British people in preventing terrorism keeping our country safe." The BBC has contacted the Foreign Office asking for an interview but no one has been made available. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viggen 644 Posted August 15, 2021 Taliban has entered Kabul with little resistance. Guess it's over. Eight years ago today I deployed to Afghanistan. And today the Taliban will probably take the country. 1 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TempestII 262 Posted August 15, 2021 It seems like the ANA have put up just as much as a fight as the Iraqi army did against ISIS in 2014... The only possible silver lining to this shite show is that the Taliban (probably) aren't directly a threat to the West. It was AQ who carried out international terrorist attacks both prior to and after 9/11. If the Taliban stop AQ and similar groups from using the country as a base for future plots, the West will probably have an uneasy peace with them. If not... Well we'll probably end up back there again in 20-30 years. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Gepard 11,296 Posted August 15, 2021 (edited) The afghan president ran away from Kabul. The Taliban are taking over. Edited August 15, 2021 by Gepard 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted August 15, 2021 I am sure our glorious leaders are very sorry for this mess Remains to be seen whether the Taliban can keep AQ and ISIS at bay or even if they are going to be a bit more democratic/liberal this time............... but I wont be putting any money on it. If it wasn't such a catastrophe for the Astan people this BBC text could be a "Yes Minister" Sketch: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nesher 628 Posted August 15, 2021 Just saw a photo of a Chinook helps evac the embassy in Kabul... reminds me the fall of Saigon.. sad.. so sad.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carter28 92 Posted August 15, 2021 The big difference between Afghanistan and Vietnam is that the ARVN and VNAF actually put up a good fight in some places before being overrun by the NVA. I'd say this disaster is far worse than the fall of Saigon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nesher 628 Posted August 15, 2021 37 minutes ago, Carter28 said: The big difference between Afghanistan and Vietnam is that the ARVN and VNAF actually put up a good fight in some places before being overrun by the NVA. I'd say this disaster is far worse than the fall of Saigon. I agree.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted August 15, 2021 Definitely some comparisons with the pull out of Nam but also correct to say South Vietnam did initially put up a fight...........it took much longer for the North to break through instead of this stroll in the park. A Vet was on TV today bemused at how much time he / they had spent training up the Afghan forces over the last decades......so at least the Talibans army will be better trained if we have to go back 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viggen 644 Posted August 15, 2021 Apparently the ANA Commando Corps was ordered to stand down and let the Taliban march in to Mazar-i-Sharif. They seemed to be the only element of the ANA to have some fight in them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites