Welcome to The Few Good Men

Thanks for visiting our club and having a look around, there is a lot to see. Why not consider becoming a member?

Afghanistan conflict: Taliban declares 'defeat' of Nato

Bootie

FGM OWNER
Staff member
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
22,713
Reaction score
6,194
Age
46
Location
Scotland
Website
www.youtube.com
Sabre rattling or do they have a point?

Taliban fighters in Afghanistan have declared the "defeat" of the US and its allies, a day after the coalition officially ended its combat mission.

A Taliban statement said the US-led force had "rolled up its flag" without having achieved "anything substantial".

Nato formally ended its 13-year mission on Sunday, but about 13,000 troops will stay to train the Afghan army.

Meanwhile, officials said four Afghan soldiers were killed in a Taliban attack in Helmand province on Monday.

Three other soldiers were injured during the attack on an army checkpoint in Sangin district. Eight insurgents were said to have been killed.

The US-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) marked the end of its mission by lowering its flag at a ceremony in Kabul on Sunday.

Mission commander Gen John Campbell said the Nato force had "lifted the Afghan people out of the darkness of despair and given them hope for the future".

'Demoralised'
But in a statement on Monday, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said the Nato ceremony was "a clear indication of their defeat and disappointment".

He said the Taliban would establish "a pure Islamic system by expelling the remaining invading forces," adding that Western troops were "demoralised".

Nato's Afghan deployment began after the 9/11 attacks against the US.

At its peak, the US-led Isaf deployment involved more than 130,000 personnel from 50 countries.

But from 1 January, the force will consist of about 13,000 mostly-American troops and will shift to a training and support mission for the Afghan army.

The US will also have an additional force of a few thousand troops whose focus will be counter-terrorism operations.

While the US and its allies say the Afghan security forces have been able to prevent a Taliban offensive, violence has increased in recent months.

This year has been the bloodiest in Afghanistan since 2001, with at least 4,600 members of the Afghan security forces having been killed.

Nearly 3,500 foreign troops have been killed since the beginning of the Nato mission in 2001, including about 2,200 American troops.
 
Cop-out Answer: Too soon to tell.
Long Answer: At this moment in time It would be I'd say a NATO Minor Victory, despite Afghanistan being the bloodiest battlefield arena since the beginning of recorded history, the Taliban has taken some serious blows within the past decade that has significantly weakened their strength, and has at least kept them relatively at bay in coming to power. That said, they haven't been eradicated, and the Afghan forces will need to remain vigilant against any Taliban resurgence.
The real loser are, in my opinion, the Afghani's. Blasted by NATO and drones, terrorized and bullied by the Taliban, you have a people concerned more with their basic self preservation and subsistence (in light of many farmers needing a new crop other than the poppy) than with Islamist government or democratic ideals.
The most worrying question is the one that won't have an answer just yet: was it worth it?
 
Stupid to get into a war, without the will to win it. Stupider still, not to deal with the realities of the local population. We should have learned something from the last couple of wars, but I guess not.
 
Hey! They gave me an idea. NO one in the club has been able to beat me yet. I declare absolute victory. Your postings are a clear indication of your defeat and disappointment.. Taliban weenies eat your hearts out!
 
Sabre rattling or do they have a point?

(...)

While the US and its allies say the Afghan security forces have been able to prevent a Taliban offensive, violence has increased in recent months.

This year has been the bloodiest in Afghanistan since 2001, with at least 4,600 members of the Afghan security forces having been killed.

(...)

There is your answer, Booty.
Starting an asymetric war with a regular peacetime Army is a fools choice (hey there Georgy Bush). Especially with " one hand tied around your balls" (who knows which movie I quoted?).
The NATO goals were to establis a stable country with a democratic system.


Stupid to get into a war, without the will to win it. Stupider still, not to deal with the realities of the local population. We should have learned something from the last couple of wars, but I guess not.

Agreed. Maybe we could have stabilised the country with a massive effort (a Company-in-every-town-type of effort; "conquer and hold" strategy) so that the Taliban couldn't move a mile without being spotted, but no-one was willing to go all the way politically.

My bet is Afghanistan will plunge into chaos just like Iraq.
I just hope this doesn't come back too hard on us....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top