TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- U.N. says Afghan violence up 30 percent
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

U.N. says Afghan violence up 30 percent

KABUL, Afghanistan - Violence in Afghanistan has surged nearly 30 percent this year and suicide bombings are inflicting a high toll on civilians, a new United Nations report says.

The report said Afghanistan is averaging 550 violent incidents a month, up from an average of 425 last year. It said three-fourths of suicide bombings are targeting international and Afghan security forces, but suicide bombers also killed 143 civilians through August.

"Suicide attacks have been accompanied by attacks against students and schools, assassinations of officials, elders and mullahs, and the targeting of police in a deliberate and calculated effort to impede the establishment of legitimate government institutions," according to the report, which was released in New York last week.

A suicide attack Tuesday on a police bus in western Kabul killed 13 officers and civilians, including a woman and her two children who boarded the vehicle seconds before the explosion, the Afghan government reported. It was the second bombing of a bus in the capital in four days.

The U.N. report didn't give any other violence-related numbers.

An Associated Press count of insurgency-related deaths, meanwhile, reached 5,086 in the first nine months of this year. AP counted 4,019 deaths in 2006, based on violent incidents reported by Western and Afghan officials. That was the first year AP compiled such figures.

The AP tally for this year includes more than 3,500 militants killed and more than 650 civilians dead from either insurgent violence or U.S. or NATO attacks.

Almost 180 international soldiers have been killed. That includes 85 U.S. military personnel, nearing the total of 98 American deaths reported by the Pentagon for all of 2006.

Insurgents have staged a record number of suicide attacks this year � more than 100, including the two bus bombings in Kabul since Saturday that killed 43 people between them.

Four children were among the 13 people killed in Tuesday's suicide attack by a man wearing a pakul � an Afghan hat commonly seen in the country's north � and a shawl around the upper half of his body called a chador, said Amin Gul, who owns a metalworking shop next to the blast site.

"When the bus came, an old man got on, then a woman with two children, then the guy wearing the chador entered, and then a big boom," said Gul, who witnessed the attack.

The seats in the front of the bus were covered in blood and small body parts, and workers washed blood from nearby trees after the attack. Ten people were wounded in the bombing, Health Minister Mohammad Amin Fatemi said.

Ahmad Saqi, a 20-year-old mechanic, said he helped put seven people in vehicles for runs to the hospital, and that several of the wounded had no legs.

"One woman was holding a baby in her arms, and they were both killed," Saqi said. "Half of the woman's face was blown off."

The blast killed eight police officers, the mother, her baby and another child, as well as two unaccompanied children who had been heading to a special school for handicapped students, Fatemi said. The children ranged in age from 2 to 8.

"The woman's husband is working at the Health Ministry. How do we tell the father his wife and two kids are dead?" asked Fatemi. "This attack goes against all of Islam. There is no reason to blow up Muslims, especially during the holy month of Ramadan. My message to these people: Please stop killing Muslims."

Tuesday's explosion is the third attack in four months against police or army buses in Kabul.

On Saturday, a suicide bomber wearing an army uniform blew himself up in an army bus, killing 30 people. In June, a bomb ripped through a bus carrying police instructors in Kabul, killing 35 people in the deadliest insurgent attack since the 2001 invasion.

A coalition soldier was killed by gunfire Tuesday morning while conducting combat operations in the northeastern province of Kunar. Three other soldiers were wounded, the coalition said in a statement. The nationalities of the soldiers weren't provided, but most soldiers in eastern Afghanistan are American.

Militants in Kunar attacked a border security post, killing three police, said Zargun Shah Khaliqyar, a spokesman for the provincial governor. It was not clear if the two incidents in Kunar were related.

Canadian troops in Kandahar shot and killed a 35-year-old man and wounded a child in what NATO's International Security Assistance Force called an "accidental discharge" by a weapons system.

The Afghan Defense Ministry, meanwhile, said Afghan and coalition soldiers battled insurgents in Uruzgan province on Sunday, killing 26 of the militants. There was no way to independently verify the claim.

source?

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree source?

I apologize for the inconvenience

Source

Isn't it nice that we had to pull our troops to send to Iraq before this job was finished. And to think, this war was actually justified.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Isn't it nice that we had to pull our troops to send to Iraq before this job was finished. And to think, this war was actually justified.

It's a travesty on so many levels. I still don't understand how it happened - there was such fervor to declare Afghanistan over and done with, on to the next target, that nobody even paused to give thought over whether or not the next target was even real.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Isn't it nice that we had to pull our troops to send to Iraq before this job was finished. And to think, this war was actually justified.

actually there are more NATO and Allied troops there and have been there than there ever were original US troops so you're wrong in that respect.

this is specific evidence that the Taliqueers have had to change their tactics in the last year.

they can't stand up and fight a normal battle against the NATO and US forces anymore. they last time they made a real effort to fight was right before spring and we had anticipated that and took the necessary actions.

they now have taken a different approach similar to the Iraq insurgency whereby they try and ferment chaos using civilian cover to inflict civilian and military casualties.

it has no real tactical goal other than to terrorize and strategically, by nature, has a limited lifespan.

fortunately Afghanistan is not rife with sectarian divides like Iraq with large multicultural and segregated areas or they would be more successful.

you can't really stop someone from blowing themselves up. it's a desperate tactic that unfortunately has devastating effect, but this, like all of their tactics is illegitimate and immoral in the eyes of the populus and must play itself out among them like it has in Iraq.

Just let them be, all they want to do is farm opium.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo actually there are more NATO and Allied troops there and have been there than there ever were original US troops so you're wrong in that respect. this is specific evidence that the Taliqueers have had to change their tactics in the last year. they can't stand up and fight a normal battle against the NATO and US forces anymore. they last time they made a real effort to fight was right before spring and we had anticipated that and took the necessary actions. they now have taken a different approach similar to the Iraq insurgency whereby they try and ferment chaos using civilian cover to inflict civilian and military casualties. it has no real tactical goal other than to terrorize and strategically, by nature, has a limited lifespan. fortunately Afghanistan is not rife with sectarian divides like Iraq with large multicultural and segregated areas or they would be more successful. you can't really stop someone from blowing themselves up. it's a desperate tactic that unfortunately has devastating effect, but this, like all of their tactics is illegitimate and immoral in the eyes of the populus and must play itself out among them like it has in Iraq.

I'd honestly have expected you to realize that it takes more troops to occupy and stabilize than it does to destroy and overthrow. The point is that we don't have the troops to send there if we wanted to, unless we take them from Iraq.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy I'd honestly have expected you to realize that it takes more troops to occupy and stabilize than it does to destroy and overthrow. The point is that we don't have the troops to send there if we wanted to, unless we take them from Iraq.

I've got this breaks track called, "We want your soul", forgot who it was by, but it says that exact same thing in ur sig. With the a chorus of zombie-like voices, "WE WANT YOUR SOUL".

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I've got this breaks track called, "We want your soul", forgot who it was by,

Adam Freeland. lol like it says in his sig.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Adam Freeland. lol like it says in his sig.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy

Was his GU album any good? I never actually heard it.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Was his GU album any good? I never actually heard it.

That track isn't on it, but I liked it. It's better than any of the others since Howells. It's got a whole CD of electro tracks from people like Kavinsky, Justice, etc. and another of more tech-house stuff. Seems to be the route that GU is going since Layo & Bushwacka are next in Rio.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy I'd honestly have expected you to realize that it takes more troops to occupy and stabilize than it does to destroy and overthrow. The point is that we don't have the troops to send there if we wanted to, unless we take them from Iraq.

see this what people and the media confuse and obfuscate about these two theaters and they get all huffy about the war in general thinking they know something about troop deployments and how they are distributed and operate.

currently there are around 33,000 NATO forces comprised from 32 different countries in Afghanistan in addition to 30,000 UN ISAF personel. the bulk of NATO forces are the ones taking the fight to the Taliqueers.

as for the US the last i heard there were like 3-5 brigades of mixed forces mostly Army and SPEC forces. the bulk of those were helping training of 100,000 Afghan forces and fighting alongside NATO.

what your asking basically is a tactical decision that would probably be made by NATO to increase troop levels accordingly. but how many? a brigade? 2 brigades? a division? something entirely doable i would imagine but you wouldn't apply the same standard as you would with Iraq.

Afghanistn is not Iraq and vice versa, by way of terrain, total enemy forces, civilian population ect.

a decision to increase force would be a complicated one but without any parity with Iraq.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I've got this breaks track called, "We want your soul", forgot who it was by, but it says that exact same thing in ur sig. With the a chorus of zombie-like voices, "WE WANT YOUR SOUL".

yeah 2003 called and they want their CD back

My long-ago thread where I was criticizing the Canadian participation in Afghanistan is coming back to mind ... just like I envisioned it. I recall saying that the violence will flare up. And our Canadian boys have died for nothing. No democracy, no security, no progress, drugs are exported, corruption and murderous warlords are in control. Its a shame ...

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium My long-ago thread where I was criticizing the Canadian participation in Afghanistan is coming back to mind ... just like I envisioned it. I recall saying that the violence will flare up. And our Canadian boys have died for nothing. No democracy, no security, no progress, drugs are exported, corruption and murderous warlords are in control. Its a shame ...

Very true.

Funny how They made Hamid Karzai to go on television and pretend how badly they need the canadians to stay there,then we find out that this was all s setup by Ottawa.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo yeah 2003 called and they want their CD back

It's from a Deekline & Wizard mix.

Is there like an off-limits time period of music for you?

"We Want Your Soul" is a great track by Adam Freeland. Love the kinda stuff that he releases, or guys like Rennie Pilgrim, Krafty Kutz, Hyper, and Soul of Man. I remember living in Tampa at the time "We Want Your Soul" was released, and some of the Breakbeat DJs in Tampa just didn't get it. Then again some of them were making some of the cheesiest funky Breaks tracks ever. Even though Tampa is big on Breaks, there aren't that many great Breakbeat DJs in the Bay Area.
Good ones include Rick West, Malicious Mike, DJ Apple, Sharaz, and a few others.
Orlando on the other hand, even the DJs that play a lot of cheese all know and respect the good stuff. Heard some pretty good sets from DJ Sandy, Jimmy Joslin, Magic Mike, Knightlife (who also used to spin some awesome Trance sets) as well as of course Icey and Baby Anne.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo actually there are more NATO and Allied troops there and have been there than there ever were original US troops so you're wrong in that respect.

US and NATO lost their chance for quick end to Taliban problem, and now it'll cost more to fight the Taliban.

quote:

this is specific evidence that the Taliqueers have had to change their tactics in the last year. they can't stand up and fight a normal battle against the NATO and US forces anymore. they last time they made a real effort to fight was right before spring and we had anticipated that and took the necessary actions. they now have taken a different approach similar to the Iraq insurgency whereby they try and ferment chaos using civilian cover to inflict civilian and military casualties.

Yep. Tried to take on NATO head on in a pitched battle and got their asses handed to them.

So they have to resort to terrorist tactics, because that's the one that works for them right now.

quote:

it has no real tactical goal other than to terrorize and strategically, by nature, has a limited lifespan.

It's tactical goal is by fear and intimidation to draw local support away from Karzai govt. Its strategic goal is to cause enough bloodshed both military and civillian to make it not worth for NATO nations to continue to support Karzai govt. Helped by media putting a rather interesting spin to draw away support from Afghanistan mission. (at least it is in Canada)

quote:

fortunately Afghanistan is not rife with sectarian divides like Iraq with large multicultural and segregated areas or they would be more successful.

Shows how much you know about Afghanistan internal politics.

There is no 'Afghanistan' as a nation to many of the minds of avg Afghans. They put their tribe first, before nation. Afghanistan is another one of those artificially constructed nation. Tribal differences, and religious differences (there's a bit of Shia vs Sunni thing in Afghanistan too), not to mention warlords fighting each other, incompetence of Afghan National Police makes it helluva place to try to forge a nation.

quote:

you can't really stop someone from blowing themselves up. it's a desperate tactic that unfortunately has devastating effect, but this, like all of their tactics is illegitimate and immoral in the eyes of the populus and must play itself out among them like it has in Iraq.

Agreed, and there are some signs that Taliban is somewhat trying to play the PR game properly to not lose popular support. But, Taliban draws only support from few tribes among the Pashtun, so they don't really care if they blow up others who don't support them.

But Taliban seems to be able to run over any local militia groups that tried to fight them.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo currently there are around 33,000 NATO forces comprised from 32 different countries in Afghanistan in addition to 30,000 UN ISAF personel. the bulk of NATO forces are the ones taking the fight to the Taliqueers.

Actually, it's only few NATO nations that do the most of the fighting. Others have strict instructions from their govts preventing them from taking the fight to Taliban, so actual number of troops NATO commanders have available to do the serious fighting is quite limited.

quote:

what your asking basically is a tactical decision that would probably be made by NATO to increase troop levels accordingly. but how many? a brigade? 2 brigades? a division? something entirely doable i would imagine but you wouldn't apply the same standard as you would with Iraq.

There has to be enough troop presence for viable security presence in all regions of Afghanistan until ANA is ready to take over, and that simply isn't happen right now.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium My long-ago thread where I was criticizing the Canadian participation in Afghanistan is coming back to mind ... just like I envisioned it. I recall saying that the violence will flare up. And our Canadian boys have died for nothing. No democracy, no security, no progress, drugs are exported, corruption and murderous warlords are in control. Its a shame ...

Woe woe, woe is the short term problems.

Contrary to popular belief, there is progress in Afghanistan. I don't think we need to bash heads again since we did enough of that in the other thread, but Afghanistan is a long term (I'd say 25yrs) mission.

People want quick solutions and cry that the mission has failed when they don't get that.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Very true. Funny how They made Hamid Karzai to go on television and pretend how badly they need the canadians to stay there,then we find out that this was all s setup by Ottawa.

So far, all we have is hearsay. Until we get full investigation and report on what happened, let's try to keep speculation to minimum.

Not to mention the party that blew the whistle on this is NDP, which has active agenda to tar Afghanistan mission for political gains.

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree Woe woe, woe is the short term problems. Contrary to popular belief, there is progress in Afghanistan. I don't think we need to bash heads again since we did enough of that in the other thread, but Afghanistan is a long term (I'd say 25yrs) mission. People want quick solutions and cry that the mission has failed when they don't get that.

I can compare it to the Communist progress in Afghanistan in 1980s ... except the mujahideen of then are Taliban of now. And most of the dying is done by the Afghani people themselves - and the reason why situation hasnt erupted is because there's no outside force to tamper with the "progress", like it was in 1980s when Americans helped fund and organize resistance. Once again, the reason that the Taliban is strong is that NATO forces have failed to win the hearts and minds of Afghani people. Karzai doesnt control the country, by the way, outside of Kabul ...

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium I can compare it to the Communist progress in Afghanistan in 1980s ... except the mujahideen of then are Taliban of now.

Some of the leadership yes. A lot of them are quite dead after fighting the Yanks and a new generation of Taliban (mostly from Afghan refugee camps from Pakistan border with sprinkling of foreign 'mujahideen')

quote:

And most of the dying is done by the Afghani people themselves -

Ok

quote:

and the reason why situation hasnt erupted is because there's no outside force to tamper with the "progress", like it was in 1980s when Americans helped fund and organize resistance.

i don't understand

quote:

Once again, the reason that the Taliban is strong

Taliban isn't strong outside Kandahar province and few adjacent provinces. However, warlords are strong in the other areas.

quote:

is that NATO forces have failed to win the hearts and minds of Afghani people.

Like I said, you see it from short term point of view. Or you're just reading all the naysayer media.

Truth of the matter is, shitloads of effort is going into reconstruction and humanitarian effort.
Example: http://www.ruxted.ca/index.php?/archives/75-GOOD-NEWS!.html
List of SOME Canadian and NATO projects happening right now.

Kinda stupid not liking people who is trying to help you out, eh

What is happening is that a lot of Afghans are leery of what would happen if NATO leaves. Because they know that Karzai govt isn't strong enough yet, and if NATO leaves, Taliban will come again. So a lot of people esp. in Kandahar and other areas with Taliban activity don't want to be vocal in support of NATO and Karzai govt, because they know that if they get caught by Taliban, their ass is going to get shot.

quote:

Karzai doesnt control the country, by the way, outside of Kabul ...

I thought I agreed with you on this on the other thread.

It's going to take a while for Karzai to build enough strength to forge a strong central govt, for a nation that haven't had an effective central government in decades

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree Some of the leadership yes. A lot of them are quite dead after fighting the Yanks and a new generation of Taliban (mostly from Afghan refugee camps from Pakistan border with sprinkling of foreign 'mujahideen')

Trust me, over the last 3 decades of brutal war most of the Afghanistan warlords have switched sides on several occassions, to survive. And they will do it again when they see things crumbling. BTW, there are still a lot of Afghani refugees in Pakistan ... many of the warlords have war crimes on records, that have been disregarded. They are beingpaid big royalties by NATO to maintain their support, and allowed to get away with bad human rights records in their regions, allowed to grow drugs to screw people over in Central Asia, Europe, the world .... how convenient.

quote:

i don't understand

In 1980s, while Soviets were "rebuilding" Afghanistan, Americans and their allies were undermining things ... but today there's no such force, other than few non-government groups (which were started to fight the communists) left over from older days that are still operational in Pakistan.

Now, the Taliban was supposed to be our friend, right? Remember how USA and Pakistan initially supported them? But then they changed their minds. And what if they change their minds again on the current leadership ...

quote:

Taliban isn't strong outside Kandahar province and few adjacent provinces. However, warlords are strong in the other areas.

Taliban controls the areas outside of cities by night. Who knows, but its only a matter of time before things get out of control and warlords will start co-operating with Taliban. Some of the warlords hate Americans and probably are sheltering / helping Taliban, as seen in the Korean hostages crisis.

quote:

Like I said, you see it from short term point of view. Or you're just reading all the naysayer media.

Heck, short term? Is starting with 1977 - is that short term? Look at what happened to Afghanistan since then, and only an ignorant fool will believe that its the last we've seen of upheaval there. Overthrowal of Taliban is a perfect example. After helping mujahideen push out the communists, Americans and Pakistan then forces those guys out with Taliban (directly helped from Pakistan). And now new forces from Pakistan are helping to bring them back ...

quote:

Truth of the matter is, shitloads of effort is going into reconstruction and humanitarian effort. Example: http://www.ruxted.ca/index.php?/archives/75-GOOD-NEWS!.html List of SOME Canadian and NATO projects happening right now. Kinda stupid not liking people who is trying to help you out, eh

Heh, the communists were involved in all kinds of projects themselves, too, you know, in 1980s ... my dad was an engineer there, and he did fight on some occassions, once his unit got trapped in a tight mountain passage and got their asses nailed, and many of troops from his unit died, because the fire was coming from waaaaay up on overpass, while the armoured columns lay below, stuck.

quote:

What is happening is that a lot of Afghans are leery of what would happen if NATO leaves. Because they know that Karzai govt isn't strong enough yet, and if NATO leaves, Taliban will come again. So a lot of people esp. in Kandahar and other areas with Taliban activity don't want to be vocal in support of NATO and Karzai govt, because they know that if they get caught by Taliban, their ass is going to get shot. I thought I agreed with you on this on the other thread. It's going to take a while for Karzai to build enough strength to forge a strong central govt, for a nation that haven't had an effective central government in decades

OK, there have been assassination attempts on Karzai. Imagine if one day it succeeds ... NATO, with rising casualties and other priorities will have to leave Afghanistan sooner or later. Judging by recent violence flare-ups, things are actually getting worse ...

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium BTW, there are still a lot of Afghani refugees in Pakistan ...

Thanks for telling me something I already know.

quote:

many of the warlords have war crimes on records, that have been disregarded. They are beingpaid big royalties by NATO to maintain their support, and allowed to get away with bad human rights records in their regions, allowed to grow drugs to screw people over in Central Asia, Europe, the world .... how convenient.

you can't take on every problem at once with limited resources. time and place for everything...

quote:

Now, the Taliban was supposed to be our friend, right? Remember how USA and Pakistan initially supported them? But then they changed their minds. And what if they change their minds again on the current leadership ...

Exactly when did Taliban was supported by US? I recall US wanting nothing to do with Afghanistan after 1989. I could be wrong on this however.

quote:

Who knows, but its only a matter of time before things get out of control and warlords will start co-operating with Taliban. Some of the warlords hate Americans and probably are sheltering / helping Taliban, as seen in the Korean hostages crisis.

Or, warlords start to see that Karzai govt might last long term and eventually realize that helping out Taliban might get their penis slapped hard.

Everything's really up in the air right now.

quote:

Heck, short term? Is starting with 1977 - is that short term? Look at what happened to Afghanistan since then, and only an ignorant fool will believe that its the last we've seen of upheaval there.

I don't group Soviet occupation of Afghanistan with current NATO operation in Afghanistan. I only say short term from 2001 to today.

quote:

Heh, the communists were involved in all kinds of projects themselves, too, you know, in 1980s ... my dad was an engineer there, and he did fight on some occassions, once his unit got trapped in a tight mountain passage and got their asses nailed, and many of troops from his unit died, because the fire was coming from waaaaay up on overpass, while the armoured columns lay below, stuck.

The communists weren't doing engineering projects for the benefit of Afghan people.

quote:

OK, there have been assassination attempts on Karzai. Imagine if one day it succeeds ... NATO, with rising casualties and other priorities will have to leave Afghanistan sooner or later. Judging by recent violence flare-ups, things are actually getting worse ...

Ok. Let's say Mullah Omar and top Taliban leadership gets killed/captured in couple of missions... Taliban, with very little public support and lacking leadership and equipment due to success in NATO operations, begin to consolidate their positions back to Kandahar, away from other parts of Afghanistan. Recent surge in violence is last ditch effort by Taliban to force NATO to withdrawal and topple Karzai govt, but NATO standsfast and with ANA, establishes control in various parts of Afghanistan.

Yeah, I can play the 'what if' scenario game too

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree you can't take on every problem at once with limited resources. time and place for everything...

Thats the problem - US and allies have resources. They just use most of them to keep the warlords happy (which is not good for average Afghani people). Which, often enough, misses many democratic components and includes such rights as grow and export drugs, and self-control ...US and allies are not concerned with Afghani democracy, thats just talk, and not implemented in most of the country outside of Kabul and Kandahar. Americans are just concerned with stability so that they can carry out their agenda. They dont want to implement big changes in Afghanistan, mainly fearing that they'll lose the support of warlords. Its sort of "voluntary" progress in Afghanistan on behalf of warlords in their controlled areas.

quote:

Exactly when did Taliban was supported by US? I recall US wanting nothing to do with Afghanistan after 1989. I could be wrong on this however.

USA and Pakistan never seized their support for the bloodshed in Afghanistan. In fact, Americans became involved in counter operations before even Soviets invaded Afghanistan ...

Saying that Americans wanted nothing from Afghanistan after 1989 is like giving up a free opportunity to establish yourself closer and push back Russian influence. Just ... do ... some ... research!

quote:

Or, warlords start to see that Karzai govt might last long term and eventually realize that helping out Taliban might get their penis slapped hard.

Dont you get it? Karzai means shit to Afghanistan. His actual authority outside the capital city of Kabul has been said to be so limited that he had often been derided as the "Mayor of Kabul."

quote:

Everything's really up in the air right now.

I praise your optimism despite the clear indication of the growing Afghanistan violence. Afghani people want quick changes, but they're not going to get it because the main concern of the coalition is hold the country's warlords together, which means closing your eyes to many human rights violations and problems.

quote:

I don't group Soviet occupation of Afghanistan with current NATO operation in Afghanistan. I only say short term from 2001 to today.

You're right, its not the same. It would be the same situation, however, if Soviet Union or its former was still around and supplying arms to Taliban to undermine NATO control in Afghanistan ... or maybe its Iran's job now?

quote:

The communists weren't doing engineering projects for the benefit of Afghan people.

Bullshit. Salang Tunnel alone is the greatest contribution by Soviet Union to Afghanistan. Kabul airport. Factories, power plants, smelters .. you are quite naive for believing that Soviets just sat there and did nothing. Some research, please!

quote:

Ok. Let's say Mullah Omar and top Taliban leadership gets killed/captured in couple of missions... Taliban, with very little public support and lacking leadership and equipment due to success in NATO operations, begin to consolidate their positions back to Kandahar, away from other parts of Afghanistan. Recent surge in violence is last ditch effort by Taliban to force NATO to withdrawal and topple Karzai govt, but NATO standsfast and with ANA, establishes control in various parts of Afghanistan.

Hasnt it occured to you that the reason for increasing Taliban activity is perhaps due to the local support and co-operation with Taliban fighters? It might have "little public support", but given the nature of the warlords who have switched power many times (and have learned how to "pretend" to be friends with occupation, dating back to Soviet times) but Taliban has many sympathizers among Afghans who hate Americans ... too many Afghanis have died at the hands of "friendly fires" and "accidents". Some Afghani people are also aware of the whole Iraq thing ;-)

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.