Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Afghan fighting - the latest reports.

They might take a different view when an Iranian sponsored Taleban government allows it to be a safe haven for anti-western terror groups including AQ.
Yes agree, but the present troop levels either remains and in some bases that have reduced just awaiting the next Taliban rocket attack or they increase troops back to the bad old days. COVID makes that impossible and i say that as it takes 2 weeks under NATO direction to reach Afghanistan at the moment. You can always launch from outside of Afghanistan Predator missions to root out terror groups....lot cheaper than troops on the ground. I am being flippant as its not as easy as that but it has to change and the US have started it.
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
You can always launch from outside of Afghanistan Predator missions to root out terror groups....lot cheaper than troops on the ground.

That doesn't really work. It has a limited effect but when there's a hostile government against you, it isn't going to cut it.

I'm not sure there's a good answer in Afghanistan at the moment. The US maintaining current troop levels and restarting operations in an attempt to enforce the peace deal might be the best option of a bad bunch.
 
Trouble is the US have started the withdrawal already in certain parts where at the moment, Lash being one of them, the ANA bases and CP's have been taken over. Contractors have reduced in some cases by 75% in supporting roles and no new recruitment. The appetite outside of Afghanistan is not there to do more and Politicians and purse string pullers are breathing a sigh of relief that the US are doing this. Militarily there will be people who will be saying "if you only allowed us to run the operation from there properly (not limiting boots on the ground)" then it may of ended up different.
 
This is keeping me up, as in I'm too shocked to sleep

NATO has stated its "strong support" for... ABDUL RASUL SAYYAF

You may well have a point. Charmless b*stard doesn't begin to do him justice:
 

Poppycock

Old-Salt
You may well have a point. Charmless b*stard doesn't begin to do him justice:
Until Sayyaf is in Guantanamo with his protege Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, then the entire mission in Afghanistan will remain a failure - all that blood & treasure just for NATO to put someone like Sayyaf back in power.

Perhaps it is time for us to reason why.
 
Until Sayyaf is in Guantanamo with his protege Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, then the entire mission in Afghanistan will remain a failure - all that blood & treasure just for NATO to put someone like Sayyaf back in power.

Perhaps it is time for us to reason why.
This is feeling quite surreal: do you have any insight into why NATO is now backing a guy who (to me, it would seem) was responsible in part, for all the things that led in the first place to NATO involvement in Afghanistan, back when my 2 youngest sons had barely started potty training?
 

Poppycock

Old-Salt
This is feeling quite surreal: do you have any insight into why NATO is now backing a guy who (to me, it would seem) was responsible in part, for all the things that led in the first place to NATO involvement in Afghanistan, back when my 2 youngest sons had barely started potty training?
No special insight, just my wild speculation about how desperate NATO is to keep the US tied up in Afghanistan for decades more
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Afghan peace process spoilers know no bounds

Kabul University attack footage (none graphic) from this morning:

Grim, but that may or may not be a spoiler. That's more likely to be ISIL-K. The Taleban has mostly been fighting a battle for territory in the provinces rather than attacking Kabul directly.
 
No special insight, just my wild speculation about how desperate NATO is to keep the US tied up in Afghanistan for decades more
I don't see NATO acting independently (in any way) of the USA, not ever, never - the Alliance is literally nothing without Unca Sam - hence my perplexity.

That said, it's The George as Unca Sam (for the time being, anyhow) and as long as that is so, it's Alice In Wonderland* rules where foreign policy is concerned.

*Stonkernote: He's The Red Queen, fer shure.
 

combatintman

War Hero
They might take a different view when an Iranian sponsored Taleban government allows it to be a safe haven for anti-western terror groups including AQ.
Iranian support for the Taliban is transactional and their interest is always going to support the folks up north by default - no value for them at all in supporting the unwashed Sunni, Pashtun Taliban dominating government.
 

Poppycock

Old-Salt
This new appointment makes a quick withdrawal more likely

Can anyone with local knowledge (i.e. in-country) speculate if it's logistically possible to do it by Christmas?

 

combatintman

War Hero
What @NemoIII said. Added to that - there's the remainder of NATO to think about here - the position of the NATO Secretary-General and many of the contributing nations is that this is a collaborative thing - the US currently lacks the political capital to see a pullout of its forces plus those of its allies out in the timeframe. There will be some form of foreign presence into the new year.
 

Poppycock

Old-Salt
Basically no, and even though it was on twitter there actually isn't a plan in place to be home by Christmas.

Thats what 7 weeks away? Not a chance.
Corr... 7wks till Christmas - that's sooner than I'd realised! What you say makes sense, i.e. not a chance on the logistics side for the whole NATO deployment & the civvy hangers-on to pack their bags, etc.

I had wondered if US forces had got an early start with packing, not the kind of thing their commander-in-chief might say on twitter though

What @NemoIII said. Added to that - there's the remainder of NATO to think about here - the position of the NATO Secretary-General and many of the contributing nations is that this is a collaborative thing - the US currently lacks the political capital to see a pullout of its forces plus those of its allies out in the timeframe. There will be some form of foreign presence into the new year.
I wonder if Trump might pullout regardless of other NATO members actions?

Given the Italian senior civilian NATO representative (tweet below) recently very publicly allied NATO to the Afghan Warlord who employed, trained & mentored the 9/11 mastermind (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed), Trump's frame of mind about NATO, and the new Pentagon leadership, I still wonder if he might just get on with it?

What amazed me about the Doha peace (withdrawal) talks was I never saw a NATO representative there, almost as though no one gives a **** what they think (same applies to the NUG)
 

combatintman

War Hero
This new appointment makes a quick withdrawal more likely

Can anyone with local knowledge (i.e. in-country) speculate if it's logistically possible to do it by Christmas?

Put it another way ... "I lost the election but I am challenging it - this kind of activity (even though he shouldn't really be making these sorts of appointments at this point in time) and talk might help support my challenge."

Resolute Support will endure into the new year.
 
I had wondered if US forces had got an early start with packing, not the kind of thing their commander-in-chief might say on twitter though
I'm left wondering how much heed the senior leadership of the US Army will pay, right now, to the incumbent POTUS, partly because there's a POTUS-elect waiting in the wings (I've no idea where he stands on the question of withdrawal) and partly because no military organisation willingly engages in a shambolic exit, which would seem to be the likely result of The Donald shouting "Tell all the trooops to pick up their monkeys and parrots and jump on the going-home bus NOW!!" followed by everyone doing his bidding.

There's no shortage of wiser men than The Donald.

A dearth of men less endowed with wisdom? Well now . . . . .​
 
No one is gearing up for a pull out pre-xmas. There is a massive reduction with both manpower and infra. Only need to see the amount of contractors who have left on certain forums/FB groups now trying to get work at bases still running or elsewhere. The issue is there is still unknown from the US side of life because the idiot in the White House wont transition properly and its not until after the New Year the new bloke starts. And to be fair, whilst Afghanistan maybe important, the legacy of the idiot and his aftermath will need sorting. Other countries....well look at Mez, its 90% German and they do their own thing but appetite will lessen once US interest wanes more than it already has done. Herat..US and Italians, not exactly slipper city as Farah down the road gets a bit tasty every now and then but again, whats the point if the US air cover and the like reduces. Kabul.... well ignore HQ ISAF and look at the other bases. QARGHA is being handed over by the Brits and the armoured taxi service and KPC (still going?) will go the same way. The Turks in HKIA and every other nation with 3 deployed blokes in a Corimec....the Turks just want to get money hence why there is hardly any Privates out there and Sgt's stag on and with Tims closed all the 511/German PX wearing posers will soon go elsewhere.
 
Top