AFGHANISTAN 2021:. THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT

I'm sure they are!

'China pledged to help the Taliban "rebuild the country" while reiterating calls for the US to lift sanctions against the new leaders of Afghanistan as the economy worsens.

'Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi made the remarks to a Taliban delegation in Doha, Qatar on Monday (Oct 25), during the first high-level meeting between Beijing and the Taliban since it formed an interim government in September.

'Mr Wang said the international community should work with the Taliban "in a rational and pragmatic manner", the official Xinhua News Agency reported.'


 
I'm sure they are!

'China pledged to help the Taliban "rebuild the country" while reiterating calls for the US to lift sanctions against the new leaders of Afghanistan as the economy worsens.

'Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi made the remarks to a Taliban delegation in Doha, Qatar on Monday (Oct 25), during the first high-level meeting between Beijing and the Taliban since it formed an interim government in September.

'Mr Wang said the international community should work with the Taliban "in a rational and pragmatic manner", the official Xinhua News Agency reported.'



Don't know whether to give a like or a funny.
IIRC one of the recently departed Colin Powells sage observations re: going into other folks countries was 'break it, you own it'. To be fair, I think Afghans are pretty self destructive the amount of aid that that small, backward country has soaked up for no obvious progress. But for China to ask for such investment, in what they intend to own...
They want it. Let them foot the bill.
We'll probably become consumers for any products utilising Afghan natural resources.
 
Last edited:
An unstable Afghanistan has consequences for the whole of Central Asia - Tajikistan is particularly wary, having bad memories of the Mujahedeen's part in supporting Islamists in their civil war of the 1990s.

From that part of the world, it looks like someone breezed in from another neighbourhood, took an enormous shit on their lawn and buggered off leaving them with the stink and the cleaning bill.
 
I can understand that viewpoint @smartascarrots but I think anyone, even in Afghanistan and neighbouring states, could see how much non military aid and assistance was pouring in - they must, many of them were in on supplying that assistance paid for by the west.
(Having said that, a colleague whose civi job is a top Civil Engineer with Arup, told me that on one Herrick, a local, digging a drainage ditch for an infrastructure project, got a right strop on, complaining that he considered what he was doing was what the coalition forces should be doing if they wanted to really assist.
As my mate pointed out; anyone could see the work needed doing and what the benefits would be. But the co-ordination, organisation, project planning, tools... and Afghan blokes wages and employment, were being paid for - by the west.
So maybe, they really can't see what benefits were there - for them, from us.)

They wanted us out - we're out. As far as I'm concerned, the Taliban, Islamic, Emirates of Afghanistan, now own it. If they're compelled to have to sell it to China, that's their call.
China calling for further international aid (underwrite their venture more like)... well, hopefully they'll be told 'they've had it already'.
I appreciate maintaining some involvement/interest may be prudent but seriously - Afghanistan conceding anything to western interests?

I caught some news, maybe BBC, last night lamenting starving Afghan kids - a little girl sold for food (well, 'maggots in the rice' is a term I've heard regarding infant females from points further eastwards) but there were also starving male infants. Callous as I may sound, I wondered why we were being subjected to this, currrently unsuprising, conscience pricking.

We don't 'own' it, never did, or, without argument, even attempted to - god knows what we realistically anticipated!
But - the incumbent hands holding the power wanted us gone. We're gone. They own it. And if it becomes a tribal Islamic state (with added I.S.) then let it demonstrate what it has to give - or allow exterior powers, like China, to decide what it wants to take.
 
We don't 'own' it
We maybe don't own Afghanistan but twenty years of propping up the Mayor of Kabul while bombing the crap out of the rest of the country and destroying their livelihoods is justifiably placed at our doorstep.

We decided we didn't like what Afghanistan was, tried to remake it in a more acceptable image and failed miserably. It was our own decision and ownership of that is definitely ours.
 
We maybe don't own Afghanistan but twenty years of propping up the Mayor of Kabul while bombing the crap out of the rest of the country and destroying their livelihoods is justifiably placed at our doorstep.

We decided we didn't like what Afghanistan was, tried to remake it in a more acceptable image and failed miserably. It was our own decision and ownership of that is definitely ours.

Agree about Mayor of Kabul (shame - I still think he was a decent bloke but... straight away power extended to family and we're back to tribal politics).

Well if bombing the crap out of GAFA? Oh yeah lots of incidents with innocents - who may have been declared not so innocent by other duplicitous factions. Being left to grow poppy or having that livelihood destroyed? - because if there are kids starving currently I'll bet that theres still a poppy crop under cultivation. We're not talking Vietnam here - and most of the dangerous ordinance I saw was Russian legacy.

Agreed, we didn't like what we saw in Afghanistan.
We tried to supply a version compatible to us, unacceptable to them - we failed.
We failed in that intent rather than failed the Afghan people - they didn't want it (and recently I had a banter with a Tajik Med Tech who was happy to state that 'Afghans have never been conquered').
We'll, they've got what they wanted - they own it.
We didn't want to 'own' it - anyone can see that would be an impossibility. We paid for it, sadly, not just in treasure - but were never trying to 'buy' it either.

So any calls from China, Afghanistan, or anywhere else, to 'put more money in' should be treat with a polite refusal IMO. And that includes paying for many charitable/aid projects.

We woul be better off accepting only women and children from such failed states because, yes, it's they that will continue to suffer.
 
Agree about Mayor of Kabul (shame - I still think he was a decent bloke but... straight away power extended to family and we're back to tribal politics).

Well if bombing the crap out of GAFA? Oh yeah lots of incidents with innocents - who may have been declared not so innocent by other duplicitous factions. Being left to grow poppy or having that livelihood destroyed? - because if there are kids starving currently I'll bet that theres still a poppy crop under cultivation. We're not talking Vietnam here - and most of the dangerous ordinance I saw was Russian legacy.

Agreed, we didn't like what we saw in Afghanistan.
We tried to supply a version compatible to us, unacceptable to them - we failed.
We failed in that intent rather than failed the Afghan people - they didn't want it (and recently I had a banter with a Tajik Med Tech who was happy to state that 'Afghans have never been conquered').
We'll, they've got what they wanted - they own it.
We didn't want to 'own' it - anyone can see that would be an impossibility. We paid for it, sadly, not just in treasure - but were never trying to 'buy' it either.

So any calls from China, Afghanistan, or anywhere else, to 'put more money in' should be treat with a polite refusal IMO. And that includes paying for many charitable/aid projects.

We woul be better off accepting only women and children from such failed states because, yes, it's they that will continue to suffer.

Surely to fit in with modern equality guidelines we should only accept Black women and children
 
We failed in that intent rather than failed the Afghan people - they didn't want it (and recently I had a banter with a Tajik Med Tech who was happy to state that 'Afghans have never been conquered').
My personal view is that we failed the Afghan people the moment we decided that our view for them was the right one. Every year thereafter, we compounded the failure.

I can appreciate being sick and tired of the place, but that doesn't absolve us of responsibility for the consequences of our choices. The only way to have avoided that responsibility was to have stayed out in the first place.

We broke it, not through clumsiness or accident but because we wanted to put it back together differently. Getting fed up when the pieces won't fit the way we want is not a good enough excuse for shirking responsibility for the aftermath.
 
My personal view is that we failed the Afghan people the moment we decided that our view for them was the right one. Every year thereafter, we compounded the failure.

I can appreciate being sick and tired of the place, but that doesn't absolve us of responsibility for the consequences of our choices. The only way to have avoided that responsibility was to have stayed out in the first place.

We broke it, not through clumsiness or accident but because we wanted to put it back together differently. Getting fed up when the pieces won't fit the way we want is not a good enough excuse for shirking responsibility for the aftermath.

Well continuing to do the same thing without a recognisable aim certainly.
At this point, even saying 'we' is vague - who? The U.S., Britain, NATO?
My opinion is that we should have just left after OBL was confirmed killed would have been best. Just who was responsible for the 'mission creep' - military? Politicians of all hues and all nations involved? 'liberal agendas' deciding what a representative and inclusive modern nation should look like?

I was there in 2002 and from what I could see the country was completely broken then. Any improvements - and there surely were, even if they were the ever expanding base enclaves, allowed a window on the west - hospitals, employment, de-mining etc. Well they're no longer functioning and they're in Taliban control.

The Russians tried to apply their contemporary values - got nowhere (but left dangerous legacy ordinance all over).
The West tried - with a different set of values.
Sorry, whatever you may feel we owe, I think we owe the Afghans the acknowledgement that they're not children needing benign philanthropists (and by any measure we were more benign than most visitors or inhabitants by comparison) and they're as much responsible for their own current situation.
So, at risk of being very glib - 'Hey Mr Taliban, tally me Banana Republic' (except there ain't even any bananas).
 

giatttt

War Hero
An unstable Afghanistan has consequences for the whole of Central Asia - Tajikistan is particularly wary, having bad memories of the Mujahedeen's part in supporting Islamists in their civil war of the 1990s.

From that part of the world, it looks like someone breezed in from another neighbourhood, took an enormous shit on their lawn and buggered off leaving them with the stink and the cleaning bill.
Agreed on the appearance of the lawn, but I feel that Pakistan's contribution may be understated. The current state of Afghanistan can't really be in their long term interest.
 
Agreed on the appearance of the lawn, but I feel that Pakistan's contribution may be understated. The current state of Afghanistan can't really be in their long term interest.

IMG_20211026_153928.png


Pakistan's Head of ISI
 
I must admit that I was rather surprised that after extracting OBL's corpse, that the USAF had not carpet bombed the ISI barracks at the end of the street. I would have thought that they would have gagged at the chance to unload an entire wing over a single target and sent a message.

In Pakistan?
There are limits you know.

Maybe enough hasn't been made of Pakistan's duplicity - but then words like diplomacy and deniability start getting thrown around.

I'm not sure how much Afghanistan's future is likely to bite them on the arse but then I doubt Afghanistan, as a nation, is really in thrall to Pakistan.
 
Everything old is new again! Weren't we almost here, just over 22 years ago?

'The US intelligence community has assessed that Islamic State in Afghanistan could have the capability of attacking the United States in as little as six months – and has the intention to do so, a senior Pentagon official has told Congress.

“The intelligence community currently assesses that both Isis-K [Islamic State Khorasan Province, the Afghanistan-based group] and al-Qaida have the intent to conduct external operations, including against the United States, but neither currently has the capability to do so. We could see Isis-K generate that capability in somewhere between six or 12 months,” said Colin Kahl, under secretary of defense for policy.

'The remarks are the latest reminder that Afghanistan could still pose serious national security concerns for the US even after it ended its two-decade war in defeat in August.

'Kahl said it could take al-Qaida “a year or two” to regenerate the capability to carry out attacks outside of Afghanistan against the US.'


Islamic State in Afghanistan could be able to attack U.S. in 6 months-Pentagon official
 
Everything old is new again! Weren't we almost here, just over 22 years ago
The only surprise is that we're expected to trust the assessment this time too.
 
Everything old is new again! Weren't we almost here, just over 22 years ago?

'The US intelligence community has assessed that Islamic State in Afghanistan could have the capability of attacking the United States in as little as six months – and has the intention to do so, a senior Pentagon official has told Congress.

“The intelligence community currently assesses that both Isis-K [Islamic State Khorasan Province, the Afghanistan-based group] and al-Qaida have the intent to conduct external operations, including against the United States, but neither currently has the capability to do so. We could see Isis-K generate that capability in somewhere between six or 12 months,” said Colin Kahl, under secretary of defense for policy.

'The remarks are the latest reminder that Afghanistan could still pose serious national security concerns for the US even after it ended its two-decade war in defeat in August.

'Kahl said it could take al-Qaida “a year or two” to regenerate the capability to carry out attacks outside of Afghanistan against the US.'


Islamic State in Afghanistan could be able to attack U.S. in 6 months-Pentagon official
If we had followed the sage advice of Wellington, who once suggested the best Generals are the ones willing to retreat, then we would have pulled out six months after capturing Kabul the last time around and then gone back in once every other year to bomb the rubble. But the modern generals listened to the intelligence community and politicians vanity wanted nation building and spent twenty years of wasted effort achieving zip.

Now its going to be very hard to re-engage and the genuinely idiotic, who never wanted to leave will be back on the airwaves convinced another twenty years we can do better.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top