Post Conflict Afghanistan

Discussion in 'Afghanistan' started by Kromeriz, Jul 19, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Afghanistan after 2014: Why zero is not an option | The Economist

    Both sides are taking up positions that risk damaging what should be their real objectives. From Afghanistan’s point of view, the bilateral pact with America and a related “status of forces agreement” with NATO are essential for stability, as they would define the role and legal standing of international troops after 2014. Afghan National Security Forces are now leading the fight against insurgents in all parts of the country, and they are acquitting themselves well. However, they still need assistance with logistics, air support, intelligence, medical evacuation and dealing with improvised explosive devices (see article). Denying Afghan soldiers this help would damage their morale, while encouraging the Taliban to believe that time is on their side

    Having invested so much and lost so much, what should be the involvement of not only American forces but NATO forces in Afghanistan post withdrawal?
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Post conflict Afghanistan is a misnomer, our departure will just mark the next phase of conflict. Afghanistan has the unhappy role, of venue for the regional bar brawl. Just as Belgium had in Europe in the twentieth century.
    • Like Like x 8
  3. I can see our involvement being about 1200 pax, from a residual NATO force of 15,000, roughly each nation will contribute about 1/6th of what they have just now.

    We will lead on the Officer academy and Der Speigal intimates that that yanks will withdraw their MERT capability.
    Leaving us to provide MERT for Helmand, possibly leading training on field hospitals and medical evacuation.
    Those 1200 pax still need real time life support, especially given that SF and airframes are rumoured to be remaining and anyone who thinks an AQ insurgency is just going to disappear on 01/01/15, needs their heads examined.

    I know the yanks are moving into(taking over) bastion in Oct 14 from leatherneck, Helmand will
    continue to be a busy place for us and them for the foreseeable.

    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
    • Like Like x 1
  4. My prediction of post conflict Afghanistan is that the yanks will hang around Afghanistan for a few years after the "pull-out" (read losing the war), try to influence (bully) the politics (as they are in Iraq), but largely be ignored by Afghans. In the meantime, Afghanistan will slowly (over a year or two) descend into civil war with the outcome of the Taliban taking over again. What happens after that is anybody's guess.

    Whatever happens in Afghanistan after we "pull-out", there will be a lot of families wondering why they lost loved ones in Afghanistan.
    • Like Like x 12
  5. Incorrect.
  6. Realistically Kabul will be on its own as Congress will eventually pull the plug. The next question is how big a bribe/tribute payment is Barry going to offer Pindi to make nice? And will they? That may be more relevant than any force deployments.
  7. The Taliban will win in the end and when that day comes a single fcuk won't be given by my good self.
    • Like Like x 10

  8. Pretty much how I see it, token forces that we leave will have no practical effect on what's happening and the Afghan security forces will eventually collapse as the energies of corruption, lack of motivation, and the descent into warlordism and banditry combine with the resurgence of Taliban to return the country to square one. The real problems of the country have not been adressed and no reforms that would make the vital difference have been implemented.

    I see alot of parrallels between Vietnam and now, the turning of an unwinnable war over to the locals, waiting for a few years before Congress gets tired of paying for it and then pulling the plug. Watching 'horrified' as the baddies win but blaming it on the corruption and incompetence of the locals whilst being secretly relieved that they can stop sending bagloads of swag into a bottomless pit.
    US went into Nam convinced they would sort it out in jig time and didn't. Afghan they actually could have done had they wanted to and had they not gone into Iraq before completing the job in hand. In both cases once they realised they couldn't win the trick was to appear to have stabilised the country and made it secure while bailing out and claiming a conditional win to retain face. However the reality will be seen by the other players and limits of power will be noted.
    The UK now, I imagine will be seen as a spent force, and Europe still seen as a divided grouping that is quite ineffective unless it is on the US side taken along to give legitimacy to actions and to fill in a few files.

    A lot of good lads died there and again for what?
    • Like Like x 2

  9. ...much as the IRA did in NI. Those in it for the long game inevitably triumph - politicians invariably aren't.
  10. I sincerely hope someone rub Blair's face in his 'History will be my judge' misnomer in a few years time when his Afghan. legacy has fully emerged.
  11. It was different in many ways, as so were those that did the fighting.
    In World War II the average age of the combat soldier was 26...
    In Vietnam he was 19.
    In Vietnam he was 19. nnnnnnnnnn 19.
    • Like Like x 7
  12. Did PIRA really win ? They started off wanting a Marxist Ireland united by the gun .... and ended up as Members of the Westminster Parliament. They have become what they once fought. That's not what I'd call a victory.
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Off topic slightly perhaps,but I agree, NI was mainly sorted through a combination of political and military (and legal) measures that really forced peace as the only option. But that took a long time and lots of commitment! Even whilst Maggie was shouting no negotiation with terrorists the government was in secret negotiations a bit like afghan now! The main difference there is of course culture corruption religion and history! Other than that its the same deal! Best we just reframe the way we look at winning and the **** off from the place and leave it to implode on itself!

    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Indeed a 32 county socialist Ireland, a doomed to fail cause if there ever was one. It's now probably permanently divided and the South is the most rightwing country in Western Europe.

    However there was a clear victor. The downfall of the old Unionist establishment and the rise of the DUP to dominate Six Counties politics as engineered by Dr Ian Paisley was a considerable political achievement. That sleekit old bugger on reflection is one of the few successful 60s revolutionaries.
  15. Don't disagree from that side. It's more the political side that I see parallels.
    As a digression what's the average age of the Brit there today? Surely not nnnnnnnnnnineteen.