Taliban readies for Ramadan

  • Thread starter Thread starter wilberhum
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 119
  • Views Views 13K
Status
Not open for further replies.
May Allah grant them all the success and victory during this blessed month to send the invaders packing home. Ameen.
 
ISLAMASWEENEY said:
The Taliban have turned evil e.g (SUICIDE BOMBINGS) but they cant beat Americans and nato hand to hand so it is the only option of victory they have even if it is horrible.
Click to expand...

but it is not islamic and goes directly against what they claim to be fighting for... it is very disturbing to hear that they did do that

In my opinion it simply shows their true colors (or at least some of them)... a mujahideen would never "blow himself up", he might try to out smart his enemy and pick and choose his place to fight, but he wouldnt risk a woman or childs life and he wouldnt disgrace his Lord by intentionally blowing up his lords creation. Only the mind of a madman could interpret the Quran to allow such a cowardly dispicable act
 
ISLAMASWEENEY said:
Yeah Bro Say The Taliban Agree T O Peace There Is Then Al Queada And The Northern Alliance To Deal With And Foreign Fighters.
Click to expand...

I know, alot of people dont realize how long that country has been ravaged by brutality and war. Those people badly deserve a break, if I had a way to give it to them I would, but sadly it doesnt appear to be in the cards
 
I fail to understand why US and NATO couldn't defeat Talibans, despite having their mighty airforce, gunships and missiles :?

Is Afghanistan turning into another Veitnam ;D
 
ahsan28 said:
I fail to understand why US and NATO couldn't defeat Talibans, despite having their mighty airforce, gunships and missiles :?

Is Afghanistan turning into another Veitnam ;D
Click to expand...

I fail to understand why you would think the US is losing the war in Afghanistan, there is a fairly stable government in place, the party that the US went in to oust has been ousted, the Taliban gets weaker and smaller by the day and their influence is felt less and less by the day. Afghanistan in many respects could be considered a victory, far more victory on the US and NATO side than the Taliban side, that is for sure.

Iraq on the other hand could be considered a bit more like a vietnam situation
(I was going to put a giggling smilely after all that but for some reason wars dont make me happy, I guess I must just be sick)
 
MTAFFI said:
I fail to understand why you would think the US is losing the war in Afghanistan, there is a fairly stable government in place, the party that the US went in to oust has been ousted, the Taliban gets weaker and smaller by the day and their influence is felt less and less by the day. Afghanistan in many respects could be considered a victory, far more victory on the US and NATO side than the Taliban side, that is for sure.

Iraq on the other hand could be considered a bit more like a vietnam situation
(I was going to put a giggling smilely after all that but for some reason wars dont make me happy, I guess I must just be sick)
Click to expand...


In a sense you may be correct, but that applies to tactical dimensions only. Afghanistan is gripped by an insurgency due to resurgence of Talibans. They have organised themselves over the period and are no more an easy prey, as seen during the initial stages of the war, when tons of munitions were delivered on them. That is an easy coourse of action since you have defined positions, however during insurgency the situation often remains fragile for the invading force, since majority of the local population views them an illegal occupation force. You can't expect much from the locals, that leads to massive intelligence failures, resulting in killing of innocent civilians and destruction of civilian infrastructure due to wrong selection of targets.

In today's complexed wars, retention of captured states becomes impossible due to several factors. The same we are witnessing in Iraq and Afghanistan.

As to your remarks about a stable Afghan govt, well I have every reason to disagree for a govt, which doesn't exercise an effective control outside Kabul. Moreover that is a puppet govt, which doesn't enjoy majority support.

Talibans aren't getting weaker. During counter insurgency operations, the regular force takes the maximum toll, whereas insurgents/freedom fighters enjoy an edge having initiative of selection of time and targets. The force, which is in the reactionary mode usually suffers.
 
ahsan28 said:
In a sense you may be correct, but that applies to tactical dimensions only. Afghanistan is gripped by an insurgency due to resurgence of Talibans. They have organised themselves over the period and are no more an easy prey, as seen during the initial stages of the war, when tons of munitions were delivered on them. That is an easy coourse of action since you have defined positions, however during insurgency the situation often remains fragile for the invading force, since majority of the local population views them an illegal occupation force. You can't expect much from the locals, that leads to massive intelligence failures, resulting in killing of innocent civilians and destruction of civilian infrastructure due to wrong selection of targets.

In today's complexed wars, retention of captured states becomes impossible due to several factors. The same we are witnessing in Iraq and Afghanistan.

As to your remarks about a stable Afghan govt, well I have every reason to disagree for a govt, which doesn't exercise an effective control outside Kabul. Moreover that is a puppet govt, which doesn't enjoy majority support.

Talibans aren't getting weaker. During counter insurgency operations, the regular force takes the maximum toll, whereas insurgents/freedom fighters enjoy an edge having initiative of selection of time and targets. The force, which is in the reactionary mode usually suffers.
Click to expand...

I can understand your point of view on the subject and you make some good points. Such as that of the Afghan government, I guess rather than using a word like "stable" I should have used "held office for a period of time". I also agree that Taliban has an edge as far as being on the offensive the majority of the time. However, their goal unlike that of the AQI, is not to kill all the civilians and create chaos, they are working to get back into society and government, and I think the US & NATO is pretty effectively preventing that in the majority of the country. The Helmand province seems to really be the last "frontier" as far as that war is going and progress is being made in that area right now, which is where Islamasweeney is right, the activity has increased, possibly to a higher level than Iraq, in the past month and it is because of this US/NATO led aggression into this province to remove the Taliban from this area as well. US and NATO casualties are not near as high or common as that of the Taliban. The Taliban are ill equiped and undertrained for the type of war they are fighting and whether it be 1, 2, 5 or 20 years now it is inevitable that the Taliban will lose. Their numbers are a mere 10 to 12 thousand, they are concentrated mostly in Pakistan and as I said before their influence over the country and its people gets smaller and smaller by the day. Not only that but while the troops are driving the Taliban back the Afghans are seizing more control over their own country, their military is building, their police and law enforcement system is improving and unlike in Iraq, it is not being infiltrated by the enemy to cause disruption and violence. At the rate it is going there is a chance that at some point Afghanistan may be able to enjoy peace in many of it areas, God knows I pray for it.
 
talibaan is getting stronger all the time - both in afghanistan and in pakistan.
 
until fairly recently, suicide bombings were almost unknown in kabul and the talibaan had little or no presence there.
they are controlling more and more areas. in pakistan, too, they are gaining more and more power and influence and from everything i've read, they are just getting stronger all the time.
 
MTAFFI said:
US and NATO casualties are not near as high or common as that of the Taliban. The Taliban are ill equiped and undertrained for the type of war they are fighting and whether it be 1, 2, 5 or 20 years now it is inevitable that the Taliban will lose. Their numbers are a mere 10 to 12 thousand, they are concentrated mostly in Pakistan and as I said before their influence over the country and its people gets smaller and smaller by the day. Not only that but while the troops are driving the Taliban back the Afghans are seizing more control over their own country, their military is building, their police and law enforcement system is improving and unlike in Iraq, it is not being infiltrated by the enemy to cause disruption and violence. At the rate it is going there is a chance that at some point Afghanistan may be able to enjoy peace in many of it areas, God knows I pray for it.
Click to expand...


The US and NATO casualties are less not due to the weakness of Talibans, its because of the fact that they are relying on air in most of the cases and avoid road movements as much as they can and where there is a real need, they keep Afghan Army and Police on the front. But you must remember, you can't rely on air operations entirely for an idefinite period, which leads you to resort to road movements, including logistics, which remains a sour point for the US and NATO. See how many logistic convoys have been attacked and destroyed by Talibans.

Regarding Taliban's casualties, I agree, but not in numbers, as being portrayed in the western media, while they try to conceal their own casualties. You see, mainstream media is in their hands, whatever they feed to the people, will be taken as true by the majority.

Talibans have gained momentum due to their recent resurgence and they are unlikely to be defeated, till they enjoy majority support. People consider them as real warriors, who have been resisting foreign forces for years and haven't surrendered, despite being negligible in strength and resources. Its something to do with ideology, faith and conviction, which drives a smaller force to remain steadfast and face odds and critical situations cheerfully.

I again disagree that the US and NATO are getting effective against Talibans. See yourself, the US has been complaining regarding NATO's role in the war. I happened to scan an article yesterday, where Americans have alleged NATO for not taking due interest in active operations. Any person having a balanced and unbiased thinking can reach to the conclusion that the situation for the invaders is not as rosy as being depicted.

A couple of months back, I read an article in Newsweek, in which it was claimed that the Americans have enhanced their budget against IEDs (improvised explosive devices) from US 4$ to US 6$ for the current year, but the chances of getting any significant success aren't much. They expressed their utter dissatisfaction over destruction of their million dollor expensive equipment being destroyed by these cheap devices having worth no more than a pizza.

Just analyse, a strong US and NATO force, equipped with latest systems and 100,000 Pakistani soldiers deployed along the border, carrying out operations, but remain miles behind of any visible success. The credit goes to Talibans.
 
MTAFFI said:
In my opinion it simply shows their true colors (or at least some of them)... a mujahideen would never "blow himself up", he might try to out smart his enemy and pick and choose his place to fight, but he wouldnt risk a woman or childs life and he wouldnt disgrace his Lord by intentionally blowing up his lords creation. Only the mind of a madman could interpret the Quran to allow such a cowardly dispicable act
Click to expand...

While I disagree with suicide bombing- it is naive to think that they are targeting women and children, or will blow themselves up anywhere near them. They actually might have military targets.
 
ahsan28 said:
The US and NATO casualties are less not due to the weakness of Talibans, its because of the fact that they are relying on air in most of the cases and avoid road movements as much as they can and where there is a real need, they keep Afghan Army and Police on the front. But you must remember, you can't rely on air operations entirely for an idefinite period, which leads you to resort to road movements, including logistics, which remains a sour point for the US and NATO. See how many logistic convoys have been attacked and destroyed by Talibans.

Regarding Taliban's casualties, I agree, but not in numbers, as being portrayed in the western media, while they try to conceal their own casualties. You see, mainstream media is in their hands, whatever they feed to the people, will be taken as true by the majority.

Talibans have gained momentum due to their recent resurgence and they are unlikely to be defeated, till they enjoy majority support. People consider them as real warriors, who have been resisting foreign forces for years and haven't surrendered, despite being negligible in strength and resources. Its something to do with ideology, faith and conviction, which drives a smaller force to remain steadfast and face odds and critical situations cheerfully.

I again disagree that the US and NATO are getting effective against Talibans. See yourself, the US has been complaining regarding NATO's role in the war. I happened to scan an article yesterday, where Americans have alleged NATO for not taking due interest in active operations. Any person having a balanced and unbiased thinking can reach to the conclusion that the situation for the invaders is not as rosy as being depicted.

A couple of months back, I read an article in Newsweek, in which it was claimed that the Americans have enhanced their budget against IEDs (improvised explosive devices) from US 4$ to US 6$ for the current year, but the chances of getting any significant success aren't much. They expressed their utter dissatisfaction over destruction of their million dollor expensive equipment being destroyed by these cheap devices having worth no more than a pizza.

Just analyse, a strong US and NATO force, equipped with latest systems and 100,000 Pakistani soldiers deployed along the border, carrying out operations, but remain miles behind of any visible success. The credit goes to Talibans.
Click to expand...

I think that you have some good points but I also stand by mine. I think that there are probably pros and cons going on, on each side and we could probably go back and forth all day about it, so instead I will make a final point and you can respond in kind if you like. My main reason for seeing the Taliban as losing the war in Afghanistan is because of everything they have lost. In many of the areas they have lost support from the people, they have lost their position of authority as government, they are confined to certain areas (Pakistan border, mountain areas), they are killed in fairly high numbers each day, even when they attack, a month ago for example, they tried to attack a small military outpost that was manned by a dozen troops and there was 70 Taliban, they lost over 30 taliban in that battle compared to 1 US troop. I give the Taliban credit for having the endurance and the capability to adapt to new fighting styles and for being able to survive this long, but I do believe that they are being closed in on from all sides and at some point they will have to fight heads up rather than attack and hide and when that time comes they will either lose or ask for a truce. (That is all hypothetical of course)
 
Malaikah said:
While I disagree with suicide bombing- it is naive to think that they are targeting women and children, or will blow themselves up anywhere near them. They actually might have military targets.
Click to expand...

I am not saying that they are "targeting" women in children, but it would be incredibly naive to say that women and children in Afghanistan havent been killed by a suicide bomber. Regardless however, the post you responded to also included the bomber himself, and whether he has a military target he is still mutilating his lords creation (himself) and disobeying the word of God, commiting suicide is a mortal sin, those who do it go to hell.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top