I post here a lot, but almost never post on politics. I had to today. Here's the link:
https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3217541
https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3217541
And opium.Quote:
All, as aalan says, financed by the Paks.
aalan94 said:
I post here a lot, but almost never post on politics. I had to today. Here's the link:
https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3217541
Huge thing: Afghanistan has a "fighting season." You fight in the Summer, you don't launch anything major in the Winter. September was a bad date anyway, but by Oct./Nov. the fighting season is over for five months or so.Quote:
I would be interested to know, from an experienced vet like aalan94, how the timeline, sped up by two weeks, has had such a dramatic effect on the outcome?
August 31st hasn't happened yet.rgvag11 said:
I see. In early July, Biden moved up the scheduled withdrawal date, set in April, by two weeks, to August 31st.
I would be interested to know, from an experienced vet like aalan94, how the timeline, sped up by two weeks, has had such a dramatic effect on the outcome?
They plant poppies in the spring, fight in the summer, go back to harvest in the fall, and hibernate in Pakistan largely in the winter. It's been a cycle for the taliban for decades, and while some tribal areas in northern Afghan don't follow the pattern etc., that's always been how the Taliban fought, since we armed them in the 80's anyway.Comeby! said:
Help me understand this 'fighting season"? Why not year round? Weather, logistics? It seems to me if I'm conducting an offensive I hit them in the 'off season'.
You are right on all of this, except us arming the Taliban. We did not. We armed the mujuhadin, but the Taliban only stood up after the US had pulled our financial resources out of Afghanistan in the late 80s.Quote:
that's always been how the Taliban fought, since we armed them in the 80's anyway.
I think you perceive an artificial division/timeline between the two. We also didn't simply 'pull our financial resources' after the late 80's from the country. Far from it.aalan94 said:You are right on all of this, except us arming the Taliban. We did not. We armed the mujuhadin, but the Taliban only stood up after the US had pulled our financial resources out of Afghanistan in the late 80s.Quote:
that's always been how the Taliban fought, since we armed them in the 80's anyway.
Further (again per link, without too much history), our state department more than welcomed/supported them in the mid 90's as well. The movement was/is more or less an evolution of people/leaders/groups from the original one in the early 80's through to day. At various points the US has directly and indirectly provided military and financial support (as well it has of course fought them from 2001 thru to 2021, prior to just handing the country to them).Quote:
Taliban, literally meaning 'students of Islam' or 'seekers of knowledge', have been part of Kandahar's 'Quran Belt' for centuries. They were teachers, dispute mediators, and comforters of the dying. They would also study in madrasas, living off charitable givings. After their studies, they could become mullahs, the 'givers' of knowledge. This provided a form of Islamic civil service in absence of state.
That and they were always conducting intra-squad scrimmages too.....JABQ04 said:
The fighters in Kunar must not have got the memos about a fighting season