Afghanistan: Street fighting rages as Taliban attack key city

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Ferocious fighting is taking place in a major Afghan city, amid fears it could be the first provincial capital to fall to the Taliban.

Lashkar Gah in southern Helmand province is under heavy assault from the militants, despite persistent US and Afghan air strikes.

The Taliban are said to have seized a TV station. Thousands of people fleeing rural areas took shelter in buildings.

"There is fighting all around," a doctor told the BBC from his hospital.

Hundreds of Afghan reinforcements have been deployed to battle the militants. The Taliban have made rapid advances in recent months as US forces have withdrawn after 20 years of military operations in the country.

Helmand was the centrepiece of the US and British military campaign, and Taliban gains there would be a blow for the Afghan government.

If Lashkar Gah fell, it would be the first provincial capital won by the Taliban since 2016. It is one of three capitals under attack.

Attempts by the militants to capture Kandahar, Afghanistan's second-largest city, have continued after rocket strikes hit its airport on Sunday.

Seizing control of Kandahar would be a hugely symbolic victory for the Taliban, giving them a grip on the south of the country.

In a third besieged city, Herat, in the west, government commandos are battling the insurgents after days of fierce fighting. Government forces have taken back some areas after a UN compound was attacked on Friday.

As government forces struggled to contain Taliban advances, President Ashraf Ghani blamed the sudden withdrawal of US troops for the increase in fighting.

"The reason for our current situation is that the decision was taken abruptly," he told parliament.

Mr Ghani said he had warned Washington that the withdrawal would have "consequences".

Although nearly all its military forces have left, the US has continued its air offensive in support of government troops. Strikes targeting Lashkar Gah continued late on Monday.

President Biden's administration announced on Monday that because of the increase in violence, it would take in thousands more Afghan refugees who worked with US forces.

The US and UK have accused the Taliban of committing possible war crimes by "massacring civilians" in a town captured near the Pakistan border.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said he had seen reports of "deeply disturbing and totally unacceptable" Taliban atrocities.

Gruesome videos that emerged from Spin Boldak apparently showed revenge killings. The Taliban have rejected the accusations.

Link. So basically it's a matter of when not if the Taliban retakes all of Afghanistan.

[Solauren]

This is not a surprise.

You were never going to keep the Taliban from coming back unless every adjoining country came down hard on them (at minimum). And it would have required genocide to do it.

All the US mission accomplished was to chew up the country, give the Taliban 20 years to hide, arm, recruit (and 20 years of motivated Afgan nations with an axe to grind), and generate billions for the US arms industry and construction companies.

[Soontir C'boath]

Yea, as soon as Bin Laden was dead was the time we should have pulled out of Afghanistan and Iraq. The amount of money wasted in Afghanistan and Iraq should infuriate the fiscal conservatives, but "the troops is fighting for my freedom!" certainly reigns strong.

On a sidenote, what a joke that he was found living in Pakistan.

[Raw Shark]

Yeah, sucks to be them, but we had no business at all there in the first place; it was all just political pageantry that some people I knew died for, or lost their legs, or their sanity. Fuck that shit. If we really cared about helping people achieve human rights we'd start with a lot of our closest allies, like say for example where Bin Laden was actually from, not try to pick on some backwater the Soviets proved can't be conquered forty years ago, even if that was the right thing to do, which it's not. Fuck that whole project.

[Solauren]

Oh, Afghanistan CAN be conquered. The Taliban took it over before, and are doing it again.

'Modern' Afghanistan is only difficult to conquer for outsiders.

[LadyTevar]

We went over there. We taught their Army to defend itself. If it can't do the job, then MAYBE they deserve what they get.

[Gandalf]

We went over there. We taught their Army to defend itself. If it can't do the job, then MAYBE they deserve what they get.

Uh, could you flesh that out a bit?

[loomer]

We went over there. We taught their Army to defend itself. If it can't do the job, then MAYBE they deserve what they get.

Yeah, I'm not particularly inclined to agree with that one. We didn't so much teach their army to defend itself as 'invade their country, brutally radicalize a couple of generations of young men, and actively cultivate a corrupt and ineffectual security apparatus designed to function as an auxiliary of the imperial occupation forces'. Nor am I inclined to agree that the extrajudicial executions, massacres, torture, and brutal repression are deserved even for those who collaborated in the occupation, let alone for thousands of people whose only crime was being a woman and participating in the opening up of education or being a minor civil servant who once didn't give someone's cousin special treatment.

[Solauren]

Part of the problem that the Afghan army is facing is the fact the United States pulled out all their hardware as they were leaving.

You don't actually think they left/gave the Afghan people the means to defend themselves, do you?

[Juubi Karakuchi]

I may be grasping at straws, but I found this curiously heartening.

Armed Afghan women take to streets in show of defiance against Taliban

Women in north and central regions of country stage demonstrations as militants make sweeping gains nationwide

by Emma Graham-Harrison in Kabul
Wed 7 Jul 2021 15.53 BST

Women have taken up guns in northern and central Afghanistan, marching in the streets in their hundreds and sharing pictures of themselves with assault rifles on social media, in a show of defiance as the Taliban make sweeping gains nationwide.

One of the biggest demonstrations was in central Ghor province, where hundreds of women turned out at the weekend, waving guns and chanting anti-Taliban slogans.

They are not likely to head to the frontlines in large numbers any time soon, because of both social conservatism and lack of experience. But the public demonstrations, at a time of urgent threat from the militants, are a reminder of how frightened many women are about what Taliban rule could mean for them and their families.

“There were some women who just wanted to inspire security forces, just symbolic, but many more were ready to go to the battlefields,” said Halima Parastish, the head of the women’s directorate in Ghor and one of the marchers. “That includes myself. I and some other women told the governor around a month ago that we’re ready to go and fight.”

The Taliban have been sweeping across rural Afghanistan, taking dozens of districts including in places such as northern Badakhshan province, which 20 years ago was an anti-Taliban stronghold. They now have multiple provincial capitals in effect under siege.

It is rare, but not unprecedented, for Afghan women to take up arms, particularly in slightly less conservative parts of the country. Photograph: Facebook
In areas they control, the Taliban have already brought in restrictions on women’s education, their freedom of movement and their clothing, activists and residents of those areas say. In one area, flyers were circulating demanding that women put on burqas.

Even women from extremely conservative rural areas aspire to more education, greater freedom of movement and a greater role in their families, according to a new survey of a group whose voices are rarely heard. Taliban rule will take them in the opposite direction.

“No woman wants to fight, I just want to continue my education and stay far away from the violence but conditions made me and other women stand up,” said a journalist in her early 20s from northern Jowzjan, where there is a history of women fighting.

She attended a day’s training on weapons handling in the provincial capital, which is currently besieged. She asked not to be named in case it falls to the Taliban. “I don’t want the country under the control of people who treat women the way they do. We took up the guns to show if we have to fight, we will.”

She said there were a few dozen women learning to use guns with her, and despite their inexperience they would have one advantage over men if they faced the Taliban. “They are frightened of being killed by us, they consider it shameful.”

For conservative militants, facing women in battle can be humiliating. Isis fighters in Syria were reportedly more frightened of dying at the hands of female Kurdish forces than being killed by men.

It is rare, but not unprecedented, for Afghan women to take up arms, particularly in slightly less conservative parts of the country. Last year a teenager, Qamar Gul, became famous nationwide after fighting off a group of Taliban who had killed her parents. The militants included her own husband.

In Baghlan province, a woman called Bibi Aisha Habibi became the country’s only female warlord in the wake of the Soviet invasion and the civil war that followed. She was known as Commander Kaftar, or Pigeon.

And in northern Balkh, 39-year-old Salima Mazari has recently been fighting on the frontlines in Charkint, where she is the district governor.

Women have also joined Afghanistan’s security forces over the past two decades, including training as helicopter pilots, although they have faced discrimination and harassment from colleagues and are rarely found on the frontlines.

The Taliban shrugged off Afghanistan’s historical precedents, claiming the demonstrations were propaganda and men would not allow female relatives to fight.

“Women will never pick up guns against us. They are helpless and forced by the defeated enemy,” said a spokesperson, Zabihullah Mujahid. “They can’t fight.”

The Ghor provincial governor, Abdulzahir Faizzada, said in a phone interview that some of the women who came out in the streets of Firozkoh, the provincial capital, had already battled the Taliban, and most had endured violence from the group.

“The majority of these women were those who had recently escaped from Taliban areas. They have already been through war in their villages, they lost their sons and brothers, they are angry,” he said. Faizzada added that he would train women who did not have experience with weapons, if the government in Kabul approved it.

The Taliban’s conservative rules are particularly unwelcome in Ghor, where women traditionally wear headscarves rather than covering themselves fully with the burqa, and work in fields and villages beside their men, Parastish said.

The Taliban have banned women even from taking care of animals or working the land in areas of Ghor they control, she added. They have closed girls schools, ordered women not to leave home without a male guardian and even banned them from gathering for weddings, saying only men should attend.

Women from these areas were among those who marched. “More than a dozen women have escaped from Allahyar in Shahrak district last week and came to us and asked for guns to go and fight for their lands and freedom. The same situation is in Charsadda region,” Parastish said.

“Women said: ‘We are getting killed and injured without defending ourselves, why not fight back?’ They were telling us that at least two women were in labour in their region, with no medical things around and they couldn’t come with them.”

For now, she said, the main thing holding the women back was the men in power. “The governor said there is no need for us now and they will let us know.”

Akhtar Mohammad Makoii contributed reporting

Perhaps Afghanistan's women, or some of them anyway, will not be herded back into purdah without a fight.

That, and the snotty Taliban retort was rather amusing.

More broadly, there are militias re-emerging all across Afghanistan. They might have more success than the government forces; if only because of their fighting spirit and local knowledge. Beyond that I can't say much, since I can't get much info on the capabilities of the Taliban forces. From what I can figure out it's mostly a motorised infantry force - not unlike ISIS - with some artillery and armoured vehicles, but I can't say for certain how many or how well they can use them.

[Raw Shark]

“Women will never pick up guns against us. They are helpless and forced by the defeated enemy,” said a spokesperson, Zabihullah Mujahid. “They can’t fight.”

"Challenge. Accepted."

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Afghanistan: Taliban captures Kandahar and Herat, hours after takeover of Ghazni
It gets worse:

The Taliban has captured its biggest prizes yet - Afghanistan's second and third largest cities Kandahar and Herat - and it comes just hours after the takeover of Ghazni.

The insurgents have taken over 12 of Afghanistan's 34 provincial capitals in the last week.

The latest conquests on Thursday will further squeeze the country's government as the US army begins to withdraw its troops from the country.

The UK will be sending 600 troops into Afghanistan to help evacuate embassy staff and British nationals, Defence Secretary Ben Wallance announced on Thursday.

The additional military support will arrive in Kabul over the coming days.

The embassy in Kabul, which will be reduced to a core team, will be relocated outside of the city to a safer place in the green zone.

Sir Laurie Bristow, the UK’s Ambassador to Afghanistan, will lead a smaller team in Afghanistan and will focus on helping Brits leave the country and helping Afghans relocate to the UK.

Mr Wallace said: “I have authorised the deployment of additional military personnel to support the diplomatic presence in Kabul, assist British nationals to leave the country and support the relocation of former Afghan staff who risked their lives serving alongside us.

“The security of British nationals, British military personnel and former Afghan staff is our first priority. We must do everything we can to ensure their safety.”

Last Friday, the UK government changed travel advice to recommend that all British nationals leave Afghanistan as soon as possible.

The US will also be sending an additional 3,000 troops into Afghanistan to help evacuate embassy staff, officials announced on Thursday.

The Pentagon, which is withdrawing its troops from Afghanistan, had kept about 650 troops in the country to support US diplomatic security, including at the airport.

The move suggests both countries are becoming less confident in the Afghan government's ability to hold onto the country's capital.

In Kandahar, the Taliban seized the governor's office and other buildings on Thursday night, witnesses said. The governor and other officials reportedly fled, catching a flight to Kabul.

The Taliban had earlier attacked a prison in the city and freed inmates inside, officials said.

Taliban fighters rushed past the Great Mosque in Herat, which dates to 500 BC and was once a spoil of Alexander the Great, and seized government buildings.

Witnesses described hearing gunfire at one government building while the rest of the city fell silent under the insurgents' control. And Taliban fighters once-detained at Herat's prison are now seen freely moving on the streets.

The US and others overestimated the Afghan government and its military and underestimated the Taliban, Rohit Kachroo explains

Herat had been under attack for two weeks before Taliban fighters finally broke through the city's defensive lines.

Afghan lawmaker Semin Barekzai acknowledged the city's fall to the Taliban, saying some officials had escaped.

On the same day, the Taliban captured Ghazni city, which cuts off a crucial highway linking the Afghan capital with the country's southern provinces.

Which provincial capitals have fallen to the Taliban so far?

Zaranj - captured on August 6 - The capital of Nimruz province in southwestern Afghanistan is linked by highways with Lashkar Gah to the east, Farah to the north and the Iranian city of Zabol to the west.

Sheberghan - captured on August 7 - The capital of the Jowzjan province in northern Afghanistan was strategic because it was the stronghold of US-allied Uzbek warlord Rashid Dostum, whose militias are among those resurrected to aid the Afghan National Security and Defence Forces.

Sar-e-Pul - captured on August 8 - The city is the capital of the homonymous province Sar-e-Pul and is located in the north.

Taloqan - captured on August 8 - The capital of Takhar province in the north east lies next to Kunduz and had particular significance for the anti-Taliban northern alliance fighters who joined the US-led coalition to oust the religious militia in 2001.

Kunduz - captured on August 8 - Kunduz, to the north and the capital of the homonymous province, is a strategic crossroads with good access to much of northern Afghanistan as well as the capital, Kabul, about 200 miles away. On August 9, the Taliban took over Kunduz airport, which is also one of seven key military bases, representing a major setback for the government forces.

Aybak - captured on August 9 - The capital of Samangan in the north was once known to be one of the safest provinces in Afghanistan, with a minimal Taliban presence.

Pul-e-Khumri - captured on August 10 - The capitol of Baghlan province, in the north, is 140 miles north of Kabul and gives insurgents control of a strategic road junction linking Kabul to the north and west.

Fayzabad - captured on August 11 - The city in Badakhshan province is in northeast Afghanistan.

Farah - captured on August 11 - Capital of Farah province in western Afghanistan

Ghazni - captured on August 12 - The capture of Ghazni, in southeastern Afghanistan, cuts off a crucial highway linking the capital with the country's southern provinces, which are also under attack. It could complicate resupply and movement for government forces.

Herat - captured on August 12 - In Herat province and west of the country, the capital is Afghanistan's third-largest city and a strategic provincial capital near Kabul.

Kandahar - captured on August 12 - Kandahar is the second largest city after Kabul and located in the south of the country.

An estimation of the situation in Afghanistan on August 12, in recent days the Taliban has seized more land.

Which areas could fall in coming days?

Fighting is also raging in Lashkar Gah, one of Afghanistan’s largest cities in the Taliban heartland of Helmand province. Surrounded government forces hoped to hold onto the southern provincial capital.

Taliban militants patrol Ghazni in utility trucks after the city fell into their hands

More than 200,000 children in Afghanistan have been forced to flee their homes as the country's conflict intensifies, UNICEF has said.

The global children's charity warned of a "rapid escalation of grave violations" against youngsters.

UNICEF found around 400,000 Afghans have become internally displaced. Over half of these are children and four million pupils are missing school.

While Kabul itself isn’t directly under threat, the latest US military intelligence assessment suggests it could come under insurgent pressure within 30 days.

The US also implied that if current trends hold, the Taliban could gain full control of the country within a few months.

The Afghan government may eventually be forced to pull back to defend the capital and just a few other cities.

The loss of Kandahar, Herat and Ghazni tightens the grip of a resurgent Taliban estimated to now hold some two-thirds of the nation.

The onslaught in Afghanistan renews questions about where the over $830 billion (around £600 billion) spent by the US Defense Department on fighting, training those troops, and reconstruction efforts went, especially as Taliban fighters ride on American-made utility trucks.

It also raised fears that the Taliban would turn back the clock on the country and reimpose a brutal regime. Already there are reports of repressive restrictions on women and revenge killings.

Afghan president Ashraf Ghani is trying to rally a counteroffensive relying on his country’s special forces, the militias of warlords and American airpower ahead of the US and NATO pull-out at the end of the month.

On Thursday, Taliban militants raised their white flags imprinted with an Islamic proclamation of faith over the city of Ghazni, just 130 kilometres southwest of Kabul.

Mohammad Arif Rahmani, a lawmaker from Ghazni, told the Associated Press the city had fallen to the insurgents. Ghazni provincial council member Amanullah Kamrani echoed this, but added that the two bases outside of the city remain held by government forces.
Already, the Taliban’s weeklong blitz has seen the militants seize nine other provincial capitals around the country. Many are in the country’s northeast corner, pressuring Kabul from that direction as well.

The USA is saying Kabul will fall like Saigon within 1-3 months and is advising anyone who can, to GTFO.

[Broomstick]

As bad as this is, if the US couldn't win hearts and minds and effect change in 20 years I'm not sure if staying longer would have made a difference.

I knew as soon as we pulled out the Taliban would take over. It's sort of like Vietnam all over again (although there are, of course, differences, too).

And yes, I'm fully aware that life will be hell for many under the Taliban, but 20 years of war failed to topple them from power. War is pretty hellish, too. I don't have any answers for this.

[Solauren]

There was no way to wipe out the Taliban with the way the US applied military force.

They fought the Taliban like they were a modern, high tech enemy. They're not. In many ways, there pre-world war 1, just with better equipment.

Drone Strikes?
Every time that happened, that US was labeled as a coward, and more people got ready to fight them, or take back what 'cowards took from them'.


Really, the only way to have crushed the Taliban (and other groups like them) would have a been a massive, massive ground invasion. Every city and settlement would have had to be seized and disarmed. Every single nomadic group isolated, captured and disarmed. Near constant air patrols at the border to prevent crossings or weapons movements.

And that probably would have not been enough. After all, you can just store your weapons somewhere the Americans are not going to, or can't look, like a cave just over the border, keep your head down, and then wait for them to leave before quickly rearming and retaking the country. You'd have to start with the border patrols for several years before launching moving inwards.

Oh well. It was a massive waste of money, time, and most importantly life while it lasted.....

[loomer]

Perhaps the only moral option available to the occupation force is to allow anyone who wants, without all the current vetting that's dragged on for over a decade and which is leaving even well-regarded and trusted collaborators with occupation military forces to be tortured and executed, to come to their countries and receive a full resettlement package.

[Juubi Karakuchi]

The Afghan government seems to be finished. President Ghani has allegedly flown to Mazar-i-Sharif to talk with ex-Northern Alliance bosses. I can't help but suspect he's gone there for sanctuary as much as anything else.

I confess I'm a little surprised at how little we're hearing about the Northern Alliance and other northern factions; beyond some vague mentions in the media that they're re-mobilising. The Taliban has traditionally been a Pashtun racket, with its support base primarily in the south; and they have a history of mistreating the northern ethnic minorities. Yet the Taliban has somehow managed to take over much of the Northern Alliance's old territory; at least nominally.

It could be that the northern minorities have sided with the Taliban, at least for now. Or else the militias are just taking a little while to get going. The Taliban offensive has only been going on for a few days, after all.

For all that, unless the Taliban really have somehow changed, I don't see them taking the whole country. More likely we'll see a return to the pre 9/11 situation, with the Taliban controlling a small majority aside from a northern chunk under Northern Alliance control.

[Ralin]

Perhaps the only moral option available to the occupation force is to allow anyone who wants, without all the current vetting that's dragged on for over a decade and which is leaving even well-regarded and trusted collaborators with occupation military forces to be tortured and executed, to come to their countries and receive a full resettlement package.

Why in the hell should we reward or protect people who took part in the rape of their own country?

[Broomstick]

Because they were our allies in doing the deed.

There is precedent - the reason there are 327,000+ Hmong in the US is because we took them in after they fought for the US in the Vietnam war.

Check the temperature of hell, because I agree with loomer, for the second time in a week:

Perhaps the only moral option available to the occupation force is to allow anyone who wants, without all the current vetting that's dragged on for over a decade and which is leaving even well-regarded and trusted collaborators with occupation military forces to be tortured and executed, to come to their countries and receive a full resettlement package.

[Ralin]

Because they were our allies in doing the deed.

Who's this 'our' you speak of? I've been against the wars for two decades now. Lots of Americans were. Bad enough that none of the Americans responsible for it will never see the inside of an Afghan courthouse. That doesn't mean we should help more of Bush's Willing Executioners escape punishment.

There is precedent - the reason there are 327,000+ Hmong in the US is because we took them in after they fought for the US in the Vietnam war.

So?

[ray245]

Because they were our allies in doing the deed.

Who's this 'our' you speak of? I've been against the wars for two decades now. Lots of Americans were. Bad enough that none of the Americans responsible for it will never see the inside of an Afghan courthouse. That doesn't mean we should help more of Bush's Willing Executioners escape punishment.

There is precedent - the reason there are 327,000+ Hmong in the US is because we took them in after they fought for the US in the Vietnam war.

So?

You assume that everyone that helped the Americans were all happy to see their country looted.

Some of them could help the Americans because their entire family were wiped out by the Taliban.

I guess it's morally right to let additional people die?

[Broomstick]

Because they were our allies in doing the deed.

Who's this 'our' you speak of? I've been against the wars for two decades now.

Me, too, but this will be laid at the feet of all Americans whether they were for or against the war. What matters to many is that the person is labeled "American", not what their actual beliefs are. Those who still relish assigning collective guilt will not hesitate to tar all Americans with the same brush.

That doesn't mean we should help more of Bush's Willing Executioners escape punishment.

Oh, sure. As opposed to bin Laden's willing executioners, right? Or the nice people who shoot schoolgirls in the head for the "crime" of going to school? There isn't really anyone I would consider a "good guy" in this conflict.

There is precedent - the reason there are 327,000+ Hmong in the US is because we took them in after they fought for the US in the Vietnam war.

So?

The Afghans who chose to throw in their lot with the Americans, for whatever reason, WILL be executed will the Taliban take over - it has already happened in captured cities (or re-captured, from the viewpoint of the Taliban). If the US does not take them in then the Americans leave them to certain death. Which might be "spiced up" with torture before the end. Maybe you're okay with torture and execution but I'm not.

And the next time the US seeks an ally abroad the US will be told to fuck off because it will be known that the US has no loyalty to anyone. Which will NOT be helpful.

[Ralin]

Oh, sure. As opposed to bin Laden's willing executioners, right? Or the nice people who shoot schoolgirls in the head for the "crime" of going to school? There isn't really anyone I would consider a "good guy" in this conflict.

Sounds like you aren’t as opposed to the war as you make yourself out to be if your immediate response is to declare that the other side is no angel and remind everyone about how scary and barbaric they are and how there’s really no right side.

There is a right side. The one that’s been shooting at the invaders. The Taliban is local. America is not. That’s all that matters.

The Afghans who chose to throw in their lot with the Americans, for whatever reason, WILL be executed will the Taliban take over

Good.

Which might be "spiced up" with torture before the end. Maybe you're okay with torture and execution but I'm not.

Just so we’re clear: You’re against the Forever War but you do believe that America is entitled to a veto on how any future Afghan government punishes their criminals?

And the next time the US seeks an ally abroad the US will be told to fuck off because it will be known that the US has no loyalty to anyone. Which will NOT be helpful.

Good. The ‘coalition forces’ would have had to turn tail and run that much sooner without local quislings.

You assume that everyone that helped the Americans were all happy to see their country looted.

Some of them could help the Americans because their entire family were wiped out by the Taliban.

I guess it's morally right to let additional people die?

If they want to defend their actions on those grounds they make that argument in a local court.

[Broomstick]

Oh, sure. As opposed to bin Laden's willing executioners, right? Or the nice people who shoot schoolgirls in the head for the "crime" of going to school? There isn't really anyone I would consider a "good guy" in this conflict.

Sounds like you aren’t as opposed to the war as you make yourself out to be if your immediate response is to declare that the other side is no angel and remind everyone about how scary and barbaric they are and how there’s really no right side.

Oh, please - don't twist my words in an attempt to paint me your adversary. EVERYONE's hands are dirty, without exception. There is no good or bad side here. Keep reading.

There is a right side. The one that’s been shooting at the invaders. The Taliban is local. America is not. That’s all that matters.

You forget that the Taliban gave sanctuary and comfort to Osama bin Laden, a Saudi national and not an Afghan, who masterminded an attack on the most militarily powerful country on the planet. There was no fucking way the US wasn't going to make someone pay for 9/11, which would be the exact same reaction of any other nation attacked who could possibly retaliate to an attack.

The mistake was staying in Afghanistan when it became apparent bin Laden was no longer there. When, exactly, that point occurred is debatable.

The Taliban were not a bunch of innocent victims. They aided and abetted the attacks on 9/11.

Don't want your country invaded (by anyone)? Don't harbor people willing and able to launch attacks on other nations in your borders.

The Afghans who chose to throw in their lot with the Americans, for whatever reason, WILL be executed will the Taliban take over

Good.

What kind of a sick fuck are you to cheer the torture and death of other human beings?

Which might be "spiced up" with torture before the end. Maybe you're okay with torture and execution but I'm not.

Just so we’re clear: You’re against the Forever War but you do believe that America is entitled to a veto on how any future Afghan government punishes their criminals?

Yes I'm against the Forever War.

I also find the Taliban utterly repugnant - how could I not? An organization that reduces women to property and brood mares? That tortures people? Yeah, I find that all pretty disgusting on a moral and ethical level. That said - I would have been content to leave them to their own little circle of hell forever EXCEPT they aided and abetted an attack on my country so on a certain level fuck them. On the other hand, now that bin Laden is dead and the US is leaving again, fuck them and leave them to their little circle of hell.

As for "criminals" - those "criminals" aren't criminals by US standards, they worked for the US, and they shouldn't be abandoned to misery and death if the US can avoid it. Unless you're going to argue that every single American should stand trial in Afghanistan and submit to whatever punishment the Taliban deems appropriate. What the fuck did you expect the people in American-held territory to do? They had to make a living somehow, so they got jobs with the biggest employer around. I'm sure for many it was a matter of either expediency or no real choice. They shouldn't die for that.

You assume that everyone that helped the Americans were all happy to see their country looted.

Some of them could help the Americans because their entire family were wiped out by the Taliban.

I guess it's morally right to let additional people die?

If they want to defend their actions on those grounds they make that argument in a local court.

The Taliban don't believe in that sort of legal system. They won't be allowed an argument or defense, they'll just be put to death. No trial. No recourse. But hey, they're just brown people, right? [/sarcasm]

Holy fuck you are cold.

[Ralin]

Oh, please - don't twist my words in an attempt to paint me your adversary. EVERYONE's hands are dirty, without exception. There is no good or bad side here. Keep reading.

I’m not twisting your words at all. You’re very clearly determined to downplay American crimes by pulling the classic “He was no angel” bullshit. There is a right side here and that side is the one that has spent the past twenty years fighting the forces which invaded their country.

You forget that the Taliban gave sanctuary and comfort to Osama bin Laden, a Saudi national and not an Afghan, who masterminded an attack on the most militarily powerful country on the planet. There was no fucking way the US wasn't going to make someone pay for 9/11, which would be the exact same reaction of any other nation attacked who could possibly retaliate to an attack.

…

The Taliban were not a bunch of innocent victims. They aided and abetted the attacks on 9/11.

You forget, America has invaded and sponsored coups and terrorist groups in scores of countries around the world. Nothing the Taliban or Al-Qaeda did to the US comes close to what America inflicted on the people of Iraq just to name one country. By your logic half the world should be attacking America non-stop for revenge, and yet you think that one terrorist attack in New York justifies a generation of violent vengeance to vent America’s spleen?

Don't want your country invaded (by anyone)? Don't harbor people willing and able to launch attacks on other nations in your borders.

So when will we be turning George W Bush over?

What kind of a sick fuck are you to cheer the torture and death of other human beings?

Where the hell do you get off thinking that after twenty years of raping the nation of Afghanistan the United States government has any right to a say in how their new government deals with collaborators?

I also find the Taliban utterly repugnant - how could I not? An organization that reduces women to property and brood mares? That tortures people? Yeah, I find that all pretty disgusting on a moral and ethical level. That said - I would have been content to leave them to their own little circle of hell forever EXCEPT they aided and abetted an attack on my country so on a certain level fuck them. On the other hand, now that bin Laden is dead and the US is leaving again, fuck them and leave them to their little circle of hell.

Blah blah blah, he was no angel.

As for "criminals" - those "criminals" aren't criminals by US standards,

They aren’t Americans and they didn’t commit their crimes in America.

Unless you're going to argue that every single American should stand trial in Afghanistan and submit to whatever punishment the Taliban deems appropriate

Absolutely. Every single soldier, every single contractor, every single mercenary who took part in the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan should be rounded up and turned over to stand trial.

What the fuck did you expect the people in American-held territory to do? They had to make a living somehow, so they got jobs with the biggest employer around. I'm sure for many it was a matter of either expediency or no real choice. They shouldn't die for that.

Those sound like issues for the local government to decide, don’t you think?

The Taliban don't believe in that sort of legal system. They won't be allowed an argument or defense, they'll just be put to death. No trial. No recourse. But hey, they're just brown people, right? [/sarcasm]

Those brown people can’t be expected to have any sort of legal system. They’re just savages. We can’t let them make those sorts of decisions for themselves. We have to spirit anyone who might be found guilty away to a civilized country![/whatbroomstickbelieves]

Holy fuck you are cold.

I’m sure they’ll get a fairer hearing than any of their countrymen who ‘coalition forces’ drone-bombed.

[loomer]

Perhaps the only moral option available to the occupation force is to allow anyone who wants, without all the current vetting that's dragged on for over a decade and which is leaving even well-regarded and trusted collaborators with occupation military forces to be tortured and executed, to come to their countries and receive a full resettlement package.

Why in the hell should we reward or protect people who took part in the rape of their own country?

Bold choice to describe women in the public sphere and comedians who made jokes about the Taliban as 'taking part in the rape of their own country'. Justify your position, fucko.