After 17 years of war, top US commander in Afghanistan admits Taliban cannot be defeated

[Feng Leng]

A military defeat ALWAYS have political effects. The Taliban was militarily defeated. Any question on that is essentially a stupid one. The current situation in Afghanistan is all political and who thinks this generation of the Taliban is going to support any state or non-state belligerent against the US, which was what happened with Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden, and Al-Qaeda?

The US will withdraw from the idea that we can make major political changes in terms of 'nation building', but no one is under any illusion that he can get away with taking sides against US. The consequences of 9/11? The US can repeat that practically indefinitely.

LOL a "military victory" just like USSR in Afghanstan and like USA in Vietnam

 

[moweike]

America creates economy through war

You can see their connections：


Factory Orders Growth Slows In September As War Spending Plunges
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-02/factory-orders-growth-slows-september-war-spending-plunges

 

[gambit]

LOL a "military victory" just like USSR in Afghanstan and like USA in Vietnam

Absolutely they were military victories. Far more than your China can claim to have.

Tbh you guys majorly failed at nation building because you have zero idea about the nation you were trying to build.

You are correct there. But now we know that part of the world is best left backward and pathetic.

Bottom line is that if you want to live under a tyrannical government, keep it within your borders. If you have a problem with US, either fight US or live with your pain. If you host someone who have a problem with US, might as well consider yourself a party to that conflict. We suck at nation building so why risk your country, right?

 

[GHALIB]

no change in offing .

 

[khail007]

This is a lesson for everyone -- and I mean really EVERYONE.

For the US, military successes do not guarantee desired political outcomes.

Sir, this message is only for US, the arrogance of US government doest not let your so called think tanks and policy makers to correct analytics.
US always bullies to weak and use propaganda to undermine the sovereignty of them.
Your rouge policy makers needs to get rid of evil in their heads. Else they will always able to come to senses after 17 years or if they keep that path may be next time not even after 34 years.
If you call it a victory then it is very very shameful victory.
In short LIVE AND LET LIVE.

 

[gambit]

In short LIVE AND LET LIVE.

Then Mullah Omar should not have involved Afghanistan in the fight between Al-Qaeda and US. Live and let live. Too bad Omar did not take your advice.

 

[PeaceGen]

Published time: 2 Nov, 2018 10:33Edited time: 3 Nov, 2018 08:57
Get short URL

© Global Look Press / Yaqoub Azorda

• 6226
• 9

The Afghanistan war cannot be won militarily and peace will only be achieved through a political resolution with the Taliban, the newly-appointed American general in charge of US and NATO operations has conceded.
In his first interview since taking command of NATO’s Resolute Support mission in September, Gen. Austin Scott Miller provided NBC News with a surprisingly candid assessment of the seemingly never-ending conflict, which began with the US invasion of Afghanistan in October, 2001.

“This is not going to be won militarily. This is going to a political solution," Miller said.

He mused that the Taliban is also tired of fighting and may be interested in starting to “work through the political piece” of the 17-year-old war.

via GIPHY

But it’s not clear if the Taliban is open to negotiations. Last month, a top Taliban commander told RT, in a rare interview, that the group’s leaders had no desire to negotiate with the Americans.




#Afghanistan is on its way to becoming America's longest war ever, and fewer and fewer Americans like it https://on.rt.com/9g84

9:21 AM - Oct 11, 2018

US veterans overwhelmingly want troops out of Afghanistan – poll — RT US News
A new poll shows a majority of US residents support withdrawing all troops from Afghanistan, 17 years into a war that shows no signs of ending. Support for winding down the interminable conflict is...


Described for years as a stalemate, the conflict has been tipping in the Taliban’s favor in recent months. Even by US military estimates, the Afghan government controls or influences just over half of the country’s 407 districts – a record low since the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, or SIGAR, began tracking district control in November 2015.

To make matters worse, casualties among Afghan government forces have skyrocketed in recent months. Afghan security forces suffered 1,000 fatalities in August and September, according to the Pentagon.

READ MORE: US veterans overwhelmingly want troops out of Afghanistan – poll

Miller’s desire for a political settlement was echoed earlier by the State Department, which said in August that the US was doing everything it could to facilitate peace talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government.

The new US commander has experienced the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan first-hand. In October, Miller survived a Taliban attack in Kandahar, which left a prominent Afghan warlord and local intelligence chief dead.

i nearly choked on my tea when i read this headline

the Taliban can be "defeated" (that population re-educated under policing force and a replacing of all their Holy Books with a more moderate version, like Holy books have been replaced by force in entire regions quite a few times earlier in history all over the world)

we've always offered the Taliban the option to stick to themselves, to mind their own business, which includes leaving the moderates in their country in peace,

but know that with enough troops and money spent over a significant time, and just a few smart determined commanders with the right plan of action to enforce this cultural change, we do have the option of doing this.

the real question is : are the Taliban foolish enough to once again host training camps for attacks on western soft or hard targets, and foolish enough to do this often enough to force us into this monetarily expensive solution?

a nasty fact is that we can afford less to care about attacks on moderates in Afghanistan or Pakistan if those governments won't support a decisive push against extremists'/fundamentalists' expansionist ambitions.
and the troops to change the Holy books in Taliban regions, would have to be moderates from that region too. And yes, it would require more effort, much more effort, for those books to become the actual social guidelines for a Taliban-like population.

but attacks on western targets, especially double attacks or sequences of attacks, or growing of domestic muslim terrorists in western countries with a significant percentage of Muslims living there proven to be orchestrated from a Taliban stronghold,
would force us nearer to a solution like this, although budget restraints will probably restrict the actual defensive activities to things like drone strikes on Taliban commanders.

the Taliban has a simple and very real chance, at all times, to prevent such drastic action against their leaders and soldiers.
refrain from attacking anyone. do not think revenge sends any message but a need to be defeated yet again.

it's bad enough women seeking actual love in a bad marriage in Taliban regions, get stoned to death for that.
i'd love to see that changed, and frankly i don't care how much force it would take.
but.. unfortunately i'm not in charge of the military policy for the Taliban regions, so i can't do anything for the defenseless innocents tortured and killed by the more absurd social rules of groups like the Taliban. i wish i could. i would be moderate, wise, swift, unpredictable yet trustable, and ruthless only whenever necessary, with my use of force.
i would not risk the lives of my troops or see my troops take my enemies' lives without the most dire of need created by the enemy.

fight like that, and eventually enemies do reach a compromise.

and guess what? that's exactly what the US military has been doing when it comes to attacks by the Taliban outside their own territory. This war is a nasty asymmetrical war, but currently it stands as a win for both the west and the Taliban itself.

Taliban, we know how you treat those who can't defend themselves, and our very large populations don't approve of such "policing" of your own population.

So if you cross the line, you'll get "the treatment" (pruning by drone force most likely), again, and again, every time you cross the line of attacking people outside your own borders. I wish we could just culture-change you by force. You fully deserve that.

 

[Verve]

The Taliban was militarily defeated. Any question on that is essentially a stupid one.

You people have not won on one war against organised gorilla force. Vietnam and now Aghanistan. Humiliated in both.

 

[PeaceGen]

You people have not won on one war against organised gorilla force. Vietnam and now Aghanistan. Humiliated in both.

guerrilla force, you mean.

and the Afghan Taliban are not a guerrilla force, they are a terrorist group.

the difference is that a guerrilla force uses different targets and methods of operating and achieving their goals,
than a terrorist force.

a terrorist force is despicable, a guerrilla force is admirable in some cases, in which they fight *against* oppression.
the Taliban, oppresses their own people, and tries to oppress others even well outside their region.

that makes the Taliban an evil terrorist force.
And the Vietnamese defended their choice to join the communists, with communist military backing. They are also not actually a guerrilla force. They were an anti-invasion force.

And the Taliban is not an anti-invasion force either. They are a group that launched attacks, frequently, against both soft and hard targets outside their borders, and thus that temporary "invasion" of Afghanistan by a relatively small number of western troops, served it's purpose : pruning of the enemy forces, identification via biometric scans of potential future combatants, and the rest we can do via drones. now, and in the future.

and if in 20 years expansionist oppressors like you and your Taliban friends, or your ISIS-like friends perhaps, force us into another short invasion to get biometric scans of all potential fighters young and old, then that's probably what will happen.

you claiming victory is actually just a foolish defiant statement.
foolish because it can get your friends killed after you rile them up to attack some soft western or non-Muslim-fundamentalist target.

your claims that all martyrs and Muslim fighters go to the best Heaven Allah has to offer, is probably also a lie you just love and like to spread. i'm not buying that one one bit.

 

[Verve]

guerrilla force, you mean.

and the Afghan Taliban are not a guerrilla force, they are a terrorist group.

the difference is that a guerrilla force uses different targets and methods of operating and achieving their goals,
than a terrorist force.

a terrorist force is despicable, a guerrilla force is admirable in some cases, in which they fight *against* oppression.
the Taliban, oppresses their own people, and tries to oppress others even well outside their region.

that makes the Taliban an evil terrorist force.
And the Vietnamese defended their choice to join the communists, with communist military backing. They are also not actually a guerrilla force. They were an anti-invasion force.

And the Taliban is not an anti-invasion force either. They are a group that launched attacks, frequently, against both soft and hard targets outside their borders, and thus that temporary "invasion" of Afghanistan by a relatively small number of western troops, served it's purpose : pruning of the enemy forces, identification via biometric scans of potential future combatants, and the rest we can do via drones. now, and in the future.

and if in 20 years expansionist oppressors like you and your Taliban friends, or your ISIS-like friends perhaps, force us into another short invasion to get biometric scans of all potential fighters young and old, then that's probably what will happen.

you claiming victory is actually just a foolish defiant statement.
foolish because it can get your friends killed after you rile them up to attack some soft western or non-Muslim-fundamentalist target.

your claims that all martyrs and Muslim fighters go to the best Heaven Allah has to offer, is probably also a lie you just love and like to spread. i'm not buying that one one bit.

Blah blah blah.

These ''terrorists" were hosted at the White House.

 

[PeaceGen]

Blah blah blah.

These ''terrorists" were hosted at the White House.

blah blah blah, that's what you do, not me.
we're done. have a nice day.

 

[khail007]

Then Mullah Omar should not have involved Afghanistan in the fight between Al-Qaeda and US. Live and let live. Too bad Omar did not take your advice.

This advice is for US not for anyone else. If US rein it's evil designs and CIA to stop toppling other legitimate governments, the world will be more safer. US actions turns this world more dangerous and unsafe.
Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya all are now ungovernable only due to foolish thinking of US.
Listen ... occupational forces never victorious in any place on the glob.
Get some introspection on why US attacked on Afghanistan? Was any of the so called hijacker of 9/11 belongs to Afghanistan, give the details of him.

 

[Verve]

US actions turns this world more dangerous and unsafe.
Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya all are now ungovernable only due to foolish thinking of US.

It's not foolish, this chaos is by design. USA has no desire for democracy etc, those are just excuses to wage wars to create chaos and spill blood.

 

[LeGenD]

We knew this years ago

If they'd listened then, the current mess wouldn't have occurred

Those who think that American war-effort in Afghanistan was a waste - do not understand the bigger picture. Some wars are fought to win and some to advance strategic goals.

Afghanistan was a fantastic experimental ground for the Americans. They tested different types of weapons and battlefield doctrines in the region under the shroud of War On Terror. They also learned a great deal about Iran, Pakistan and China as added bonus.

What if they are leaving Afghan Taliban on purpose? We do not understand their game well enough.

It's not foolish, this chaos is by design. USA has no desire for democracy etc, those are just excuses to wage wars to create chaos and spill blood.

Somebody gets it.

The so-called War On Terror would serve Israel well in the long-term. This war have exhausted Muslims and reshaped public opinion across landscapes, and several countries are warming up to Israel consequently [which was not possible before]. They plan 50 years ahead then us.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

This advice is for US not for anyone else. If US rein it's evil designs and CIA to stop toppling other legitimate governments, the world will be more safer. US actions turns this world more dangerous and unsafe.
Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya all are now ungovernable only due to foolish thinking of US.
Listen ... occupational forces never victorious in any place on the glob.
Get some introspection on why US attacked on Afghanistan? Was any of the so called hijacker of 9/11 belongs to Afghanistan, give the details of him.

The hijackers were part of Al-Qaeda.
Al-Qaedas leader, Osama bin Laden was in Afghanistan.
Mullah Omar was requested to deport him in a meeting with Pakistan and KSA.
Mullah Omar refused, and insulted personally the KSA prince present at the meeting
That made Afghanistan an ally of Al Qaeda, and ripe for attack.
That has been known for a long time.

Afghanistan, Libya are ungovernable because of Muslim infighting,
Iraq seems in better shape.