Forces with Afghanistan's National Directorate of Security escort an alleged militant as Taliban and Islamic State fighters are presented to the media in Jalalabad in May 2019 (AFP Photo/NOORULLAH SHIRZADA)
Diana Stancy Correll, Military.com: Analysis suggests warlords in Afghanistan are bracing for civil war once US, NATO troops exit
As the U.S. and the Taliban are on the brink of securing a peace deal that would remove U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan, a new report cautions that Afghan warlords are readying for a potential civil war.
According to analysis from the Institute for the Study of War, ethnic groups in Afghanistan including Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazaras are preparing for a possible civil war once U.S. and NATO forces depart Afghanistan — similar to the civil war that ensued after the Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989.
“Afghanistan is dangerously poised for a new Afghan Civil War reminiscent of the instability that followed the withdrawal of the Soviet Union in the 1990s,” Afghanistan research assistant Scott DesMarais wrote in the analysis published Aug. 15.
Read more ....
More On The U.S. - Taliban Peace Talks Debate
America is close to ‘deal’ with Taliban, hints Trump -- The Guardian
Fears in US of bad peace deal with the Taliban -- AFP
Afghans voice fears that the U.S. is undercutting them in deal with the Taliban -- The Washington Post
Debate Flares Over Afghanistan as Trump Considers Troop Withdrawal -- The New York Times
Trump’s Afghan gamble is about to begin - analysis -- Jerusalem Post
Pompeo’s latest remarks regarding Afghan peace after high level White House meeting -- Khaama Press
7 comments:
If the US wants to win in Afghanistan, they should get the Paks embroiled in a civil war. A civil war would cause the ISI to look inward instead of pulling Taliban strings.
They better get ready, for like South Vietnam and Iraq we are about to sell them down the river, Since World War 2 we like to get involved in conflicts but we never seem to try and win them. They bog down, the politicians who got us in these messes in the first place, gnash their teeth and pander for the cameras, and we abandon our allies. Every single time, hell even the first gulf war in 1991 went the same way.
Stephen,
Iraq is still there albeit without 30% of the population being represented.
In both cases it was Democrats who sold them down the river just like they used to do in the Antebellum South.
It was the Democrat Congress who cut off aid to South Vietnam. Nixon's Vietnamization worked. In 1972 the Godless Communist North Vietnamese attacked and were thrown back. After Watergate and the Dimocrat cut off funds the North Vietnamese attacked again in 1975. Nixon was not around. The Democrat allies of the Communists did their part.
In Iraq it was the 1/2-frican Obama who sold Sunnis and Kurds down the river. The Iraqi government is still there but it just represent the Shia now (~ 50% of the population).
Obungles created ISIS with his lackadaisical SOFA negotiations.
Sort Anon; Bush I sold the Kurds out after the 1st Gulf war - read your history.
Vietnam is not a fair comparison; We completed the task of stopping Communism which is why we were there. History will also tell you that.
Yup. The prior occupant of the White House, perfect as he is, does get busy at times. Keeping the universe running simply required too much time but that wasn't his miscalculation. We know the growth of ISIS in 2014 happened on his watch but he was focused, as I mentioned, on his universe and OTHERS let him down. Waddaya gonna do? What a cross to bear. No wonder his hair has grown white in some spots.
By the way, when is this robot going to learn what stoplights, automobiles, and crosswalks look like?
Bush I sold out the Kurds and the Shia. He encouraged them to rebel and then did not back them up. Bush also had Graves disease. I do not know if this was as much of a factors as him being of the Country Club / Liberal wing of the party.
And Obama sold out the Iraqis all over again.
Vietnam is a fair comparison. We wanted containment. We also wanted to keep what we had. NATO, CENTO, & SEATO were all part of that. You would not call a war in Europe where we lose West Germany but stop the Soviets form reading into France, England, Italy and Spain a clear cut victory. It would not be a victory at all if the USSR did not implode and came back for round 2 and gobbled up France.
It was a victory in that we held the greedy MFers long enough that Thailand was saved. We held them long enough that the grifters could stop squabbling amongst themselves like good socialists Kampuchea vs Vietnam; Vietnam vs China).
"In the fall of 1974, Nixon resigned under the pressure of the Watergate scandal and was succeeded by Gerald Ford. Congress cut funding to South Vietnam for the upcoming fiscal year from a proposed 1.26 billion to 700 million dollars. These two events prompted Hanoi to make an all-out effort to conquer the South."
https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/31400
"2, 4, 6 8 Who do we appreciate? Democrats! Yay!" Ho Chi Minh
never trust Western liberal media. Notice how they call the Afghan tribal leaders "Warlords". They are always trying to insert their liberal bias. Realize the press is full of bullshit, always. Do not trust them, ever.
Post a Comment