Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Share
    avatar
    Russian Patriot

    Posts : 1169
    Points : 2063
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 26
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  Russian Patriot on Tue Aug 18, 2009 1:12 am

    Car Bomb Explodes in Kabul Outside NATO HQ, Near US Embassy

    By Steve Herman
    Kabul
    15 August 2009


    A suicide bomber in the Afghan capital, Kabul, blew up a car in a heavily fortified section of the city. At least seven people were killed and 91 others wounded, including children in an attack that comes five days before Afghanistan's presidential election.

    Afghan and NATO authorities say the car exploded on the road in front of the headquarters of the International Security Assistance Force, near the U.S. Embassy and the Presidential Palace.

    NATO says some ISAF soldiers are among the wounded. But most of the casualties appear to be Afghan civilians, including children who congregate in the area to sell chewing gum to passersby.

    An ambulance driver told VOA he saw numerous dead and injured. He says all of the people he transported were civilians, including women.

    Bloodied and dazed wounded stood near firemen who extinguished the flames coming from the vehicle that had detonated.

    Windows of nearby shops were shattered. The force of the blast rattled windows several kilometers away and sent a plume of smoke into the Saturday morning sky. It is the first such attack in Kabul in six months, although this month a barrage of rockets was launched at the capital, most landing harmlessly.

    Kabul police criminal investigations director, Brigadier-General Sayed Abdul Ghaffar, tells reporters at the scene this is obviously a suicide car bombing.

    General Ghaffar says the identity of the bomber will be difficult to ascertain because he blew himself into many pieces, but investigators hope to arrest his accomplices.

    Taliban claims responsibility

    The Taliban, in phone calls to news agencies, claimed responsibility for the car bomb, saying it contained 500 kilograms of explosives and the intended target was the U.S. Embassy.

    Embassy spokesperson Fleur Cowen says the American diplomatic compound was not hit. Cowan said, "I was in my office when a blast occurred a little after 8:30 a.m. and I certainly heard it but I didn't feel anything. We're still gathering information, however, to the best of our knowledge all U.S. Embassy personnel have been accounted for and there has been no damage to the Embassy."

    General Ghaffar acknowledges the attackers were able to penetrate an area of the capital that is supposed to be heavily secure, less than a week before Afghans go to the polls for the first national election since 2004.

    Officials urge Afghans to vote

    The police official says this suicide bombing should not deter Afghans from voting or derail the election.

    President Hamid Karzai, running for re-election, earlier in the week urged citizens not to be intimidated by Taliban threats to attack voting sites and disrupt balloting.

    A successful election is considered as a key test for this country's fledgling democracy and the ability of the joint Afghan and international forces to provide adequate security.


    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2009/08/mil-090815-voa01.htm
    avatar
    Russian Patriot

    Posts : 1169
    Points : 2063
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 26
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Post-ISAF situation

    Post  Russian Patriot on Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:57 pm

    Dozens of Taliban Killed in Clash With US, Afghan Forces


    By Steve Herman
    New Delhi
    12 September 2009


    Details are emerging about an hours-long intense battle in western Afghanistan that has resulted in significant casualties for the Taliban. Two American service personnel and several Afghan soldiers also are reported to have been killed.

    A World Food Program convoy under Afghan military escort came under attack by insurgents Saturday in the Bala Baluk district in Farah province.

    The convoy, which included 14 contracted trucks carrying 500 metric tons of food rations, was targeted by roadside bombs and mortar fire.

    U.S. Navy Lt. Commander Christine Sidenstricker tells VOA News that a U.S. quick response force was called in, engaged in combat and then radioed for additional help.

    "As the engagement went on and the enemy continued with strong fire, air support was called for," said Commander Sidenstricker. "Helicopters and airplanes came and started first with a show of force. Sometimes simply flying overhead is enough to make the enemy disperse and allow the engagement to end. When that did not happen bombs were dropped and that ended the engagement."

    The U.N. World Food Program says none of its trucks were damaged nor any of its personnel injured and the rations were delivered.

    Afghan Army and provincial officials say up to 50 Taliban died in the battle, which lasted for several hours.

    A woman and a teenage girl are also reported to have died. Commander Sidenstricker says that is under investigation.

    "We also have reports of civilian casualties, but the info we have from the Afghan National Army on the ground is that it is believed that that was caused by insurgent mortar fire," she said.

    The Bala Baluk district, dominated by the Taliban, has been the scene of previous intense battles, some of which have caused significant civilian deaths.

    This latest incident comes at a time when Afghanistan is witnessing its worst violence of the eight-year-long war following the ouster of the Taliban from power in 2001.

    U.S. forces make up the majority of the 100,000 foreign military personnel in Afghanistan. The Obama administration is considering an increase in troop levels to counter increased military casualties from improvised explosive devices.

    A resurgent Taliban have been able to extend their influence to larger chunks of the country, which is now facing potential political turmoil following a presidential election tainted by allegations of fraud.


    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2009/09/mil-090913-voa01.htm
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Thirty US troops have been killed in Afghanistan.

    Post  ahmedfire on Sun Aug 07, 2011 12:10 am


    Shocked Shocked

    US special forces Afghan helicopter downed 'by Taliban

    Thirty US troops, said to be mostly special forces, have been killed, reportedly when a Taliban rocket downed their helicopter in east Afghanistan.

    Seven Afghan commandos and a civilian interpreter were also on the Chinook, officials say.

    US sources say the special forces were from the Navy Seal unit which killed Osama Bin Laden, but are "unlikely" to be the same personnel.

    This is the largest single US loss of life in the Afghan conflict.

    The numbers of those killed have now been confirmed by the Nato-led mission in Afghanistan.

    The Chinook went down in the early hours of Saturday in Wardak province, said a statement from President Hamid Karzai's office.

    It was returning from an operation against the Taliban in which eight insurgents are believed to have been killed.

    A senior official of President Barack Obama's administration said the helicopter was apparently shot down, Associated Press news agency reports.

    An official with the Nato-led coalition in Afghanistan told the New York Times the helicopter was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade.

    The BBC's Quentin Sommerville in Kabul says it is rare for the Taliban to shoot down aircraft.

    The Taliban say they have modified their rocket-propelled grenades to improve their accuracy but that may not be true, our correspondent says.
    'Enemy activity'

    "The president of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan expresses his sympathy and deep condolences to US President Barack Obama and the family of the victims," the statement from President Karzai said.

    President Obama, too, issued a statement paying tribute to the Americans and Afghans who died in the crash.

    "We will draw inspiration from their lives, and continue the work of securing our country and standing up for the values that they embodied. We also mourn the Afghans who died alongside our troops in pursuit of a more peaceful and hopeful future for their country," the statement said.

    Reports say more than 20 of the US dead were Navy Seals.

    A US military source has confirmed to the BBC that they were from Seal Team Six - the same unit which killed Bin Laden in Pakistan in May.

    However, US officials have told both they BBC and AP they do not believe that any of those who took part in the Bin Laden operation were on the downed helicopter.

    The size of Team Six, an elite unit within the Seals, which is officially called the Naval Special Warfare Development Group, is not known.

    Several air force personnel, a dog and his handler, a civilian interpreter, and the helicopter crew were also on board, AP reports.

    The Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) said it was mounting an operation to recover the helicopter and find out why it crashed. It said there had been "enemy activity in the area" where it went down.

    A Taliban spokesman said insurgents had brought down the helicopter with a rocket after US and Afghan troops attacked a house in the Sayd Abad district of Wardak where insurgents were meeting late on Friday, Associated Press said.

    Sayd Abad, near the province of Kabul, is known to have a strong Taliban presence.

    A Wardak government spokesman quoted by AFP news agency agreed with this, saying the helicopter had been hit as it was taking off.

    A local resident told the BBC Pashto service a rocket had hit the helicopter.

    "What we saw was that when we were having our pre-dawn [Ramadan] meal, Americans landed some soldiers for an early raid," said Mohammad Wali Wardag.

    "This other helicopter also came for the raid. We were outside our rooms on a veranda and saw this helicopter flying very low, it was hit by a rocket and it was on fire."
    Map of Afghanistan showing Wardak province

    There are currently about 140,000 foreign troops - about 100,000 of them American - in Afghanistan, fighting the Taliban insurgency and training local troops to take over security.

    All foreign combat forces are due to leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014 and some troop withdrawals have already taken place.

    Nato has begun the process of handing over control of security in some areas to local forces, with Bamiyan becoming the first province to pass to Afghan control in mid-July.

    An increase in US troop numbers last year has had some success combating the Taliban in the south of Afghanistan, but attacks in the north, which was previously relatively quiet, have picked up in recent months.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-14430735
    [center]
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  ahmedfire on Sun Aug 07, 2011 12:16 am

    Dangerous territory: The helicopter crashed in the Tangi Valley in the volatile Wardak province, which borders the Taliban stronghold province of Kabul




    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 07, 2011 5:46 am

    A Chinook is a very large vulnerable target, and ironically the RPG is such a dumb weapon that it is hard to stop.

    Firing flares and using sophisticated Directed Infra Red Counter Measures (DIRCM)systems do little to stop unguided rockets.

    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  ahmedfire on Sun Aug 07, 2011 3:43 pm


    30 soldier,very big loss !!

    americans should learn the lesson and withdraw from there ,they will never ever evade these losses ,

    Is russia help taliban ?
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  ahmedfire on Tue Aug 09, 2011 2:52 pm


    How the Taliban Brought Down the SEALs' Chopper

    I have flown in CH-47 Chinook helicopters over Afghanistan, like the one shot down on Saturday, which killed 38 people, including 22 members of the elite SEAL Team 6. Believe me, it's not a ride for the fainthearted. In addition to needing straps for rucksacks and weapons, you need one for your stomach.

    It's really very simple: the pilots up front do everything they can to minimize their bird's exposure to enemy fire. How do they do that? By flying low and fast. It's called a "nap of the earth" flight, wherein the helicopter becomes little more than an airborne toboggan, rising as it climbs a rugged peak, then precipitously diving down the other side. People on the ground can barely sense the chopper's approach before it flashes by overhead and then disappears within seconds.

    Valleys can make for good flight routes, unless there are Taliban down below. It's always disconcerting to be traveling at up to 140 knots and see terrain out both sides of the chopper.

    These kinds of flight profiles work well, except for one thing: choppers can't fly quickly when taking off or landing. They have to slow down before entering a hover to land. Taking off presents the same problem, in reverse.

    So at the beginning and end of every mission, there are several seconds when these helos are basically flying in slow motion. That's not a problem if you're taking off or landing at Bagram, the big U.S. military base north of Kabul.

    But it can be deadly when you're trying to insert Special Operations forces into the Tangi Valley to aid a Ranger unit that is under attack there. That's the terrible reality the CH-47 pilots faced early Saturday morning: they had to fly low and slow to deliver their troops, but the enemy was awake, alert and already fighting when the chopper arrived on the scene. Even at night — especially at night — a Chinook makes a lot of noise as it prepares to land.

    That's when a Taliban insurgent down below — alerted to the CH-47's approach by its engines' roar — spied the chopper no more than a couple of hundred yards away. He apparently fired his rocket-propelled grenade, as he has likely done hundreds of times before. But this time its whoosh was followed by a boom as the grenade hit the helicopter, which exploded and fell to the ground.

    http://battleland.blogs.time.com/2011/08/08/how-the-taliban-brought-down-the-seals-chopper/?iid=tsmodule




    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:34 am

    Is russia help taliban ?

    I doubt it.

    I would rather suspect the RPG used for the kill has chinese markings on it.

    The US spent billions of dollars through the Pakistani ISI supplying the muj forces against the Soviets. Most of the Afghans were trained in Soviet military equipment so supplying US equipment made no sense and would reveal to the world what the world already knew.

    Instead they supplied the Muj with captured Arab weapons from Israel as a use for them and then they started buying chinese made weapons so that it could be said that they captured the weapons from the Soviets, but any close examination of the weapons makes it clear their origin was not Afghan army stocks or captured Soviet weapons.

    Right now Iran have not supported opposition to US forces in Iraq or Afghanistan because Saddam was an enemy to Iran and the Taleban were also an enemy. When the US leaves Iran will likely move in to get influence and promote regimes friendly to it to power.

    Russia will likely offer assistance too but give its history will not want to move forces in there in any way. Russia wants a stable peaceful Afghanistan... if the US can create that and not try to built lots of permanent military bases then Russia will not try to inflict pain on the US.

    Of course if the US starts building permanent US military bases in Afghanistan and sets up CIA stations etc the US might find its logistics bridge through Russia is closed and the opposition might start getting the odd more powerful RPG.

    To be frank the Taleban were terrible for the Afghans but did little to their neighbours so if the choices are American radar stations and CIA intel bases with enormous amounts of opium crossing the border on its way to Russia or the Taleban and no drugs, I think the choice is pretty clear.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10067
    Points : 10557
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Post-ISAF Afghanistan

    Post  George1 on Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:53 am

    Current withdrawal of the U.S. and its NATO allies' forces from Afghanistan is complicated by a number of factors, which raise some questions that have no adequate answers. This circumstance leads to uncertainty of both the transition process and the situation in Afghanistan and around it.

    The most important question is who power in Afghanistan will belong to after the withdrawal of the coalition forces. Today’s government with its overcentralized power structure has little chance to survive: it seems that wider range of various political forces including the Taliban and its allies will have a share in it.

    Now all the actors on the Afghan political scene recognize that negotiations with insurgents and their integration in the political process are extremely necessary. For that the Taliban has to meet three conditions: they must renounce violence, break ties with al-Qaeda and abide by the Afghan constitution. Still it is unclear if the Afghan government is able to invite the Taliban, the Haqqani network and other groups of extremists to take part in negotiations. The September 20, 2011 assassination of Burhanuddin Rabbani, the Chairman of the High Peace Council, calls it into question. Even if they sit down at the negotiating table, it also seems unclear whether they will be ready to sign an agreement that would satisfy the U.S.A. and the Afghan government given the fact that the insurgents believe they will outlive NATO. It can’t be ruled out as is the possibility that the insurgents may use the talks to their own advantage and violate an agreement any moment convenient for them to do it.

    That is why it seems hardly probable that negotiations will produce a strong agreement acceptable to the Taliban which would exclude the risk of their takeover after the U.S. forces withdrawal, the division of the country, creation of some new form of Northern Alliance and a civil conflict. It is equally unlikely that the Taliban will accommodate such values as respect for human rights and effective democracy that the outside world has been trying to bring to Afghanistan.

    As to the current talks taking place in Qatar, they do not have any significance since the chief player on the Afghan political field – the Afghan government does not take part in them. Moreover, these talks are irregular and under a constant threat of being easily disrupted, as it happened recently when the Taliban suddenly refused to continue the dialogue with the U.S. The Taliban does not seek to make decisions acceptable to Hamid Karzai and his Western partners, since the time is on their side. The insurgents may come to treat talks as a delaying tactic, or a way to win the war by political means, because they do not realize that they can be defeated and have all the reason to believe that the only thing they have to do is to outplay NATO in a battle of political attrition.

    Besides, these talks need to include one more participant – Pakistan, on whose efforts the outcome of the talks would largely depend. By the autumn 2011 already sour relations between the U.S. and Pakistan had further deteriorated and became nearly hostile after the U.S. troops had assassinated bin Laden and 24 Pakistani soldiers had been killed by U.S. forces on the Afghan Pakistani border in November 26. The deterioration in U.S. - Pakistani relations forced Pakistan to expel U.S. advisors, shut down the U.S. unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) base in Pakistan, and limit flights of these vehicles over this country.

    Nowadays the Pakistani establishment does not show any sign of restoring even a minimal level of cooperation with the U.S. Under these circumstances, Pakistan almost closed NATO supply routes passing through its territory.

    Islamabad has a reason to believe that after the withdrawal of the coalition forces there will emerge a sort of power vacuum, which would give it a chance to take an active part in creating a new Kabul regime, remembering that in 2014 a new president of Afghanistan will be elected. It can’t be ruled out that he may turn out to be a Pakistani protégé. Pakistan in its turn will seek influence over, at least, the Pashtun areas and will use Afghanistan to provide strategic depth against India.

    Another factor that has an impact on the process of NATO withdrawal is the position of neighboring countries – Iran, Pakistan, China, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and regional powers – Russia, Turkey, India and Saudi Arabia. In the context of the situation in Afghanistan, they have many common goals – they seek to stop hostilities and military presence of foreign countries, to provide security and stability, to fight drug-trafficking and to secure national unity of Afghanistan. However, each country pursues its own interests and intentions which are not always in line with national interests of Afghanistan.

    One of the countries playing a key role on the Afghan field is Iran, whose approach towards its neighbor proves to be ambivalent. On the one hand, it renders economic assistance (since 2002 – nearly $1 b.), mainly to the populace of western provinces and to Hazara people residing in the central part of the country. On the other hand, Iran takes a tough stance in pushing out Afghan refugees (their number exceeds 1 million people) from its territory and сovertly supports various groups of insurgents striving to undermine the U.S.-led international coalition’s position. Iran cooperates with Pakistan and India as well as with Turkey in the framework of various agreements on the settlement of the Afghan problem. It participates in the SCO as an observer and maintains close contacts with Russia.

    As to the position of China, it sees the economic cooperation in the region as its main priority. Still its role in Afghanistan is confined to some small projects. A big project of copper deposit procession in Ainak to the south of Kabul looks as an exception. Generally, China is more interested in Pakistan as a partner and ally that provides strategic depth against India. In its Asian politics, Islamabad, in its turn, heavily relies on Beijing. In 2011 Pakistan reportedly asked China to “take upon” the U.S. role in Afghanistan as well as sought major increases in Chinese aid and support to allow Pakistan to reduce its dependence on US aid. Pakistan also has made a point in 2011 describing China as an “all weather” friend compared to the U.S., which it sees as untrustworthy, abandoning the region again. According to press reports, during the visit to Kabul in April 2011 Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Gilani told Afghan President Hamid Karzai that the US had let them both down and that they had to turn to China.

    Beijing seeks a stable Afghanistan to minimize the need for a long- term U.S. presence on China's western border. It continues to seek improved relations with, and stability and security for, Afghanistan. Generally, Afghanistan finds itself on the periphery of Chinese political interests. Nevertheless, as a leader of SCO, Beijing will play a growing role in Afghanistan after NATO withdrawal.

    The Northern neighbors of Afghanistan maintain good relations with it and render limited economic assistance in accordance with their possibilities, mainly in terms energy resources supply and communications development. Each needs security along its border with Afghanistan, and each wants to stop the inflow of Afghan drugs onto its territory. In practice, however, the near and mid-term options are limited at best.

    That said during the withdrawal of the coalition forces the role of Central Asian countries is significantly increasing in the first place in the capacity of transit area for NATO forces. Nevertheless each of them pursues its own goals though they are members of a number of regional organizations. They play host to the NATO Northern Distribution Network, which is an important advantage to Russia and its allies, who provided military bases as well as multiple ground and air transportation routes into and out of Afghanistan for U.S. military aircrafts. Besides, Uzbekistan has recently constructed a 75 km-long railroad from the border town of Hairatan to the Northern Afghan capital Mazar-i-Sharif, which is supposed to be actively used by NATO forces pulling out of Afghanistan.

    In the near term, while NATO troops are leaving Afghanistan, Central Asian countries along with Russia and China will have to elaborate a strategy of resilience to political and ideological expansion of terrorism and religious extremism in order to maintain security in the region, taking into account potential increase of the Taliban and their allies’ role in these countries (Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, “Hezb ut-tahrir” and so on).

    Another problem that should make NATO anxious is that neither the U.S. nor its allies have a clear strategy of power transfer in to local authorities in Afghanistan. This is not only about tactics and exit strategy from Afghanistan but about something more significant – to provide conditions that will allow Afghanistan to remain a stable and secure state after 2014. So far, no there have been no signs evidencing that it is feasible. Currently the U.S. and its allies have no idea of what to do in Pakistan, Central Asia and Southern Asian states after 2014.

    After all, the success of transition will depend on the Afghan government strategy that provides for its responsibility for achieving and maintaining security and stability. There has been made some progress in creating the Afghan army, but without a well-functioning state the Afghan National Security Forces could collapse. Moreover, during the transition Afghanistan and the Afghan government may encounter a deep economic recession when the international financing is fundamentally cut.

    Judging by the current situation the Afghan government and its Western partners in the course of this process will face a number of difficult problems and challenges that won’t have practical solutions.

    http://russiancouncil.ru/en/inner/?id_4=395#top


    Last edited by George1 on Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:13 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10067
    Points : 10557
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  George1 on Tue Aug 07, 2012 8:33 pm

    Central Asia: A Look at Sources of Violence and Instability

    There is a general assumption that Afghanistan is a notorious exporter of violence and that the pullout of US and NATO troops in 2014 from the country portends trouble for the neighboring states of Central Asia. Yet this assumption rests on shaky evidence. The recent fighting in Tajikistan reminds us that disorder and violence in Central Asia are homegrown phenomena.

    Experts in Russia, China, the U.S., and Europe are worried that Afghanistan’s evil twins – drug trafficking and the export of religious extremism – will bring chaos and violence to Central Asia after 2014. To address these threats policy makers agree that security assistance to Central Asian governments needs to be ramped up. Highest on the list of what needs to be done is an expansion of train-and-equip programs for border guards and local security forces. In addition, the United States is considering leaving armored personal carriers and other military equipment in the region after the pull-out from Afghanistan. Russia, meanwhile, is negotiating with Tajikistan to extend a base deal that would permanently station 6,000 Russian troops in the country.

    While these policies may seem like sound strategy, the problem is that none of them address the causes of instability in Central Asia, and some may even exacerbate existing problems. The basic truth is that security threats in Central Asia develop from within, and are not imported from elsewhere.

    An example: two weeks ago, as Tajik soldiers were engaged in firefights with gunmen in Khorog, the capital of the autonomous region of Gorno-Badakhshan, I was skyping with a friend in Dushanbe. In reply to my question of what was going on he said: “It’s simple: one gang of drug traffickers is fighting with another gang of drug traffickers over their turf. Both wear official Tajik uniforms.” His explanation resonates with many inside and outside Tajikistan. Even if the Tajik government initially stressed links to Afghan militants and spoke of eight Afghan nationals with possible links to the Taliban, al Qaeda or the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan that had been detained, little evidence or even logical arguments could be produced to bolster these claims.

    In fact there is very little to indicate that Afghanistan’s evil twins after 2014 will influence the security situation in Central Asia more than they do already. Take the export of religious extremism: the Tajik civil war in the 1990s did have a religious component, and United Tajik Opposition commanders enjoyed a safe haven in Afghanistan. But the conflict itself arose out of internal political contradictions, rather than being exported from Afghanistan. Similarly, recent flare-ups of violent religious extremism in Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan developed within a local context and as a reaction to repression of religious and other fundamental civic and economic rights of Central Asian citizens by their governments.

    Looking at drug trafficking, opium derivatives such as heroin are generally not smuggled into the region, but cross the border by the truckload on established roads and through official checkpoints. Few seriously contest that the biggest drug traffickers in Central Asia are government officials, or at least individuals or groups closely connected to the governments in the region.

    If one considers instances of violence in Central Asia over the past two decades – including the riots in Uzgen and Osh in 1990, the Tajik civil war in the mid-1990s, the events in Andijan in 2005, the violent revolutions in Kyrgyzstan in 2005 and 2010, the clashes in Osh in June 2010, the riots in western Kazakhstan in 2011 or the fighting in Tajikistan in 2010 and 2012 – Afghanistan really isn’t a factor. A multitude of local factors were behind these outbursts of violence, including the political dynamics inherent in non-democratic states, conflicts over resources and the inability of states and societies to manage conflicts.

    Traditional security assistance to Central Asian governments as currently conceived in Brussels, Washington, Moscow or Beijing does little to address these problems. Given some evidence that governments in the region are more part of the problem than they are of the solution current assistance programs are counterintuitive. Even initiatives that specifically include an element aimed at professionalizing relations between uniformed officials and civilians such as western-funded police training or border management assistance programs generally fail to deliver results in these areas.

    The stated aim of foreign security assistance in Central Asia is to promote stability in the region itself. The first step towards providing such assistance should be to stop assuming that Afghanistan is the biggest threat to regional stability and to acknowledge the homegrown nature of the threat.

    http://www.eurasianet.org/node/65760
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 08, 2012 1:02 am

    nd these outbursts of violence, including the political dynamics inherent in non-democratic states, conflicts over resources and the inability of states and societies to manage conflicts.

    I strongly disagree... the source of the problem is the drugs coming from Afghanistan and passing through fairly poor neighbouring states. The money that changes hands to get the drugs through comes from the sales of those drugs and goes into corrupt pockets to ensure the supply line is kept operating.

    The solution is not to increase Russian presence in the region, the solution is for everyone to leave Afghanistan and for the Taleban to take over again.

    Now that solution will be bad for the west because they will have lost face.

    It will be bad for the women of Afghanistan because they will return to the middle ages in terms of their futures.

    When the Taleban crack down on drugs however it will be good for Afghanistans neighbours.

    To be brutally honest... I think the best thing that could happen to Afghanistan is to split it between the north and south... the south can join Pakistans independent northern areas, or become part of Pakistan if it wants, while the north can join the countries to the north... the split along ethnic lines.

    Once the Western forces pull out I would like to see the locals or the neighbours to the north bombing the heck out of the poppy fields. Corruption means it wont be the governments run by officials that accept money to let the drugs through their countries so it will probably have to be Russia... perhaps an attack UCAV carrying ZAB-250 incendiary bombs in the middle of the night.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10067
    Points : 10557
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  George1 on Wed Aug 08, 2012 2:37 am

    Βritain intervened in 19th century, Russia at 80s, now US-led ISAF. I think next is China to fight the Islamic fundamentalists. Smile
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:07 am

    Actually Britain invaded Afghanistan about 5 times... they wanted a land route for silk and opium from China to Britain that bypassed the south china sea and lots of island areas where danger lurked.

    The huge irony is that the opium is now grown in Afghanistan rather than China...

    Would also add that it was the Soviets in the 1980s, and not so much to conquer, as to eliminate a CIA infestation that had migrated from Iran after the overthrow of the CIA puppet Shah of Iran in 1979.

    The Soviet fear was the CIA on a Soviet border via Pakistan and Afghanistan.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10067
    Points : 10557
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  George1 on Wed Aug 15, 2012 12:32 am

    US to downsize A'stan contingent

    The Pentagon will downsize the US contingent in Afghanistan to 68,000 by the end of next month, and plans to complete the withdrawal by the end of 2014.

    Defense Secretary Leon Panetta confirmed on Tuesday that the US would stick to the pullout timetable despite the continuing tensions in Afghanistan. Panetta said the Afghan military was already experienced enough to singlehandedly ensure domestic security.

    Meanwhile, the combat phase of the US-led military operation in Afghanistan is still underway.

    http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_15/US-to-downsize-Astan-contingent/
    avatar
    Russian Patriot

    Posts : 1169
    Points : 2063
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 26
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  Russian Patriot on Thu Aug 16, 2012 2:00 am

    Just why did I see this thread : Afghanistan is my area of specialism.


    With the recent Green on blue attacks ( Afghan forces turning on U.S trainers) you can see that as soon the U.S leaves, Karzai will fail and there will be more sectarian violence especially in Kunduz and Khost provinces of northern Afghanistan where the Haqqanni and Uzbekistan Islamic Front operate (read Al Qaeda allies).

    Kandahar will be Taliban ruled again opening the way start to Highway 101 (straight to Kabul and Mosul).

    There will be inter-fighting between Afghans ...
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:26 am

    Hate to say it, but I think Russia would be far better off with the Taleban in control of Afghanistan. They would wipe out the drug fields and they rarely tried to spread the word outside their borders.

    Afghanistan on the other hand will go back to the middle ages under the taleban and continuing outside efforts to support one side or the other will just prolong the fighting and dying.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10067
    Points : 10557
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  George1 on Fri Aug 17, 2012 5:25 pm

    Russia wants to know about America’s Afghan plans –defense official

    Russia is urging its U.S. partners to clarify plans regarding their military presence in Afghanistan after 2014, if such exist, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said.

    "We have a question: if the ISAF [the International Security Assistance Force] leaves Afghanistan in 2014, where it is staying with a certain mandate, does this mean that it has fulfilled its mandate?" Antonov said at a press conference in Dushanbe on Thursday.

    "If this is so, then this force should report to the body that has given it this mandate," he said.

    However, what Russia is concerned about is that the U.S. plans to preserve its military presence there after 2014 when the ISAF led by the U.S. should complete its withdrawal, he said.

    "We would like to receive additional explanations from our American partners regarding the prospects for military presence there - without bases or some centers and so on. We would like to learn from them whether American military bases will appear near the CSTO [the Collective Security Treaty Organization] borders," he said.

    The CSTO is comprised of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan.

    Antonov said he did not see the need for the U.S. to deploy its military facilities in one of these countries.

    http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_09/84545928/
    avatar
    Russian Patriot

    Posts : 1169
    Points : 2063
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 26
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  Russian Patriot on Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:01 am



    Here what Americans face that Afghan forces will face.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:12 am

    The irony is that the Afghan forces are much better equipped to fight Taleban than the American forces were.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3203
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  flamming_python on Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:18 pm

    GarryB wrote:The irony is that the Afghan forces are much better equipped to fight Taleban than the American forces were.

    Well, they won't be fighting the Taliban either way - something tells me; if even now they are killing each other and Coalition troops at every oppurtunity.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16172
    Points : 16803
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:28 am

    The best place to hide your forces is within the enemy forces.

    It is a fairly old trick to infiltrate government forces, though the random attacks on the trainers/occupiers is an interesting touch... it requires people willing to die for the cause, which would probably make most westerners uncomfortable because for the last few centuries war basically meant making the other guy die for his country.

    I rather suspect that even long after western forces have left companies like Blackwater will stay in place, ignoring local and international law and act as a private army to whomever starts extracting the mineral wealth of the region.

    There are likely enormous reserves of exotic minerals that have been too deep for simple manual excavation methods to be able to recover and I am sure there are plenty of companies just chomping at the bit to get in there and dig.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Russian Patriot

    Posts : 1169
    Points : 2063
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 26
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  Russian Patriot on Sun Aug 26, 2012 1:06 am

    Afghan Public Protection Force to Protect NATO Bases

    RIA Novosti

    00:35 24/08/2012 KABUL, August 24 (RIA Novosti) - The Afghan Public Protection Force (APPF) is ready to provide security for NATO military bases throughout the country, APPF Deputy Minister Mujtaba Patang said.

    Speaking at a news briefing on Thursday, Patang said the remaining 37 private security firms, which currently protect NATO facilities in Afghanistan, would be dissolved and replaced with the APPF personnel by March 2013.

    The announcement comes in a wake of a spike in attacks against NATO-led troops by Afghan security personnel or Taliban militants clad in military or police uniforms.

    The assaults, called green-on-blue or insider attacks, caused the deaths of at least 40 International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) troops this year.

    All troops at NATO headquarters in Kabul and all bases across Afghanistan have recently been ordered to carry loaded weapons around the clock.

    Patang said that the loyalty of APPF personnel was guaranteed by their tribal leaders and provincial council members and that there was no enemy infiltration within these forces.

    The APPF currently has 30,000 personnel, and the number is expected to rise to 100,000 after 2014, when foreign troops complete their withdrawal from the war-torn country.

    NATO has supported the move towards a public security force staffed by Afghans and has been helping to train the APPF personnel since 2010.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2012/08/mil-120824-rianovosti01.htm
    avatar
    Russian Patriot

    Posts : 1169
    Points : 2063
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 26
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  Russian Patriot on Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:23 am

    clearly related:

    ISAF, Afghans Working to Curb Insider Threats, Spokesman Says

    By Karen Parrish
    American Forces Press Service

    WASHINGTON, Sept. 4, 2012 – U.S. special operations forces have paused training for 1,000 new Afghan local police recruits, but partnered operations between coalition forces and established members of the local police remain ongoing, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said here today.

    Little said the training pause will allow an “intensive re-vetting process” for all 16,000 members of local police units across Afghanistan. Insider attacks against coalition forces have risen sharply in recent months, and the press secretary noted the Taliban see local police forces as both a threat and an opportunity.

    Little told reporters that during a weekly briefing earlier today between Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Marine Corps Gen. John R. Allen, commander of U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan, the general “reported … that insurgents are alarmed by the ALP, whose legitimacy and local intelligence networks make it exceedingly difficult for the insurgency to maintain or establish a foothold in local communities.”

    The added strength local police units bring to small villages, Little said, is one reason why the Taliban would like to exploit the local police. “And it is why, in part, it is so important that the vetting process be sound for all members of the ALP,” he added.

    ISAF officials have described the local police program as a way to augment the national police force at the village level. Local police members have authority only within their own villages, officials have said.

    “While the ALP is not part of the [Afghan national security forces], we believe they are critical to helping provide for security for the Afghan people,” Little told reporters.

    The press secretary emphasized that training continues unabated for Afghanistan’s army and national police forces.

    “The goal remains to train and field 352,000 [Afghan national security forces] by October, and we remain on track to reach that milestone,” he said.

    NATO’s International Security Assistance Force is working with the Afghan government to thwart insider threats and to develop a joint protection plan, Little added. Everyone involved takes the issue of insider threats very seriously, he said, noting ISAF issued a tactical directive in March requiring specific and tailored force protection measures.

    “Personnel at increased risk from an insider attack were required to undertake specific close-quarter combat and active shooter training,” Little said. “All commands … are required to conduct refresher training. This is particularly for mentors and others who routinely work side by side with Afghans.”

    The directive also required additional in-theater cultural awareness training, and instructed coalition force units to create safe zones inside Afghan security force compounds where they can defend themselves if necessary, the press secretary continued. More recently, he added, there's been a great deal of focus on small-unit leadership in counterintelligence matters, “that will help identify potential attackers early on.”

    Little acknowledged the risk of insider threats will never diminish to zero.

    “This is something that we have to … constantly be on the lookout for. This is a war zone. … But what we can try to do is put as much effort into identifying potential attackers as early on as possible, to try to stop insider attacks,” he said.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2012/09/mil-120904-afps03.htm?_m=3n.002a.598.dd0ao031i6.jix

    connect2raza

    Posts : 52
    Points : 103
    Join date : 2012-12-21

    Three die in attack on US consulate in western Afghanistan

    Post  connect2raza on Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:59 am

    Three police officers have died and 18 people have been injured in a militant attack on the US consulate in Afghanistan’s western city of Herat, reports say


    Militants detonated a car packed with explosives at the entrance of the consulate compound in Herat at around 6:00 a.m. local time (0200 GMT) on Friday.

    Reports say a heavy gun battle broke out between Afghan security forces and militants near the consulate following the massive explosion.

    US helicopters reportedly landed in the compound to evacuate the injured.

    The US Department of State said, “There are no American casualties. At this point there may be one wounded contract security member and there are likely wounded Afghan police.”

    Several people were also wounded in the attack.

    Taliban spokesman Qari Yousef Ahmadi has claimed responsibility for the incident on behalf of the militant group.

    The attack took place two days after the Taliban militants fired several rockets at Bagram Air Base in Parwan Province, which is the largest US military base in Afghanistan.

    There has been a surge in the number of militant assaults against Afghan forces, foreign troops, and civilians in Afghanistan in recent months.

    US-led troops and Afghan forces are falling prey to Taliban attacks on an almost daily basis.

    The Taliban recently attacked a US military base in the town of Torkham, Nangarhar Province, sparking a lengthy gun battle between American forces and gunmen.

    According to icasualties.org, over 3,370 US-led soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since the invasion of the country in 2001, which was conducted as part of the so-called war on terror.

    The increasing number of military casualties in Afghanistan has caused widespread anger in the United States and other NATO member states, undermining public support for the Afghan war.
    HERE IS THE LINK http://presstv.com/detail/2013/09/13/323621/us-consulate-in-herat-attacked/ .

    connect2raza

    Posts : 52
    Points : 103
    Join date : 2012-12-21

    AFGHAN MUJAHIDEENS attack US airbase in eastern Afghanistan.

    Post  connect2raza on Sat Sep 14, 2013 11:49 pm

    Taliban militants have launched an attack on a US airbase in the eastern Afghan province of Nangarhar.
    HERE IS THE LINK http://presstv.com/detail/2013/09/13/323782/taliban-attack-us-airbase-in-afghanistan/ .

    Sponsored content

    Re: Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. Afghan Army

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Jul 23, 2017 2:53 pm