first of all NA used to hold only 5-7 % of afhanistan once, no one said they were gone did they? so in afghanistan holding territory is not the improtant thing, its the will to fight and the backing of outsiders. and as long as islam is alive in the hearts of even few, there will be continued help coming across the border in to afghanistan for taliban. and also to tell you the stupidity of these NA soldiers and so called generals, cnn today showed a footage of how the fight aronud the small village near kabul went, NA soldiers were simply running over the mountains to attack the taliban fighters on top of the mountains...i dont know how to describe it. even a 10 yr old who has played age of empires and AoK will tell u that attacking a well established postions on the top of a mountain by charging towards is commiting suicide. i dont know who planned that attack but if thats the intelligence of those generals of NA, then i really really wouldnt wanna be a soldier in NA.....
[quote]
Originally posted by who---me:
** LOL!.....Negotiations afghanistan style!**
[/quote]
Yes and the fact that the cowardly NA at hearing one rocket go off is sent fleeing for cover.
A lot of wishful thinking going on here.
First, being surrounded, and negiciating terms of surrrender is not a good situation.
Two, every day there will be Taliban drifting out of the city, and more refugees evacuating the city.
Three, food, fuel and ammo are not going into Kunduz.
Four, there are more NA arriving hourly.
Fifth, American weaponry such as AC-130 gunships are arriving daily.
Sixth, more support from Russia arrives daily.
Conclusion, time is on the side of the NA.
Originally posted by Ohioguy:
You mean on the American side in the last 15 days since the NA moved into Kabul. No Kunduz, no Kandahar, and most important of all no OSAMA.
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif
Yes of course it is, that’s why Hazara’s are defecting from the NA to the Taliban. The Uzbeks and Tajiks are at each other’s throats, and the NA are running away from every Taliban counterattacks. Not to mention the rising lawlesness and banditry across the country. Time is on somebody’s side, but certainly not the NA or American side.
[This message has been edited by Malik73 (edited November 24, 2001).]
You mean on the American side in the last 15 days since the NA moved into Kabul. No Kunduz, no Kandahar, and most important of all no OSAMA.
Malik,
It was never said this was going to be fast. Going in it was planned as 2 to 5 years. If the US was not worried about the civilian population this would be over other than the OBL search. I know what is coming here and the civilian toll could be much higher.
Hmmm,
Name one major Taliban victory.
The battle at Kunduz will be the most important so far. Here is my guess:
The attack on Kundoz will be sudden and violent. Coordinated Air attacks, and ground attacks will commemence suddenly and without warning.
The US will try to generate a huge shock value. The more NA troops that survive, the more there are to go to Khandahar. The refugees from the Taliban that make it to Khandahar will carry with them stories of attacks that they have not heard before.
Only after a full night of attacks will the NA go in, and in multiple prongs. Apparently the US commander was actually in Afghanistan, and I would imagine that war plans were reviewed and revised. The key is taking out the tanks. Tanks running at night give off a huge heat signature, even if they are hidden.
Next stop Khandahar. Once Khandahar falls, OBL will have no where to hide. Don't you think your favorite NA commanders would like that 25 mil? Maybe your favorite Gen Dostrum will get rich and go to London, or Geneva? He would fit right in wouldn't he?
I think Sunday means Sunday.
[quote]
Originally posted by Ohioguy:
**A lot of wishful thinking going on here.
First, being surrounded, and negiciating terms of surrrender is not a good situation.
Two, every day there will be Taliban drifting out of the city, and more refugees evacuating the city.
Three, food, fuel and ammo are not going into Kunduz.
Four, there are more NA arriving hourly.
Fifth, American weaponry such as AC-130 gunships are arriving daily.
Sixth, more support from Russia arrives daily.
Conclusion, time is on the side of the NA. **
[/quote]
I see you have a CNN person here.
Try to atleast read the british papers if you want objective information.
Ours is not to reason why;
Ours is but to do and die
CM,
British papers;
moreobjective...not totally objective.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by CM:
** I see you have a CNN person here.
Try to atleast read the british papers if you want objective information.
CM,
I just went through your link to the BBC and see it say's the same as CNN. The Taliban are finished. Got any other links to add.
No,
Just common sense. The US doctrine since Iraq has been one of overwhelming force. I do indeed read the British newspapers, as well as the ArabNews, and the Dawn. I even read the Pakistan News.Net and The Pakistan News service. All are to be taken with a grain of salt.
The only way to avoid huge civilian casualties is to give them time to exit the city. By attempting to negociate surrender, the world understands that time has been given to surrender. Frankly having so many hard core Taliban and foreign fighters encircled in one place is the best possible outcome. Those thousands of troops would be much more dangerous in the hills. A guerilla war becomes much less likey if fighters are bottled up in cities.
Ex-Army alluded to it, he knows what's coming. I happen to live in a military town, they teach tactics here, not too hard to figure out.
Originally posted by Ohioguy:
[quote]
Name one major Taliban victory.
[/quote]
The major one is stopping America so far failing to get it's hands on Osama. So it's 50 days now, and 15 days since your child-murdering friends the NA went into Kabul. When are you going to get him?
[quote]
The battle at Kunduz will be the most important so far. Here is my guess:
[/quote]
Keep on guessing, because Americans have been guessing for the last 15 days, and still they can't get just one town to fall.
[quote]
Next stop Khandahar.
[/quote]
Next stop. I remember some Americans predicted this 15 days ago and posted topics on Kandahar having fallen. Talk about counting all your chickens.
[quote]
Once Khandahar falls, OBL will have no where to hide.
[/quote]
Sorry but the Taliban still controls some 35% of Afghanistan, and the NA are being beaten back in places south of Kabul by the Taliban.
[quote]
Maybe your favorite Gen Dostrum will get rich and go to London, or Geneva? He would fit right in wouldn't he?
[/quote]
Sorry but Rashid Dostum is your favorite American warlord if you remember, not ours. He is busy quarreling with other American puppets like the Tajik warlords.
Wow,doesnt take much to get you guys going,does it? (Malik,Ali. etc.etc.)Sorry to burst your bubble,but your side is losing.Oh!i know,OBL is going to ride in on his white charger,to save the day for the taliban.(dream on)
If you need to take a grain of salt with the Pakistani news.
I take a gallon of salt with the US media.
Also Ex-army The BBC is not the only british media.
Read the Guardian, Independent.
The Economist and FT are just as good in my opinion far better than the two above.
You read what is truth there.
It will open your eyes.
Also Ohioguy, did you learn about guerrilla war in those tactic classes?
Or bidding your time etc?
Ours is not to reason why;
Ours is but to do and die
Also Ex-army The BBC is not the only british media.
Read the Guardian, Independent.
The Economist and FT are just as good in my opinion far better than the two above.
You read what is truth there.
It will open your eyes.
Also Ohioguy, did you learn about guerrilla war in those tactic classes?
Or bidding your time etc?
CM,
We are bidding out time. We want the Taliban hiding in the caves in winter it will make the bombing and total destruction of them much simpler and less likely to inflict civilian causalities.
I will read the other site’s also. But the question is what makes them more believable than the rest. I think all news agencies report what their followers want to hear and we have to decide the truth.
[This message has been edited by Ex-Army (edited November 24, 2001).]
Malik,
it is called consolidating gains. Remember, virtually every NA fighter has rushed to Konduz. With Konduz out of the way, pacifying the countryside is much easier.
OBL is not the only issue. I watched a news report on OBL Tshirts in the Border city in Pakistan. Sales are slowing. Everyone likes a winner. Pakistani Jihadis returning to Pakistan are telling terrible tales, and no longer does it seem fun to try to give the US a bloody nose. His image of invincability has been removed.
As far as when do we get OBL, what is the rush? Have we seen any video tapes lately? A terrorsit on the run is ineffective. Nothing about war is predictable. We may not get him in Afghanistan, but he will be hunted down. His image of invincability has been removed.
Let's get together in a week, if Konduz has not fallen, I would be very suprised. Ther will be a lot less Taliban by the end of Dec.
[quote]
Originally posted by Ohioguy:
**
Name one major Taliban victory.
**
[/quote]
Stopping the NA rape, pillage and murder people for about 4 years.
Originally posted by Ohioguy:
Yes every NA fighter you say? Remember these people practically took the North without any fight, and not it takes every fighter to converge on one town, and they still can’t take it after 15 days. In fact across strategic parts of Afghanistan - in Kunduz, just south of Kabul, in Kanadahar etc the NA have dared not meet the Taliban head to head in a fight. In fact when they have been fired on by the Taliban they have fled as fast as possible.
Really why did America attack Afghanistan then? Are you saying that you may never be able to catch him?
50 days and still counting…and he’s still not in your hands despite constant American reports that they are “near” him. According to you they are not.
Oh please not the “let’s give it a week” thing again. 15 days ago I asked you if you would get Osama, and I remember you then saying “ask me in a week”.
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif
[This message has been edited by Malik73 (edited November 24, 2001).]
CM,
Guerilla warfare is indeed well understood in the US. It is something that the US reviewed extensively after Vietnam.
Bottling up thousands of troops in Kundoz and Khandahar is exactly the wrong thing to be doing if you want to fight a guerilla war. Massing troops when the opposite side has superior firepower and control of the air is absolutely the wrong thing to do.
Guerilla warfare wins by suprise, and the lack of a need to control land. The exact opposite is happening here. The US and it’s friends have control of the timing, and the initiative. Having your back up against a river and surrounded is the worst possible outcome. Undoubtedly, the Taliban figured if they could cut off supply routes, they could prevent resupply, that is the only reason they retreated to Kundoz.
I do read the Guardian and the Independent. The Financial Times is a little stodgy for me, but I read it when I am in London and cannot get a WSJ. I should read the economist, but don’t. Don’t assume that all Americans are brain-washed, read the following:
“My own personal experience — and that of many others — has been that Americans are basically fair-minded people. They want the truth but the truth is not always easily and readily available to them; to their credit, they often realize this and seek information from other sources. This is where arabnews.com has assumed an unexpected and unforeseen importance.”
http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=10730
Malik,
Are we not talking about the surrender of Kundoz?
Find the post where I said, OBL would be caught in a week. Four weeks ago, the Taliban controlled most of the country, and you were telling me how ineffective the bombing was. If you think wars happen in a day, you are deluding yourself. Momentun has clearly turned against the Taliban.
[This message has been edited by Ohioguy (edited November 24, 2001).]
And a lot less innocent people as well Ohioguy.
Ours is not to reason why;
Ours is but to do and die
There i don’t agree.
The sites or media i have mentioned write as objectively as possible for humans.
I personally will believe something in the economist anyday even if it is covered by CNN.
I will believe the economist.
Why?
Because they print all the news, the good the bad and the ugly - ie bush.
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/biggrin.gif
CNN covers what shows the US is a good light and totally ignores news like the war in the congo and stuff happening in africa.
Ours is not to reason why;
Ours is but to do and die