Afghanistan - News & Discussions

[MLRS]

Afghan special forces commander defects with guns to taliban allied group


Is this the begininng?? Will such things become common once western forces leave?? Can ANA really hold ground??

I would be more worried if he switched over to the Taliban, but this is Hezbi Islami. It is a peculiar situation, on the one hand they fight an insurgency against Americans, but on the other hand they will also run for presidential elections next year. They also have people in the government right now, as advisors and ministers.

 

[nrupatunga]

I would be more worried if he switched over to the Taliban, but this is Hezbi Islami. It is a peculiar situation, on the one hand they fight an insurgency against Americans, but on the other hand they will also run for presidential elections next year. They also have people in the government right now, as advisors and ministers.

Confused. These people take money aid from west while in government and use the same money to fight western forces on a'stan??? And west stands watching this ?? Totally confused????

Ya i know even pakis do the same. But still how is this possible so overtly???

 

[MLRS]

Confused. These people take money aid from west while in government and use the same money to fight western forces on a'stan??? And west stands watching this ?? Totally confused????

Ya i know even pakis do the same. But still how is this possible so overtly???

I guess at this point America doesn't care about Taliban and other insurgents. They just want to focus on Al Qaeda. But this attitude will come back to bite them.

 

[datguy79]

India should give us some choppers and artillery guns instead of building a ridiculously extravagant parliament building which we don't need:

 

[nrupatunga]

@datguy79 looks like far from the city. it seems still lot to be done before it gets completed. Also why dont you people dont need a parliament??

 

[datguy79]

@datguy79 looks like far from the city. it seems still lot to be done before it gets completed. Also why dont you people dont need a parliament??

It is sort of on the edge of Kabul, but the whole land surrounding it belongs to the government, which is why it looks so desolate. Still within the city.

We already have a parliament building down the road from the new one. I guess this is better security-wise since it escapes the hectic expansion of downtown Kabul.

 

[nrupatunga]

Taliban: We will boycott elections until US leaves Afghanistan

 

[cloud]

India should give us some choppers and artillery guns instead of building a ridiculously extravagant parliament building which we don't need:

This could very well be one of the most iconic building in Afgan in future to come. Not just in this century but maybe even next. may be we Indians want you guys to remember us when Afgan develops and people from whole world is interested and write history about, This building will most probably shown in every action movies in futures related to Afgan, from where your leaders will take decisions which might even change the history of Afgan. . When there is a good governance and piece in Afgan even after decades, this will be the building from where the Afgan leaders will give statements of pride and glory of Afgan. obviously we would like to be the part of that. a little is ok..

 

[datguy79]

This could very well be one of the most iconic building in Afgan in future to come. Not just in this century but maybe even next. may be we Indians want you guys to remember us when Afgan develops and people from whole world is interested and write history about, This building will most probably shown in every action movies in futures related to Afgan, from where your leaders will take decisions which might even change the history of Afgan. . When there is a good governance and piece in Afgan even after decades, this will be the building from where the Afgan leaders will give statements of pride and glory of Afgan. obviously we would like to be the part of that. a little is ok..

I would share your optimism but the way the constitution is set up right now, parliament barely has any power. The president elects all governors, district heads, police chiefs, any position of public power has to go through him. Parliament at most gets to vote on the nominated ministers and impeach them if necessary (they are easily bribed to prevent this.)

 

[jmj_overlord]

India should give us some choppers and artillery guns instead of building a ridiculously extravagant parliament building which we don't need:

india should definitely grab this opportunity to win more friends and partners than losing them, like our neighbors to the chinese..........anyway the building looks splendid. India designed it and is building it ?

 

[MLRS]

Afghan Taliban denounces 'cowardly US drone attack' that killed Hakeemullah Mehsud

The Afghan Taliban denounced yesterday's drone strike in North Waziristan, Pakistan that killed Hakeemullah Mehsud, the emir of the Movement of the Taliban in Pakistan. The Afghan group said the US would be "greatly mistaken" to believe that Hakeemullah's death would "create a void" in the jihadist movement.

"With great sadness we have learned that yesterday the leader of Pakistani Taliban, Mullah Hakimullah Mehsud, was martyred as a result of a cowardly US drone attack, surely to Allah we belong and to Him is the return," the Afghan Taliban said in a statement that was released on its official website, Voice of Jihad.

 

[MLRS]

Great news. Senior Haqqani Network leader killed near Islamabad
Could it be the work of our NDS? Or was he fighting with his fellow Taliban about drug money?

 

[Dharmateja]

Great news. Senior Haqqani Network leader killed near Islamabad
Could it be the work of our NDS? Or was he fighting with his fellow Taliban about drug money?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/12/w...-is-killed-in-pakistan.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

It probably is a work of NDS, ISI thinks so.. and i would say NDS is the best guess.

 

[MLRS]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/12/w...-is-killed-in-pakistan.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

It probably is a work of NDS, ISI thinks so.. and i would say NDS is the best guess.

Some jihadi sources on the Internet are saying he was killed by the ISI, because the guy was too close with late Hakimullah Mehsud, and even called him a martyr. They had to teach him a lesson.

 

[nrupatunga]

Endless Afghanistan? US-Afghan agreement would keep troops in place and funds flowing, perhaps indefinitely

The wide-ranging document, still unsigned by the United States and Afghanistan, has the potential to commit thousands of American troops to Afghanistan and spend billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. The document outlines what appears to be the start of a new, open-ended military commitment in Afghanistan in the name of training and continuing to fight al-Qaeda. The war in Afghanistan doesn't seem to be ending, but renewed under new, scaled-down U.S.-Afghan terms.

The 25-page "Security and Defense Cooperation Agreement Between the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan" is a sweeping document, vague in places, highly specific in others, defining everything from the types of future missions U.S. troops would be allowed to conduct in Afghanistan, to the use of radios and the taxation of American soldiers and contractors.

The document doesn't specifically say how many U.S. and NATO troops would remain in Afghanistan beyond 2014. Afghan officials tell NBC News they hope it will be 10 to 15 thousand. U.S. officials tell NBC News the number is closer to seven to eight thousand, with an additional contribution from NATO.

American bases
While the document specifically says the United States would not seek "permanent bases" in Afghanistan, the US military would have "access to and use of the agreed facilities and areas." Some of these areas would be for the "exclusive use" of US troops. The agreement does not say how many "exclusive use" sites there would be in Afghanistan. The United States also would also be permitted to keep vehicles and aircraft in Afghanistan, take off and land from Afghan soil, and fly though Afghan airspace.

U.S. payments
The draft agreement says the Afghan government should "eventually" pay for all of its defense and security personal. But until then, "so long as the strategic partnership agreement so provides, the United States shall have an obligation to seek funds on a yearly basis to support the training, equipping, advising and sustaining of the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF).

Sticking points
The document shows a long and hard series of negotiations, particularly on the issue of legal jurisdiction. The draft initially insisted that U.S. military personnel be subject to Afghan laws and, if accused of a crime, be tried in Afghan courts. This section in the July draft is crossed out. Afghan officials tell NBC NEWS the jurisdiction dispute appears to have been overcome, with U.S. troops only being subject to American laws.

The copy of the draft -- the full text is available here -- is dated July 25, 2013.

 

[nrupatunga]

A very loooong article.

How Is Hamid Karzai Still Standing? - By William Dalrymple in NYT

 

[nrupatunga]

Why the US bought Russian helicopters for Afghanistan – and then dumped the deal

For once the US military, which has suffered nearly 20,000 casualties in its longest war ever, had got something right in Afghanistan. The decision to arm the Afghan National Army with Russian helicopters instead of American ones was based on sound military logic – you fight with the best weapons you can.

But that deal now stands cancelled because of pressure from an unlikely alliance of right wing politicians and left wing human rights groups, which argue that the Russian firm, Rosoboronexport, which supplies the Mi-17, is also dispatching weapons to Syria.

Twenty-five years after the Soviet Army left the country, Russian helicopters are remembered – fondly or fearfully, depending on which side they were fighting for – by the Afghans. Russian helicopters had routed the US-Saudi Arabia-UK-Pakistan-China backed mujahideen before the arrival of the US-made Stinger surface-to-air missiles restored the balance.

What about US choppers?

The US military's argument for procuring the Russian model is that American helos are far too advanced to be operated by Afghans who, the American say, have poor literacy levels. So the more basic Russian helicopters are suited for Afghan skill levels.

Well, not quite. The Taliban may be semi-literate, but the Afghans are not. During the 1980s, the Russians built up the Afghan Air Force (AAF) which had over 400 military aircraft, including more than 200 fighter jets, based mainly at Shindand on the Iranian border. Afghan air power propped up the pro-Russian government of Dr Najibullah, with the AAF pilots doing an ace job against the mujahideen.

High attrition

Perhaps the argument that the Afghans are not capable of training on American aircraft is a cover-up. Besides being two to three times as expensive as the Russian ones, American military helicopters have suffered numerous blowouts in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The high altitudes of Afghanistan have played havoc with helicopter equipment. For instance, in June 2013 a hailstorm damaged more than 80 US military helicopters, wrecking rotor blades, shattering windows and grounding aircraft for weeks.

Russia vs US: Comparable choppers

The Mi-17V5 is the export model of the Mi-8 – the most produced (12,000) and exported (3000) helicopter in the world. The chopper can be used as both a transport and gunship helicopter. It not only has an auxiliary engine but also an extra door on the right side, improving survivability.

The Russian chopper is nearly twice the size and weight of the equivalent American model, the Bell UH-1, although it only hauls about 50 per cent more cargo. But the additional weight constitutes a thicker skin and overall more protection from small arms fire. Earlier this year a Syrian Air Force Mi-17 was hit by an air-to-air missile fired by a Turkish Air Force fighter aircraft but the helicopter survived long enough for both Syrian pilots to bail out in their own airspace and avoid capture.

According to Strategy Page, while the American military replaced the UH-1 with the UH-60 in the 1980s, the Russians "just kept adding better engines and electronics" to the Mi-17's basic frame. And with the Russian aircraft costing about half as much as a UH-60, "if you want mobility for the least cost you get the Mi-17".

In fact, the push for the Mi-17 came from the very top of the US military establishment. Asked why the US doesn't supply the Afghans with American-made aircraft, US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told Congress last summer: "There's no way we can put them in anything other than that helicopter."

Folks, the comparision between russian and yankee defence maal, how accurate is it??
@pmaitra @p2prada

 

[pmaitra]

Why the US bought Russian helicopters for Afghanistan – and then dumped the deal





Folks, the comparision between russian and yankee defence maal, how accurate is it??
@pmaitra @p2prada

I don't see anything wrong with the article. The article talks about helicopters only, not all military hardware.

 

[p2prada]

Why the US bought Russian helicopters for Afghanistan – and then dumped the deal

Folks, the comparision between russian and yankee defence maal, how accurate is it??
@pmaitra @p2prada

It is fine for the points compared to.

 

[nrupatunga]

How would Afghanistan look without the United States' support?

You get a sense of what might happen if U.S. troops suddenly left Afghanistan while sitting in a joint U.S.-Afghan military operations room. On one side are uniformed American advisers. They sit in front of flat-screen monitors displaying American intelligence gathered from around the world. Their desks are covered with satellite maps, and telephones and computers are encrypted for classified communications. On the other side of the room, a dozen Afghan soldiers it at desks without computers. They take calls on cellphones and write down what they hear on whiteboards. A television in the middle of the room plays an Indian sitcom.

U.S. commanders, using those screens and communications systems, give Afghan troops "intelligence packets." They provide maps marked with x's, the x's are targets, and the Afghan forces go find them. The U.S. military also provides Afghanistan with air capacity, "lift," which Afghans don't have. Afghanistan does have an air force: It has two C-130s. But two planes don't even make a Caribbean charter airline, let alone an air force for a country at war.

Americans military leaders are baffled. "Karzai acts like we need this deal more than he does," one senior officer said. But the bewilderment on their faces is obvious and is growing by the day. For Americans, this seems like the deal of a lifetime for Afghanistan, never to be offered again.

Maybe Karzai is digging in his heels at the risk of destroying the country's security services. Certainly many Afghans also see it this way. The recent Loya Jirga of around 2,500 tribal elders voted in favor of the US alliance. Members of Karzai's own government are furious with their president: They want him to sign now.

But Karzai, who has been in power since 2001, appears to have a different perspective. He's the only president Afghans have known since the Taliban were driven out. He is supposed to step down in April. He must decide what his legacy and future will be.

Karzai knows the Americans will eventually leave; if it's a year or two, or five or ten, Americans won't stay in large numbers in Afghanistan forever. But the Taliban will. So who does Karziai make a deal with, the United States or the Taliban?

If Karzai signs up with the Americans, he's committing Afghanistan to a long-term war against the Taliban and its al-Qaeda allies. If instead, however, he tries to reintegrate the Taliban, he must chose a different course. He would try to look strong and appear to be kicking the Americans out, or at least making demands they can't accept. There are indications this is what Karzai is inclined to do; the preconditions Karzai is setting are the Taliban's terms. Karzai seems to be putting his chips behind a deal with the Taliban, betting an accord with them can bring more peace to Afghanistan than a deal with the U.S. military. But his gamble is even bigger than that. He appears to be betting that his government and security forces are strong enough to survive without U.S. help, and that the Taliban is willing to compromise. If he's wrong the consequences are enormous. If he's right, US troops will be coming home.

Somewhere i feel he is confused as he does not want to be shah shuja-II.