>fought two superpowers
>won
Is it possible to defeat insurgency? Any stories from /k/ommandos that served overseas?
They haven't been in power since they were ousted in December 2001. That's not a win.
>>29856416
>implying the insurgency itself won
>spent the first one using CIA weapons and cash
>spent the second one using left behind slavshit
Nuclear or chemical is the best way to guarantee everyone within a certain radius is dead, but we never used them in Afghanistan.
>>29856416
easily too.
>Go wild west on them, free trips, weapons free. Allow our random citizens to go claim whatever the fuck they want there.
I wouldn't say they defeated anyone. The first time, they were backed by a superpower (The U.S.) Then the second time it was less about wanting to win a war, and more about needing an excuse to "Country Hop" to a place where money/oil was to be made off of the destabilization.
Like...our government basically used them to effect a different agenda. Russia sort of did to.
>Beat insurgency
Actually yes, but the U.S. cannot into Scorched Earth Tactics anymore. Nor can Russia. Or any first world power because we're all too afraid of hurting someone's feelings :(
I'm not an expert on this, nor have I ever served-- But according to most texts on guerrilla insurgency the key is to gain the support of the local populace. Hiding your shit, places to sleep, the enemy will never have informants, etc.
My guess is that if we were to convince the general populace that these guys are "bad" then it would make things very difficult. However that is likely never to happen just due to the fact that Islamists will side with other Islamists no matter what.
>>29856416
So long as the will to fight exists you'll never really be able to call the war "won."
>>29856473
Well if they're all Islamists they're all fair game.
>>29856467
It's alright to advocate mass murder as long as you mock anyone that disagrees huh
>>29856416
Yes
Bomb the shit out of Afghanistan and burn everything that's still standing
>drones killed Jihadi John
>drones may actually defeat ISIS
>real world operators are /v/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnokkabKTK0
>>29856416
The problem is that the taliban are doing more good things for the people then the goverment does, if you dont want to keep your military forces at a place forever you have to get the locals on your side, otherwise a victory is impossible
>>29856484
Fuck off bernie
>>29856518
>I'm a fucking uneducated piece of shit
It's the fucking mountains you moron, Afghanistan is only hills, mountains and valleys. It's impossible to conquer and hold.
NOONE EVER FUCKING SUCCESSFULLY CONQUERED AFGHANISTAN IN THE LAST 2.5K YEARS
..just for info. Alexander the great was defeated, the Huns were defeated, the Brits were defeated, the Russians were defeated, the fucking NATO is defeated.
Maybe not like you'd define it, but noone can conquer it and hold it afterwards. The Taliban are on the rise again and slowly conquering the North. In the South, they have never really been defeated.
Afghanistan fucking perfect for Guerilla warfare. It's just not possible to achieve a sustainable victory there.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/the-talibans-return-the-opposite-victory-14675
>>29856518
It's not like that hasn't been tried in Vietnam, huh?
It's not possible to beat the Guerilla in a military way. You can fight for years without winning the war. It's also to be done politcally.
Ask the Turks, NATO's 2nd largest army. They are fighting the PKK since 45 years, and it's still there.
>>29856433
they were never replaced in the rural areas, they just hid. and they're gaining back the cities now.
>>29856433
Get rid of your Call of Duty mentality. That's like saying the US didn't loose in Vietnam because there were far more VC casualities.
The Taliban won in the end. The US and it's allies conquered the country, they occupied it for 10 years, and now they had to leave because real peace could never be established. And the Taliban are taking it back now, as they were never destroyd but hid and lead a Guerilla war. They won. Or, they are winning right now. It's inevitable.
Feels like shit, i know. Must also feel like shit for a US marine who lost friends in the battle for Fallujah, to see on TV that ISIS just went into the city 2 years ago and took it without problems.
>watch cartoons as a kid
>watch characters win fights through sheer willpower
>laugh and think it's just a bunch of crap, the real world ain't like that
>it's real
>>29856416
You can't really classify anything as a victory in Afghanistan. No one has won anything there since the Mongols. They area is a group of villages and tribes that have been fighting each other for hundreds of years. US, USSR, UK are nothing more than another tribe, just a tribe with much more fire power, so they came in other tribes relax their fighting and focus on the new big player in town. And on it goes. When US leaves the Taliban will slowly take over the place, and when Taliban take over than tribes and villages will start making coalitions against them. The place is a libertarian/anarcho-communists dream. No central government, no regulations and everyone is armed and each village is a "democracy" onto itself.
>>29856484
>"huh?"
>"The mark of a true liberal shitstain is when they restate your statement, in a very distorted way, and end it with 'huh?" or 'Right?"
Yes. I advocate "mass murder" if it benefits my people. Just like The Taliban/Al Quida/Muj. Just like every nation that was ever worth a damn has ever done. It's called "War." And there is no moral high ground to stand on during a war. You do what you need to do to win because your own people back home are what is at stake.
>HURRR DUUUR BUT THE OIL IS WHY WE WENT TO WAR
>BUSH DID IT, AND THE GOVERNMENT WANTED TO....
Yeah, and you're a Libtard who probably advocates putting more people into power who will do the same shit, or expanding the power of people who already do that shit.
You're disgusting.
>>29856955
see
>>29856748
The Mongols/Huns didn't really conquer the country. Their tactic was to just ride in a huge fucking horde, steamroll everything, ride on, and call everything behind them their empire.
They beat the most tribes in that area of course, but it's not like they ever really tried to occupy it. Or even tried to establish own infrastructure.
>>29856450
Chemical weapons have a serious issue with this, they are highly unreliable, depending heavily on local atmospheric conditions to be effective. The huge international effort to get rid of them is mostly optics so governments can look good for getting rid of their old, unwanted weapons.
>>29856467
>they were backed by a super power
Total myth perpetrated by Americans to look like the good guys. In fact there was very little support for the mujahideen because we were sending shit through a third party which was the ISI. The ISI sent arms mainly to the taliban which is why they were so powerful after Russia left. US arms did very little to turn the war in favor of afghans
>>29856416
>Terrorists
>won
Need I remind you that they were fighting against an OCCUPYING FORCE
OCCUPYING
THAT MEANS THAT THE US HAD ALREADY WON
DUH
>>29857053
kek tho
>>29856416
>two
Right, because the U.S. withdrawal hasn't happened yet
The Taliban is dead, long live the Taliban.
When I was there we had a huge problem with the 'shadow government.' We would win pretty much every gunfight we got in but that's not enough. We had most of the shadow gov ID'd by name if not picture but couldn't get to them; they hide within the populace leveraging intimidation and money. Doesn't matter how many dudes with AKs you ice if you can't get to the power structure.
We fought it all wrong - we should've gone in there, killed everything resembling anyone in power, then propped up a favorite strongman with weapons/money and told him we'd do it to him if he got out of line, and oh keep the terrorism down will ya? And then left. Democracy is a western tribal value; they have no concept of it and something like 'women's suffrage' is anathema to their entire civilization.
>>29856416
>Is it possible to defeat insurgency?
kill everyone
no more people, no more insurgents
>>29856872
>as a kid
who are you trying to fool here, anon
>>29856416
The blue guys kinda look like poilus without helms and Lebels
>>29856450
You could nuke every city and there would still be villages that would resist. You could gas them but I doubt that there is sufficient quantity of gas in the world to destroy every village, cave. If some one released bio weapons in Kabul the rest of the world would be destroyed before all the villages in Afghanistan were.
>>29856813
>Get rid of your Call of Duty mentality. That's like saying the US didn't loose in Vietnam because there were far more VC casualities.
No, it's not like that in the slightest. Fuck off with your false equivalence.
>>29857628
It's the same logic. "They haven't been in power, thus they didn't win".
Of course they won. Don't be a retard.
>>29857004
Thanks for the input, thirteen year old white American
>>29857004
Boy that fucking triggered the shit out of you huh
>>29857632
>Vietnam
>North Vietnam takes total control of Vietnam
>Afghanistan
>Taliban aren't in power
I think you're just throwing in Vietnam because you think it makes your point better. It doesn't. It makes you sound like you don't know what you're talking about in the slightest.
You're saying a country being completely conquered is the same as a country that still has members of the group fighting in it.
>>29857632
The Talibans goal is control of Afghanistan. They were the rulers of the country.
They were ousted and haven't been back in control since. How the fuck is that a "win"? How is that the same as the NVA literally conquering the south?
>>29856433
>MURRICA ALWAYS WIN
>>29857657
>Because Vietnam happened the Taliban have won
>>29857655
It's a win because they are still there and are taking back the country. You could also say the process of winning is in progress. But it's an inevitable win. Maybe in 6 months, maybe in 1 year, they'll have total control over the country.
>>29857653
I threw in Vietnam because it's the same, 1-dimensional logic.
>>29857665
>HURR DURRR TALIBAN IS NOT VIETNAM THERE FOR YOU ARE WRONG THEREFORE WE WON TALIBAN
no wonder trump is going to be the next king of the land of the whoppers, with people that doesn't understand the meaning of contrast, how can he lose
>>29857004
Yes because only the US can wage wars of extermination, there is no way the other side can create weapons which could have the same effect on US.
>>29856767
It worked for Genghis Khan, it can work for us.
>>29857688
So you say they've won because they're "going to win"
See the disconnect here?
>>29856748
>Alexander the great was defeated
wut
>>29857721
Yeah, they're going up against the ANA and ANP.
they're gonna win.
>>29857721
Of course not. Tell me why the Taliban are not going to win. It's so sure that i used "won". Because it's inevitable.
>>29857722
Well not directly defeated, but he, like everyone else, could not dominate it. That's how it always went, someone goes to Afghanistan, beats whoever is in power, and gets slowly beaten and defeated in the end himself in the next years.
So is there a reason we can't just let ISIS take over the whole land, then turn it into a fruitless desert?
>>29857722
He lost, married a local princes to secure safe passage and fucked off to India. The country has poor infrastructure today, 2500 years ago it was a fucking deathtrap, he probably lost more men going from one village to another than take any village.
>>29857751
Probably because just some particular Taliban factions even like ISIS.
Are you aware ISIS means Islamic State in Iraq and Syria? And that there's Iran, a huge ass country, between Iraq and Aghanistan?
>>29857741
>>29857745
I'm not predicting the future. I'm not playing that bullshit game.
I'm saying they haven't won. You're also saying they haven't won.
>>29857769
I'm sure a joint project between China, Russia and America could somehow destroy the ozone layer so the middle east becomes a bigger shithole.
>>29857704
>It worked for Genghis Khan, it can work for us.
Maybe it would also be a good idea for US soldiers to just sleep under their horses between battles, instead of building camps. That way, they can just hop onto them the next morning, and ride straight into battle. Could be the possibility to take huge parts of the enemy's country, without wasting time on building tents and shit.
>>29857610
dude, we could easily kill every man, woman, and child in Afghanistan if we wanted to. It would take about a year, but we could literally kill all of them. We could also poison all the water supplies if you want to go that route, but with conventional weapons we could remove every human from that place
>>29857775
They haven't won but also haven't lost. That's the point. And now they will win.
That's the big trick of the Guerilla. They can't win the war by battle, but also can't loose. Time is on their side. Sooner or later, their enemy will leave their country. And then they win.
There's a lot of good books about the concept Guerilla. Try Mao, it's really interesting.
Literally the only way to eliminate an insurgency is to commit genocide.
Other than that, you can only minimize insurgent damage with intelligence and policing.
>>29857811
>the revolutionary/guerillero inhabites the population like the fish inhabites the water
You can't beat them untill you remove simply everyone.
>>29857657
The whole reason we withdrew was because of the 80% disapproval rating and the upcoming election.
Withdrawing from Vietnam wasn't a military thing, it was a political thing. It's no coincidence that South Vietnam was losing cities left and right after we starting dissolving our presence.
>>29857776
Are you also aware that Afghanistan is not the Middle East?
I'm sure you also think people speak Arabic in Afghanistan
>/k/ommandos think genocide kills insurgency
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_in_Yugoslavia#Critical_Axis_offensives
The Axis powers slaughtered over a million Yugoslavs many of whom were killed execution style by the Nazis. Despite this, the Partisan insurgents beat them all out of Yugoslavia.
Small arms, explosives, and guerrilla tactics beats out wealthier, larger and better trained forces.
>>29857045
They did beat the british when the army invaded a few hundred years ago
>>29856416
>>29856416
>Resisting the US = winning
Yeah, tens of thousands of talibeaners were sent to paradise, but at least they kept their opium fields and pedophilic culture.
>>29857850
Well that just shows how relevant they are.
Send the nukes.
>>29857850
Just shows how relevant they are.
Send the nukes.
>>29857811
You say that like its a bad thing.
>>29857917
>but steel is heavier than feathers
>>29857905
I would rather say that the germans couldnt spare troops to fight properly in yugoslavia. super low priority front.
you gotta stay there for a while and keep opressing. it also depends on culture. not to familiar with yugos. but in the middle east the people follows the side that is strongest and exerts the most power. through violence. so just fucking going medieval on their ass would probably be better than the shit they tried
>>29857945
you sound a like uneducated, semi-stormcuck, total idiot
>>29857934
I'm kind of nihilistic on the subject so I don't really give a shit either way. Insurgent forces are often the minority of a population and don't exactly reflect the people you'd be committing genocide against, but on the other hand I can't really feel much sympathy towards a populace that would allow themselves to be killed en mass either so there is no right answer.
>>29857945
During the Yugoslav occupation the Germans conducted seven major offensives, with general commitment of some 100k, of those 40k+ were usually German., two to three entire divisions. Add to that the garrison forces, Yugoslavia was certainly more costly than it was worth to Germans even with local collaborators. The front was quite important, the partisans occupied large portions of territory. German forces and garrisons were forced to remain around main transport routes. There was a significant risk that Partisans could take over Adriatic ports and combined with territory occupied in Bosnia it would allow Allies to advance deep into Yugoslavia while having to fight Germans in only few cities.
>>29857942
I'm just saying, Afghanistan is the backwards shithole of a place it is today BECAUSE it was never conquered. It's the WORST place on the planet for women and men alike and it would be much better had they been colonized by Britain, controlled by the USSR, or client-state to the US.
Why do people call this victory? They didn't beat two superpowers, the US and Russia are still around with standards of living and international influence beyond the comprehension of Afghanis.
But sure they fought very hard to keep their lives short, diseased, and painful. Protcting the virtues of fucking up inter-sex relations so bad that all of the males fuck little boys in the asshole and are constantly suffering from STDs because of it.
I, living in a $700,000 house with high speed internet and dank memes, feel so defeated.
>>29858051
Than again its their choice. It was UK, USSR, US that tried to impose their view on them and failed. Its not logical but freedom rarely is.
>>29858051
>i force my definition of happiness onto the whole world
Afghanis don't give a fuck about your definition of happines. For them it's not a shithole, it's their home.
Also, Afghanistan was a nice place before the Taliban took over. You should educate yourself on that topic if you want to discuss about it.
It's not the Afghanis who won, it's the Taliban.
>>29858094
Yeah Taliban fucked everything up
>>29856416
>won
Nope.
>>29857004
wew lad, dem edges.
>mujahideen that fought the soviets =/= taliban
Anyway, an irrelevant far away rough terrained shit hole is always gonna be able to defend itself against a foreign enemy who isn't determined to win. Both the US and Soviets could have taken over Aghanistan if they really wanted, but none of them are willing to make sufficient commitment. The insurgents have nothing better to do, they don't have a home country far away to run, they only have the one that is being fought over, so they're not going to quit. All they have to do is just keep destabilizing the country and play the waiting game, sooner or later the invaders get bored or tired of the occupation and leave, granted there isn't some resource to gain from being there. In Afghanistan, there's fuck all. They went in to get Osama, they got Osama, there's no more reason to stay. Just seems everyone forgot that part.
Before you ask, no I'm not American.
Dont worry guys, we didn't have to do shit but provide them freedom. We won in the same idea that theres a mcdonalds in countries across the globe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYu2tqVR02U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkw4Uj2byS0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1ofEFo4oyo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ-iiMllXuA
>>29858123
Are they still planting poppy, holding AKs and fucking goats???
They won...
>>29857093
This. This is basically what the Ruskies did in Chechnya. It's still a shothole, but for the most part, they have that place under their thumb.
>>29858196
Iran is full of opium/heroine addicts, too m8. you won't find a park in Teheran without hundreds of addicts lying around. That's because that shit's growing everywhere there. Doesn't have anything to do with the US invasion.
I don't understand your point.
>>29857093
see
>>29858116
You guys all know nothing about Afghanistan, do you? It's not their culture to opress women. It's not Iraqi or Syrian culture to opress women. It's Islamism that grew in the last 20-30 years, that took control over those countries and fucked them up.
Afghani culture is rich and open, it's the fucking Taliban making everything shit.
>>29857093
ahem..
VIIIEEETTTNNNAAAMMM!!!!
>>29856748
>Mongols didn't win
And yet they fucked up the infrastructure so bad that the country hasn't recovered to this day. Then again that probably says more about the Afghani than then the Mongols.
>>29858238
>so bad that the country hasn't recovered to this day
what
what could the mongols have destroyed that Afghanistan's missing today? wtf
>>29858238
kek. Like Africa and Europe
>>29858209
we won, by not allowing harsh islamist regimes to reign and control the epidemic, there are now generations of heroin addicts. These heretics succumb to their addiction.
>>29858224
>Boy fucking, selling children into slavery, man on man rape, rubbing rocks on your dick to clean it, shitting in your water supply and giving babies heroine
>Rich and open Afghan culture
Afghanistan will be a shit hole with or without Islam and the Taliban. It's a tribal country where no one wants to move to the 21st century except for a select few.
>>29858273
i still don't get your point. and i start to doubt you actually have a valid point.
Iran hasn't been conquered by anyone. There's a harsh islamist regime reigning. and the country is full of addicts.
doesn't have anything to do with whoever is in power, they just pick that shit from the streets and smoke it at home.
>>29858287
nothing of that has anything to do with Afghani culture. that's the culture of war. have you ever been deployed? you can see that in every conflict zone, maybe a bit less intense. afghanistan is at war since the 1980s, of course you see a loooot of fucked up shit there. doesn't mean it has anything to do with their culture.
Afghani culture is what was their culture before that, in the 70s or 60s. Again, look at the photos from the 1960s.
>>29858247
The water way system they used to have before the Mongol invasion used to run through the country and now it don't. For some reason one thought to rebuild it again for some reason (probably warring tribes).
>>29858290
I dont get your point...bla bla bla some other country, bla bla bla cognitive dissonance.
>>29858247
Exactly, you wouldn't even know cuz Mongols erased it pretty effectively.
>>29856433
This human being understands.
This land and its nation, are able to defeat anyone...
Unfortunately, including itself
>>29858094
>Afghanis don't give a fuck about your definition of happines.
It's not about happiness, it's about an objectively better way of life.
>For them it's not a shithole, it's their home.
I never said they weren't delusional. Remember theyve been anally raped their whole lives so its impossible they are complete human beings.
>Also, Afghanistan was a nice place before the Taliban took over.
That's just not true. Some of cities where a lot of foreign money was going through were relatively metropolitan, but the majority of the country has always been in the stone age.
>You should educate yourself on that topic if you want to discuss about it.
Lol you're the one who thinks a Kabul paid for by foreign aid is representative of Afghanistan.
>It's not the Afghanis who won, it's the Taliban.
Not until they are back in power.
>>29858523
>It's not about happiness, it's about an objectively better way of life
lol of course not. it's your definition of a better way of life. consuming stuff = happines. That's the credo of any westerner. Doesn't mean it's true, there's a lot of people in the world that have other philosophies.
>Some of cities where a lot of foreign money was going through were relatively metropolitan, but the majority of the country has always been in the stone age
so what? those are the villages, you find those stone age places in most countires of earth. even fucking turkey and south korea have wide parts of landscapes where people live like a fucking 1k years ago. and they're fine with it.
You should try to widen your horizon m8, all you do is put your American view on everything. Those people are different than you.
>>29858590
The funny thing is in some parts of America there is also no running water or electricity
>>29858247
The Mongols pushed the population into the mountains, before Mongols the it was like any other place with population living in lowlands and near rivers. Mongols forced them into the mountains which made them more tribal, reduced communication and trade.
>>29858663
that was like 1.5k years ago, and it's not like the mongols always dominated the country. they steamrolled over it and then went on. that's what brought their empire to fall in the end, it was just too big and they didn't leave behind any structures. They never really occupied, they just went on to conquer more places.
>>29858175
>They went in to get Osama, they got Osama, there's no more reason to stay.
Well actually there's some of Al-Qaeda leaders/cells left over after Bin Laden's death. I don't give a fuck about building hospitals or schools there I just care if Al-Qaeda core is neutralized.
>>29856416
The issue at hand is that the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq is the first time we've had to deal with an enemy where we have to consider them people. We didn't have a goal going into Afghanistan. Iraq we won in 21 days, but then stayed for whatever fucking reason.
It used to be:
Invade
Conquer
Occupy with force
Military Governor
Crush resistance with overwhelming force
And yeah, sure, there was always some level of resistance group but once you went in and made it not a shithole for your people, the quality of life for the natives improved too. During the Cold War we fucked ourselves out of ever winning a counterinsurgency because we don't occupy and colonize anymore. It's retarded. These people are incompatible with democratic ideals and principles. They need a military governor to conquer the area and occupy it. That's how you make peace.
There's a fucking reason that there are no democracies in the Middle East. It's all dictators.
>>29858306
Yes I have deployed and what I described is exactly what I saw
>Bacha bazi is a form ofpederastywhich has been prevalent inCentral Asiasince antiquity. It waned in the big cities afterWorld War I, for reasons that dance historianAnthony Shaydescribes as "Victorian erapruderyand [the] severe disapproval of colonial powers such as theRussians,British, andFrench, and the post-colonial elites who had absorbed those Western colonial values."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacha_bazi
>However, the spread of the opium poppy to Afghanistan, via the eastern Mediterranean and Persia seems more probable – see the references in the 12thto 14thcentury Persian literature
https://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/on-the-cultural-history-of-opium-and-how-poppy-came-to-afghanistan/
I don't know when the fuck rubbing rocks on their dicks started but I'm guessing it's not a recent development after the Soviet invasion. The pictures you see of a developed Afghanistan only came from the big cities like Kabul but the rest of the country has always been a rural shit hole living in the 5th century.
>>29858681
It was 800 years ago but that's beyond the point. Mongols scorched the place and scared the people for good. I am talking about northern part where Tajiks, Aimak, and others live. The Pashtuns have always been like they are today. The last major change to their culture was 1100 years ago when they adopted Islam, not that Islam changed their way of life by much ether. After Mongols v1 they also got Timur, Mongol v2 which reduced to dust few towns that survived Mongols. So you have people that have been invaded and their entire civilization destroyed, good part of population exterminated. You can imagine why they would be paranoid. And add to that British,Soviet and US invasions and well you get a paranoid people whose entire lives were spent in war. Modern Afghanistan has not known peace since 1979 at least, that's 37 years of war.
>>29858965
It's their fault for being the gateway to Europe or Asia. You can't expect armies to not invade you.
>>29856748
>NOONE EVER FUCKING SUCCESSFULLY CONQUERED AFGHANISTAN IN THE LAST 2.5K YEARS
You know the Russians and Brits ripped it in two during the Great Game, right? Please leave.
>>29856748
>being this stupid.
Alexander, the Mongols, and NATO all conquered Afghanistan.
Maybe you should visit a few of the permanent NATO bases.
>>29856416
Nuclear war made conventional war near obsolete. Nuclear war by it's own deterrence doctrines, makes itself obsolete. They simply learnt from the US how to fight a culture war against the soviets, where every man woman and child is a radical and death lies under every stone, then they turned it against the US. If you can't match the US in conventional arms, simply don't fight them, it's the difference between invading with Napoleonic squares against guerillas, it's just two completely different theatres of war strategy.
Fighting this type of war with conventional means is synonymous to fighting a mosquito with 22lr, sure you'll hit it eventually, but not before breaking the bank and every collateral target in your house, (which is synonymous with the huge collateral of conventional bombing campaigned against urban insurgencies and the imediate backlash support for radicals).
>>29859541
>>29859560
you fucking mongoloids didn't read the thread, did you? we're talking about conquering, like dominating, ruling, you know. you fucking retarded idiots, read the damn thread.
>visit permanent nato bases
holy fuck you're literally retarded
>>29856416
Not reading the thread.
In what way do you think the Taliban won? Even as NATO was pulling out, the taliban couldn't move freely and lost every engagement. The last big loss that I remember before the pulling out started was the 2009/2010 (fuzzy) attack on Bagram, that was one of the worst loses I've ever seen an attacker suffer, by any measure. Any measure.
What is required of NATO and afghanistan for you to say the taliban lost? The taliban is essentially a gang, at one time a large gang, now tremendously smaller, but still a gang. Eradicating it requires actually killing all the members, because any of the prisoners that have been released can (and have locally) restart it. NATO will never just eradicate every member of the Taliban, so the Taliban will never stop existing entirely.
But if you think complete annihilation of active elements is required for victory, then WWII never ended. Nazis and/or pro-german elements kept the fire alive in one way or another till modern times, but it was still laughable. Even when werewolves were killing occupation forces here and there it was laughable.
I think the Taliban lost pretty badly, and only the inherent lawlessness of the region they are in allows their survival in any form, and if they do return to their former glory it will only be because of that lawless area that favors armed gangs (versus virtually unarmed and spread out rural people) in the same way many areas of feudal Japan did.
NATO left when it had nothing more to do, NATO can't make Afghanistan stop being lawless on its own, nothing but the greater part of Aghanistan wanting to change can change it.
NATO did badly beat the taliban in everyway. ANd if you are still saying the taliban won by nature of still existing, I would add that NATO still exists too, and has the capability to come over and do it again.
The taliban has little capability to do anything.
>>29859921
dude it doesn't matter, you didn't understand anything. the taliban are more than an armed gang. also they are taking back control over the country. it's going to be like exactly before the war. just that there's thousands of Americans and Europeans that died for nothing.
>The taliban has little capability to do anything.
Like i said, you don't understand anything. Read some good articles on the Taliban and their offensive going on since last year. And read some books about the concept of Guerilla, the difference between political and military victories, the history of Afghanistan.
You're fucking clueless.
>>29856416
Not without genocide.
>>29857775
The Taliban did not control all of Afghanistan prior to the invasion. They have lost significant territory but still control vast swaths of Afghanistan. They may have not won, but they are winning.
>>29858590
>lol of course not. it's your definition of a better way of life. consuming stuff = happines.
>longer
>less disease
>rule of law
objectively better. You'll continue to argue that and continue to look more and more autistic.
>so what? those are the villages, you find those stone age places in most countires of earth.
You don't seem to have any grasp on what human development is.
"Well there are people living in anterior alaskan villages so the US and Afghanistan were basically the same. Some people lived normal lives, some in abject poverty"
Fucking hilarious.
Let me see if you can wrap your head around this. Afghanistan has a literacy rate of 52%, if you exclude females because most of them aren't allowed to learn. The average income is $500. AND YOURE COMPARING THEM TO SOUTH KOREA!! You MUST be joking
>>29856416
Yes, by purging the heretics.
>>29856416
>two
Remind me again what group controls Kabul and the majority of the districts in Afghanistan?
And the way the war is going against ISIL, it looks like Iraq may just pull through as well.
>>29856466
It would work, and it would make America the "imperialists" they love to bitch about.
>>29856703
Die you rebel scum
>>29858196
jaweed what the fuck are you doing
you had one chance you nigger
>>29856416
1- the Taliban can form a more functioning economy and government than the AFG government can, and it knows the tribal bullshit better and moves within it better.
2- the Taliban literally live there for their whole lives. Thus they are more patient with fighting.
3- being the "aggressor" means they have the luxury of choosing when to fight, and where the fight will occur, and what methods to use for surprise. Most firefights with the Taliban come down to "mag dump and run away".
4- most "Taliban" aren't actually important. Most are disposable farmers told to dig a hole, toss in the plaster of Paris-covered IED, run those wires over there, make a pile of rocks, then they go home $20 richer, which is like two days labor for them. If they die who cares, the core of the group (comparatively well educated and experienced) rarely fights, so they retain a high level of skill compared to what most people think. You can literally tell bomb makers based on their techniques and preferences. Some prefer ANFO, some prefer something based on lead pic rate or whatever, some prefer this detonator over that...
The point is they are smarter than "lel goat shephards".
A comprehensive COIN in tribal regions involves making the community FUNCTION as part of the larger government.
This means building up a rapport with a capital 90% of them could barely find on a map and have never been to. This means building up an economy from the ground up to build trade relations, since trade benefits form stability and improves Their lives and jeeps people gainfully employed. It means educating a generation to be more positive to outsiders so they are willing to work with you, and still improve their society further. It means building a law structure that isn't steeped in corruption and nepotism, so the law is worth more than the paper it is printed on. It means making them feel like the occupiers aren't baby-eating invaders, and that they benefit from the occupiers help.
>>29864896
Shockingly, this is hard.
This is a multi-decade effort. It often has a bunch of steps back. Most peoples have no patience to wait, no treasure to spend building up a whole new nation, and no desire to help a foreign culture.
You need to convince tribals to essentially stop being tribal and be more cosmopolitan and work within the greater society, not the village and the 10-mile radius around it. To them that's basically the whole world, and you need to break that mindset.
>>29856813
ISIS=/=Mujahideen
The IS take everything the Mujahideen fought for and have corrupted it into a cartoonishly evil mission of conquest, and the moment IS tries to push towards their territory, you can bet they'll be fighting, and the Mujes won't have the US backing them this time.
>>29856416
The only thing that could truly subdue Afghanistan would be straight up genocide.
Conquering a country nowadays, where war is so regulated that the military uses less deadly ammunition for their service weapons than the civilians they protect, is only possible if you win over the population, and Afghans are notoriously stubborn fucks.
They're unbeatable for the sole reason that no matter what happens, they refuse to throw in the towel.
If the gloves came off and our military was unbound, Afghanistan would be depopulated and turned into an American territory faster than you could say Trail of Tears.
>>29858051
You're taking a personal, literal definition of victory. The British Empire/USSR/US had the objective of occupying Afghanistan. The Afghans had the objective of repelling foreign invaders. Guess who met their objective and who didn't?
>>29856416
You defeat an insurgency by not fighting it in the first place.
You defeat it by under-cutting its recruitment propaganda and ideological standing.
You defeat it by giving locals who might support an insurgency a more attractive option, like, say, providing them with a better livelihood and security guarantee that the insurgency could ever provide.
You defeat it by looking and acting like a good guy.
>>29856467
Scorched Earth isn't effective; you end up looking like Satan, and at least a few somebodies always survive. It at most buys a couple years of not having to give any effort since the combat zone temporarily becomes a no-man's-land
As this anon so beautifully put it... GLASS- PARKING- LOTS.
>>29856416
Short answer: yes. The problem is that we have leftard SJW politicians who think we should hug these fucks who behead children. The only way to truly defeat them is with a level of brutality that not even they can stand. Large scale, brutal, public and unforgiving attacks to the point that it breaks them is the only way to defeat them.
>>29856416
>Is it possible to defeat insurgency?
Yes.
Its hard, its disgusting.
You make a village hate its sons.
>>29859721
>you fucking mongoloids didn't read the thread, did you? we're talking about conquering, like dominating, ruling, you know. you fucking retarded idiots, read the damn thread.
Are you the retard here?
Just because all the other powers decided to just exploit Afghanistan's territory to build military bases and take their opium and minerals on the cheap doesn't mean they weren't conquering or dominating.
If any of those countries ACTUALLY WANTED AFGHANISTAN, then all they'd do is just kill all the natives in a massive genocidal sweep so there wouldn't be a population worth fighting. And then colonize the otherwise nice territory to build a strategic european entity.
So yeah I agree with you, the only thing stopping us from truly winning Afghanistan and dominating them are our own self destructive liberals who don't have the balls for imperialism. Good thing god emperor trump is about to anally annihilate them.
>>29865423
yeah, but if you go full scorched earth, what the fuck is your enemy gonna do?
they have no supplies, most likely no allies, few numbers, and leaving a certain area is suicide.
dresden-style mass air raids, fire bombings, massive campaigns of death, do fucking wonders at winning wars.
>>29856416
It's very possible.
The problem is that the measures it would take are not considered "war" by the West.
>>29858287
>It's a tribal country where no one wants to move to the 21st century except for a select few.
This. The commies tried to drag the country into the 20th century by force. That's where all the pics of Kabul women walking around parks is from. It's communist propaganda. Communist party of Afghanistan tried to modernize the country but succeeded in doing so only in major urban centers which in the case of Afghanistan means Kabul and two or three bigger villages. Meanwhile they alienated the rural folks especially in the tribal areas and gave birth to Mujahadeen and later Taleban.
Since commies had given US a bloody nose in Indochina the US was more than happy to support a Islamists dargging people back to 800s because probably communism is worse than living in the dark ages.
Had US not intervened Afghanistan today would be like Vietnam or China. Officially communist but really a capitalist country rapidly modernizing itself. But its easy to be captain hindsight
Solving the insurgency is easy. Take kids from the wealthiest members of each town and village, kill then if there are terrorist attacks. Any time a village revolts flatten it, and drop herbicides on crops grown outside of dirext village planting. The villagers have no option but to fight the insurgents for you, and since they have all of the food and resources will eventually win.
Or go full Sherman and just drop herbicides on the whole country and introduce crop blights until everyone is forced out, slowly fill abandoned regions with walled towns full of texans.
>>29866379
but then once the taliban/is/mujas/whoever are dead, the villagers come after us.
best to just go full scorched earth and kill everyone
>>29866393
That is what the hostages are for. Everytime you put someone in charge of anything members of their family come to "study" at the US, are a clear threat, but also means the leadership is eventually indoctrinated into American ways. What worked for Ghengis Khan, Caesar, and the Brits will work for us.
>>29856442
slavshit, yo mean redneck supported saudishit
>>29859721
You're the literal goal post moving retard around here, fact is the Mongols dominated and conquered Afghanistan easily. Their domination was so severe the Hazara remains in the country as a reminder of that period.
By your stupid ass definition then China has never been conquered either because hurr durr Chinese still around derp.
>>29856433
What was the name of that American general who said something in lines of
>it's good thing that NATO does tons of collateral damage because the victims will have to apply for compensation, which will build a bond between them and the new government
again?
>>29865423
South African here, The brits employed scortched earth to great effect against the boer commando's which broke our collective spirit apart from a few bitter enders who were easily dispatched after the main commando's gave up the fight... Putting your enemies women and children in concentration camps does wonders for their moral
>>29856467
Didn't the Soviets try scorched Earth in Afghanistan? I heard that they razed entire villages and had severe reprisals on civilians for mujahadeen attacks. Clearly it didn't work. Hell the Nazis certainly had no qualms about massacring civilians and using maximum brutality, it didn't stop resistance movements from popping up in every country they occupied.
>>29856416
You're talking about two different insurgencies fought for different reasons.
The Muj defeated the Soviet Union against what they saw as an invasion of their land.
The Taliban fought against the US coalition in order to impose its own authority on the people of Afghanistan. In can call some of the Taliban groups invaders themselves as many come from Pakistan.
