Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

War In Afghannistan

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234
Author
konstantinius View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 762
  Quote konstantinius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: War In Afghannistan
    Posted: 19-Nov-2007 at 08:29
Originally posted by Sarmat12

I find funny that you might seriously think about Putin's role in it.

And I can repeat again that in order to conquer Afghanistan, the Soviet Army should have turned the whole country in a desert and perhaps sent most of the male population older than 12 to the concentration camps or may be stay there for 20 more years.

And this wasn't done.
 


True, the Soviet leadership usually applied brutality mostly to their own population; a few conquered enemies and some "undisciplined" friendly regimes being the exception. Much of  an improvement, no?


Edited by konstantinius - 19-Nov-2007 at 09:50
" I do disagree with what you say but I'll defend to my death your right to do so."
Back to Top
Jonathan4290 View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Mar-2008
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 185
  Quote Jonathan4290 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Mar-2008 at 03:43
Originally posted by Chwyatt

NATO needs to watch out though. Near indiscriminate attacks by the Soviets on the Afghan population guaranteed that the Soviets could not win. NATO air attacks on the Taliban resulting in civilian deaths have been tolerated as they have been accidental. But NATO is so dependent on air power. Because some NATO allies, although supporting democracy in Afghanistan, wont put in the troops in the south where they are needed to help the Brits, Canadians, US and Dutch. Increased civilian deaths, although accidental, will undo the good work the PRTs have been doing in rebuilding Iraq. 

 
Yes, NATO isn't much of a military alliance it seems. Our Canadian troops are there but I was ashamed when my government demanded additional troops to Kandahar and threatened to pull out if it didn't happen. The US is the Canadian military's crutches but unfortunately there is still this myth here that Canadians are only peacekeepers and that we don't need to pull our weight militarily. Don't worry US, we're trying to shape up though!
Like great battles? How about when they're animated for easy viewing?
Visit my site, The Art of Battle: Animated Battle Maps at www.theartofbattle.com.
Back to Top
Sikander View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 12-Aug-2004
Location: Portugal
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 198
  Quote Sikander Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jun-2008 at 00:22
War in Afghanistan is not a military affair but a political one. The soviets left the coutry because they realized that their political goal was impossible to achieve and most of the population were against the government. So, to stay and fight would be useless.
 
Nowadays things are a little bit different. NATO and other international stakeholders are performing reconstruction projects to help population and "win hearts and minds". The army, as far as I know, has been performing well and for instance, the last major operation in Arghanbad district, a week ago, was performed mainly by Afghan troops supported by Canadians.
But things are not perfect and may change for the worse.
The Karzai government is still heavilly dependant on foreign help and cannot perform with authonomy;
Slowly by slowly the war is taking its toll on foreign troops, and as we know, Western people is less willing on taking casualties as it was 60 years ago;
More important, any Western military débacle is likely to show on Al Jazeera, no matter how insignificant it may be. And the image of burning vehicles and dead soldiers will have a disproprotionate effect on public opinion if compared with the real military loss.
So, things are not all that bad but the West has many drawbacks, and these can turn a stabble situation into a defeat.
 
And lets not forget a crucial dogma: for a guerrilla force to succeed it only needs to stay alive while for a conventional force to succeed it has to destroy the guerrilla.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.