Afghan government collapses as Taliban takes Kabul

[woodsghost]

To try to take a less personal, and more clinical look at this, as difficult, and frankly, gross-feeling as it may be, this may be useful as a lesson/guide to bugging out--what would we do in a similar situation, and what, in the coming days/weeks/months will prove to be effective, and what won't.

It doesn't sit right with me, and I feel awful even suggesting it.  But since there really isn't anything I can do to change the situation, all I can do is learn from it. 

As I re-read your post, j want to make clear... I'm not saying we need to be "clinical." I'm saying "let's not stray into 'X' leader was an idiot for 'Y' reason" or similar. We are human beings and I think all rational people are grieving over what is happening.

[flybynight]

I've seen awful video today of Afghani civilians hanging onto the outside of U S planes as they take off. and fall to their death

[TACAIR]

This does seem to have happened remarkably quickly. The 1989 Republic of Afghanistan lasted three years from the Soviet withdrawal, while the latest Taliban campaign has only taken three months.

Some could argue it's been two decades. Large regions of the country were already under Taliban control, and they have far better communications technology than even existed in 1989.

Improved communications and logistics technologies also allows them to leverage large numbers of small disparate sources of outside support in ways they couldn't in 1989.

I'm just surprised so many people are shocked by this.

Many saw this coming a long time ago.

Americans wear wristwatches.

Afghanis just have time....

The Russiansdidn't learn from the Brits, we failed to learn from the Russians. 

As I noted in my book The Story of the Mummified Stranger
one does not buy / own Afghans -- they are rental only....

[RoneKiln]

I think I can address a lesson learned at this point, but I'm doubtful of my ability to articulate thoughts on how to mitigate a similar issue. Hopefully others can start building on this attempt at a start.

My understanding is a lot of territory was captured by threatening the families of large swaths of "middle management." Without the US sledgehammer to threaten annihilation upon those threatening their families, huge sections of national infrastructure surrendered fairly peacefully.

Last year in the US we saw a rise of protestors showing up at homes of politicians and police chiefs.

This is happening in Mexico as well as cartels gain more influence through threatening the families of politicians.

I do not believe what happened in the US, Mexico and Afghanistan are comparable to one another. I do see a similar underlying concept in methodology. I reference Mexico and the US to argue that all human societies are very susceptible to this tactic.

I think alertness and wariness of any faction going to the homes of government leaders and servants to drive political change is important.

Alertness to this may only help you bug out before the situation is as dire as in Kabul right now. Or as we all come to grips with this and sort out our thoughts better, we might be able to figure out how to better protect your local community from such tactics without it devolving into some assinine stroll through hollywood action movie stupidity.

Now, if ya'all lived near me, I'd invite everyone over for a few bottles of whiskey and lots of stupid discussion (or venting). But on this medium of communication, I hope we can keep it more constructive.

But I'm still drinking whiskey as I write this.

[woodsghost]

I think alertness and wariness of any faction going to the homes of government leaders and servants to drive political change is important.

You hit on something pretty universal. That is a bedrock tactic of guerilla warfare. Show up to an area, tell people "you can join me willingly, or I can kill you and your family and make the same offer to your successor." The success of a group depends on their ability to carry out the threat. This is also true of criminal groups. I won't get down the rabbit hole of semantics and "criminal vs guerilla."

The success of the established government depends on its ability to provide security to communities and leaders. Rural communities and leaders have traditionally been the most vulnerable. Current examples include Nigeria and Afganistan.

Sometimes it is urban areas which are more vulnerable. Tradionally it has been easier to exert social control in urban areas so those are the last to fall. If one sees urban areas falling, I would stop and ask "why?"

In Colombia and Mexico there are private groups which rise up against sources of violence. In Colombia these private groups became tolerated by the government. I sus5that is because they had no choice,. The government simply could not get a handle on the violence. In Mexico, from what I've seen so far, private groups are still unwelcome and seem to draw more official response than the cartels? That is what I think I'm seeing.

What I'm hearing about Afganistan, there was an expectation that government leaders had large military and police power. I heard the number "300,000" used to describe the power of the Afgan government and "75,000" used to describe the Taliban. The people I've been listening to said the real number of Afgan government forces was 50%-70% lower, because a bunch of leaders had 50%-70% fake names on their rosters to boost the money they would get for training, equipping, and fighting.

It is a Western cultural idea that governments govern for the benefit of the people. Everywhere else, governments govern for the benefit of those in power. Usually those are family or tribal groups.

Further, it was British history which gave us the idea that the King should be subject to the Law.

I feel it is important to understand that most of the world does not share Western or British cultural values. This understanding, I feel, helps us make sense of events around the world. I will also point out that it is not universally accepted in America that "the King is under the law" nor that "the government should govern for the benefit of the people rather than solely for the benefit of the tribe or family." You see this where you see more corrupt politicians. Ideally, the Police and the Courts keep people in line, but when you don't have a functional court system, a functional police system, and you have dysfunctional community leaders, you create the space needed for non-state actors to grow in power. Some are purely criminal in nature. Some have more political ambition and seek organized control offer the lives of others.

At this point you may be seeing the circle. And where one sees weak institutions, I would prepare for continued violence and unrest.

[Mr. E. Monkey]

As I re-read your post, j want to make clear... I'm not saying we need to be "clinical."

Right.  I apologize if it came across as trying to put words in your mouth, that was all me.  And clinical may not be the right word in the first place.

I'm saying "let's not stray into 'X' leader was an idiot for 'Y' reason" or similar. We are human beings and I think all rational people are grieving over what is happening.

You'll get no argument from me on any of that.   


It's an emotional subject, and a personal one at that, for some among us.  It's hard to set that aside, or not look at the situation through that lens.  I'm not convinced that we should, entirely.  But there are going to be things we can learn through this.


(But if you do want to talk politics, I can give you an earful.    )

[12_Gauge_Chimp]

I just watched a bit of footage from Kabul airport and seeing the Afghani civilians trying to cling to the side of a plane as it taxis down the runway is just heartbreaking.

If ever there was a term that would accurately describe this whole withdrawal from Afghanistan, I think "clusterf**k" would be it.

[Lettuce Pray]

If ever there was a term that would accurately describe this whole withdrawal from Afghanistan, I think "clusterf**k" would be it.

I try not to use those kinds of words anymore but sometimes there just isn't a better way to describe it.

[12_Gauge_Chimp]

If ever there was a term that would accurately describe this whole withdrawal from Afghanistan, I think "clusterf**k" would be it.

I try not to use those kinds of words anymore but sometimes there just isn't a better way to describe it.

The messed up part is that's the most polite term I could think of.

I thought of a few others that'd make even Richard Marcinko or R. Lee Ermey blush.

[Lambykins]

I am finding it too difficult to watch anything about Afghanistan.
Given  my families history with military service and the memories I have of watching the fall of Saigon, it is just too damn painful to watch.
My youngest son lost several friends in Afghanistan. He, himself, is now considered 85% disabled due to various injuries.
Too many lives lost, too many lives wasted.

[MPMalloy]

I do however see other 1970's matters on the horizon. Including a lot of inflation.

Please lay it on us