Kabul abandoned by Taleban, holy heck

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Man. Okay, I wasn't expecting any of this. Dare I hope, dare I think, that maybe, just maybe, there's a chance bombing will cease by Ramadan, maybe? The next few days will be terribly interesting indeed.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I want to know what the taleban/Al-Quaeda have left ticking in kabul. Even if the taleban have collapsed AL -Quaeda have surely got somehting planned and I'm not sure if I wan to find out what it is. I rather hting that this makes something like the gaurdian's nightmare scenario from last week more, not less, likely.

― Ed, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Good news for the refugees, which is the short-term important thing. Mixed news for the anti-war movement - yes the bombing might stop but it'll be very easy in future to say "it worked" and do similar things elsewhere. Bad news for the 'broad-based government' idea since the coalition clearly has no idea what to do now. And bad news for Pakistan, whose support for the US looks to have delivered half of Afghanistan on a plate to the Northern Alliance - Musharraf's Islamist constituency has been forever alienated and now his regional strategy is surely in big trouble.

― Tom, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

but where is the ole dirty O?

― Geoff, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Mullah Omar's in Kandahar, sitting in an abandoned car, pretending to drive it, and making "beep beep" noises, if some reports are to be believed.

The U.S. didn't want the Alliance in Kabul until spring. why?

― Tracer Hand, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

As Tom said -- NAlliance reflects coalition of tribal peoples representing fraction of population in Afghanistan. Govt. by fraction of ethnic population = unstable. Coalition govt. of multiple ethnicities over one region = in most cases doomed to faliure anyway.

― Sterling Clover, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

What are the reasons why Afghanistan shouldn't be partitioned anyway?

― Tom, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

ethnicities in afghanistan overlap with neighboring countries -- boundaries were drawn not on ethnic basis in the first place, but on arbitrariness of geopolitics and the GRATE GAME. Thus partitioning afghanistan would increase unrest & unstability in Pakistan, former soviet republics, & other nearby areas. Cf. how intervention over Kosovo sparked further tension w/r/t albanians in macedonia (not to mention current ugliness in greece).

― Sterling Clover, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I kind of suspect that the US are slightly worried about who is making sure law and order is being observed in Northern Alliance Afghanistan - early reports would suggest that in many cases it just isn't. This makes a volatile country and a volatile regime and this is not what the USA wants if it is going to keep on bombing and put troops on the ground to try and capture Bin Laden. Not taking Kabul would have given the Alliance slightly less power and this is an important thing.

― Bill, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I heard some expert on NPR today predict Kandehar will fall within a week.

― nickn, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

My Pakistani newsagent reckons the Taliban are bluffing: 'they are very vengeful people,' he said. Create false sense of security, then do something "surprising".

― suzy, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Certainly I could see them gathering somewhere and simmering up a plot. But if there's a whole bunch of UN troops on the ground -- something I suspect will be more and more likely -- they might think twice...

― Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.