They could do like the rest of NATO and hire Antonov Airlines/Volga-Dnepr/Unit 224. It's not ideal but in principle there are options...
Last edited by a moderator:
Afghanistan War
- Thread starter gree0232
- Start date
You can get a lot of people into a Ruslan or the Mirya. However they would have to fly at about 8,000 ft because IIRC the cargo decks are unpressurized.
InterestedParty
Active Member
I would imagine that the risk of a mechanical/maintenance problem of such rare aircraft, happening in a place like Kabul, or worse still, the effect of an idiot with an RPG, would be too great for the owners to take. Imagine the after effects of either of those planes crashing on take off.
I seem to recall a C5 crashed after takeoff during the Vietnam evacuation, with a large number of war orphans on board. In that case I think it was a mechanical failure in the rear door mechanism rather than enemy fire.
Remembering The Doomed First Flight Of Operation Babylift
In 1975, the first flight of orphans out of Vietnam made a crash landing, and many died. Forty years later, some of the survivors have reconnected, helping to lessen their lingering grief.
www.npr.org
Last edited:
An interesting look at ISK and the dynamics at play. The attack was aimed at the Taliban just as much as it was against U.S. troops. The Taliban was hugely embarrassed and it also lost men. The danger as I see it is not the possibility of ISK taking parts of the country (it’s numbers are small and extent of local support limited) but its potential to further destabilise things.
www.aljazeera.com
“There are two aspects of this attack that need to be considered. First, ISKP attacked the airport primarily to discredit its rival, the Taliban, in yet another escalation of the larger conflict between Sunni extremist armed groups. Second, ISKP made it clear that the Taliban will find it hard to keep its promises to ensure the safety and security of civilians, especially women and minorities under its rule.”
The threat of ISKP in Afghanistan has been underestimated
The Islamic State’s Afghan affiliate could derail Taliban efforts to establish security and stable rule.
“There are two aspects of this attack that need to be considered. First, ISKP attacked the airport primarily to discredit its rival, the Taliban, in yet another escalation of the larger conflict between Sunni extremist armed groups. Second, ISKP made it clear that the Taliban will find it hard to keep its promises to ensure the safety and security of civilians, especially women and minorities under its rule.”
You know that may be the undoing of ISIS-K. It may have just been a fatal strategic mistake that will lead to their destruction. Up until now ISIS-K have been fighting 2 enemies, both of those enemies have been hampered; the Taliban because it has been fighting both the ANA along with the Coalition, and ISIS-K; and the ANA and its Coalition partners who had restrictive ROE.An interesting look at ISK and the dynamics at play. The attack was aimed at the Taliban just as much as it was against U.S. troops. The Taliban was hugely embarrassed and it also lost men. The danger as I see it is not the possibility of ISK taking parts of the country (it’s numbers are small and extent of local support limited) but its potential to further destabilise things.
The threat of ISKP in Afghanistan has been underestimated
The Islamic State’s Afghan affiliate could derail Taliban efforts to establish security and stable rule.
“There are two aspects of this attack that need to be considered. First, ISKP attacked the airport primarily to discredit its rival, the Taliban, in yet another escalation of the larger conflict between Sunni extremist armed groups. Second, ISKP made it clear that the Taliban will find it hard to keep its promises to ensure the safety and security of civilians, especially women and minorities under its rule.”
The rules have changed with the Taliban for all intents and purposes running the majority of Afghanistan, and they aren't hampered by restrictive ROE, nor do they care about legal procedures. So their security apparatus can now concentrate upon ISIS-K and deal with its elimination. If they accept American help in the search and destroy mission then it's to the Taliban advantage.
A look at Pakistan. As I’ve pointed out previously; beneath the surface the Pakistani’s have a lot to worry about. Out of all of Afghanistan’s neighbours they will be affected the most (followed by Iran) if things in Afghanistan deteriorate following the Taliban victory. It’s not a simple matter of declaring victory, celebrating and moving on with plans various economic plans; including a longstanding plan to use Afghanistan as a commercial land hub to Central Asia.
The Pakistani’s will naturally attempt to maintain their hold in the Taliban; hard to do however given the Taliban is far from being a puppet that dances to every Pakistani tune. The Taliban’s ties with certain countries will also be of concern to Pakistan; as will any attempts to develop a closer relationship with Pakistan's large Pashtun population. As such it’s a combination of economic and security related issues which concern the Pakistani’s and which led to their call for an “inclusive” future Afghan government.
www.aljazeera.com
“It’s not that [Pakistani leaders] are not alarmed or concerned about the fallout effect, but the real thing is that they see the change in Afghanistan will have provided them a better situation across the border, and particularly in the context of India,” said Hussain”
“The main issue between the two countries, both analysts agreed, will be the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) or Pakistani Taliban”
“First, we are not in a position to take in more [Afghan] refugees,” he said. “Second, Pakistan wants to preserve the gains we have made against terrorism in the last decade. And lastly, we want to pursue a policy of regional connectivity and that requires that Afghanistan be a stable and peaceful country.”
The Pakistani’s will naturally attempt to maintain their hold in the Taliban; hard to do however given the Taliban is far from being a puppet that dances to every Pakistani tune. The Taliban’s ties with certain countries will also be of concern to Pakistan; as will any attempts to develop a closer relationship with Pakistan's large Pashtun population. As such it’s a combination of economic and security related issues which concern the Pakistani’s and which led to their call for an “inclusive” future Afghan government.
On Afghanistan, Pakistan walks tightrope of optimism and caution
Some see Taliban takeover as Islamabad’s preferred outcome, but it may embolden armed groups in the country.
“It’s not that [Pakistani leaders] are not alarmed or concerned about the fallout effect, but the real thing is that they see the change in Afghanistan will have provided them a better situation across the border, and particularly in the context of India,” said Hussain”
“The main issue between the two countries, both analysts agreed, will be the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) or Pakistani Taliban”
“First, we are not in a position to take in more [Afghan] refugees,” he said. “Second, Pakistan wants to preserve the gains we have made against terrorism in the last decade. And lastly, we want to pursue a policy of regional connectivity and that requires that Afghanistan be a stable and peaceful country.”
Indeed. I would think that American help would be invaluable in that UAS strikes can be launched and intel obtained from outside of Afghanistan but relating to ISK can be put to good use.
Given the size of the country and the terrain totally eliminating the ISK presence will be next to impossible but increases pressure on it can eventually tender it irrelevant or ineffective. In fact constant pressure from the Taliban has led to ISK having to disperse in small groups; unable to operate effectively. The good news is that the vast majority of Afghans are not flocking to fight under ISK’s banner; just like how years ago millions of Muslims worldwide did not flock to IS’s “caliphate” in Syria as IS had hoped.
The irony is that the Taliban is now Afghanistan's government and has a counter insurgency or non state actor threat to deal with.
Quoting witnesses; Al Jazeera has reported that several civilians, including children, were killed in the U.S. strike on the ISK target. Whilst it’s indeed brilliant that the ISK operatives were killed as it saved lives from being killed in an attack the harsh fact remains that saving lives resulted in civilians being killed.
For me the key question is whether the UAS operators and those they report to were aware there were civilians there or whether the deaths of civilians was “regrettable” but “unavoidable”? In “The Kill Chain: Defending America in the Future of High-Tech Warfare” (Brose) the author mentions how “high value targets” were still cleared for elimination by the Americans eventhough doing so would lead to civilian deaths. Paying the price for being at the wrong place at the wrong time is very unfortunately the price civilians have long had to pay in places such as the occupied Palestinian Territories; Libya, Yemen, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine and a long list of other places.
For me the key question is whether the UAS operators and those they report to were aware there were civilians there or whether the deaths of civilians was “regrettable” but “unavoidable”? In “The Kill Chain: Defending America in the Future of High-Tech Warfare” (Brose) the author mentions how “high value targets” were still cleared for elimination by the Americans eventhough doing so would lead to civilian deaths. Paying the price for being at the wrong place at the wrong time is very unfortunately the price civilians have long had to pay in places such as the occupied Palestinian Territories; Libya, Yemen, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine and a long list of other places.
Understand Islamic State Khorasan (ISK) and updates on strikes — Part 1
1. President Emmanuel Macron says that France and Britain plan to propose at the U.N. the creation of a “safe zone” in Kabul that would allowed for continued “humanitarian operations.” The French leader, currently in Iraq, said Sunday that Paris and London would propose at a Security Council meeting on the crisis in Afghanistan a resolution “aimed at defining a safe zone in Kabul under U.N. control.”
2. Even if the Taliban agree, the above effort I suspect is doomed to failure, once ISK conducts 2 to 3 suicide bombings at any U.N. controlled site. This is not the same as the Turkey — Taliban negotiations to run the Kabul airport.
4. ISK has a tradition of using children as human shields for years and there are reports that it was a family that had links to the disposed Afghan National Army — which means it is possible they were kidnapped as human shields or radicalised before hand. This is like the Sri Lanka civil war, at the final phase where the army found whole families wearing suicide vests, whether willingly or not. Frankly, it is not something we as outside observers can discern with any accuracy.
5. Concerns about collateral damage tend to result in US in-action but the USAF has a choice of a surgical strike to limit collateral damage or allow ISK to kill another 150 to 300 civilians once these suicide bombers got to the correct location, where crowds loiter.
1. President Emmanuel Macron says that France and Britain plan to propose at the U.N. the creation of a “safe zone” in Kabul that would allowed for continued “humanitarian operations.” The French leader, currently in Iraq, said Sunday that Paris and London would propose at a Security Council meeting on the crisis in Afghanistan a resolution “aimed at defining a safe zone in Kabul under U.N. control.”
2. Even if the Taliban agree, the above effort I suspect is doomed to failure, once ISK conducts 2 to 3 suicide bombings at any U.N. controlled site. This is not the same as the Turkey — Taliban negotiations to run the Kabul airport.
3. There is nothing unfortunate on this drone strike. Unconfirmed reports suggest that there were 1 or 2 secondaries after the missile hit (which means there were likely to be two suicide bombers mixed in with the civilians). It is just sad to see kids killed.
(a) A spokesman for U.S. Central Command, Navy Capt. Bill Urban, said U.S. officials were aware of the reports of civilian casualties and were still investigating. Urban said the strike disrupted an imminent threat on the Kabul airport but added: ”We would be deeply saddened by any potential loss of innocent life.”
(b) Separately, a U.S. official said the drone fired a Hellfire missile at a vehicle in a compound between two buildings when individuals were seen loading explosives into the trunk. The official said there was an initial explosion caused by the missile, followed by a much larger fireball, believed to be the result of the substantial amount of explosives inside the vehicle. In his statement, Urban said those powerful subsequent explosions may have caused civilian casualties.
(c) In the latest news, 5 rockets were fired at Kabul Airport. US military employed C-RAM missile defense and there are no casualties: US defense official. The rockets were fired from a vehicle situated in PD-4 area. Classic ISK methodology in attacks. This is why most of NATO have decided it is too risky to keep sending further aircraft into Kabul and opted for a zero footprint.
4. ISK has a tradition of using children as human shields for years and there are reports that it was a family that had links to the disposed Afghan National Army — which means it is possible they were kidnapped as human shields or radicalised before hand. This is like the Sri Lanka civil war, at the final phase where the army found whole families wearing suicide vests, whether willingly or not. Frankly, it is not something we as outside observers can discern with any accuracy.
5. Concerns about collateral damage tend to result in US in-action but the USAF has a choice of a surgical strike to limit collateral damage or allow ISK to kill another 150 to 300 civilians once these suicide bombers got to the correct location, where crowds loiter.
Last edited:
A UN safe zone could work if the UN troops were allowed to be well armed, have armed overwatch, strong security measures, and very clear ROE. American, Chinese, Pakistani and Russian involvement would have to be avoided at all costs. Getting the Taliban to agree to it would be another story.
IS-K have launched an unsuccessful rocket attack on Kabaul Airport. The ANA C-RAM at the airport successfully intercepted the incoming rockets. Apparently the Taliban are now taking control of parts of the airport with the US perimeter shrinking.
Taliban have taken control of more areas of Kabaul Airport.
Not my intention to be argumentative but if innocent bystanders were killed; then to me it is indeed unfortunate. Yes U.S. planners had a choice between killing a few innocent bystanders or letting the ISK cell proceed with its mission and killing much more people (both U.S. service members and Afghan civilians); like I said “regrettable” but “unavoidable”.
Last edited:
The reports you quoted could be right but then again there are reports which indicate otherwise. Whatever the case; they’ve just joined the long list of children who paid the ultimate price for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
‘Horror scene’: Anger as US drone attack kills Afghan children
Ten people from a Kabul neighbourhood killed in US drone attack – Washington claims ISKP fighters were the target.
““They were innocent, helpless children,” Ahmadi says of the majority of the victims, including two-year-old Malika. Had he not gone out to buy groceries, Ahmadi himself could have very easily been one of the victims”.
Unless things improve; highly doubtful if any country would want to take the risk; even with the Taliban’s approval; doubtful as it would be another case of foreign troops in the country; even if they are not seen as occupying troops. Would t make the Taliban look good.
A few days ago the Taliban announced a meeting was held in Qatar with representatives from Turkey. It seems that the Taliban have realised that they need external help to run the Kabul airport and the Turks have agreed.
surpreme
Member
Pakistan Armed forces has lost alot of soldiers in its offense in tribal area. The offensive operation did clear the area. Pakistan did it part by hitting tribal area. Now if the Taliban are modern as they claim then I see Pakistani opening friendship with themA look at Pakistan. As I’ve pointed out previously; beneath the surface the Pakistani’s have a lot to worry about. Out of all of Afghanistan’s neighbours they will be affected the most (followed by Iran) if things in Afghanistan deteriorate following the Taliban victory. It’s not a simple matter of declaring victory, celebrating and moving on with plans various economic plans; including a longstanding plan to use Afghanistan as a commercial land hub to Central Asia.
The Pakistani’s will naturally attempt to maintain their hold in the Taliban; hard to do however given the Taliban is far from being a puppet that dances to every Pakistani tune. The Taliban’s ties with certain countries will also be of concern to Pakistan; as will any attempts to develop a closer relationship with Pakistan's large Pashtun population. As such it’s a combination of economic and security related issues which concern the Pakistani’s and which led to their call for an “inclusive” future Afghan government.
On Afghanistan, Pakistan walks tightrope of optimism and caution
Some see Taliban takeover as Islamabad’s preferred outcome, but it may embolden armed groups in the country.
“It’s not that [Pakistani leaders] are not alarmed or concerned about the fallout effect, but the real thing is that they see the change in Afghanistan will have provided them a better situation across the border, and particularly in the context of India,” said Hussain”
“The main issue between the two countries, both analysts agreed, will be the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) or Pakistani Taliban”
“First, we are not in a position to take in more [Afghan] refugees,” he said. “Second, Pakistan wants to preserve the gains we have made against terrorism in the last decade. And lastly, we want to pursue a policy of regional connectivity and that requires that Afghanistan be a stable and peaceful country.”
The US has finally left Afghanistan. The last US flight left Kabaul on Monday 30/08/2021. Now we will see what happens within Afghanistan and also if the US learns any lessons from its defeat. Because this withdrawal, with its tail between its legs, is a defeat as great as, if not greater than, Vietnam. It's a complete failure of policy that hasn't finished yet because it's still involved in Iraq using exactly the same policy. There is plenty of blame to go around and people will be pilloried and punished in the inevitable witch hunt that Congress will have, but those that have the real responsibility will escape any consequences.
www.aljazeera.com
The Taliban have given an indication of their plans for the future government of Afghanistan. What actually happens remains to be seen.
US completes Afghanistan withdrawal as final flight leaves Kabul
Last flight signifies the ‘end of the nearly 20-year mission’ in Afghanistan, top United States general says.
The Taliban have given an indication of their plans for the future government of Afghanistan. What actually happens remains to be seen.
I have my doubts about that. Yes the Army have had to act when some groups in the Pashtun tribal areas have gone to far, but they have generally left them to it. The Pakistani Army use the Pashtun tribes for their own ends and they also have long had a close relationship with the Taliban. The problem that the army faces now is if the Taliban decide to take on the cause of Pashtunistan because if it does that is a clear and present danger to Pakistani sovereignty of the Pashtun tribal areas within Pakistan.
For me the question is whether it actually learnt any lessons from Iraq and Syria? Even if it did was it the right lessons?
There’s also the overall long standing highly flawed U.S. towards the Middle East. By maintaining the course in the region; does it actually contribute to America’s interests and regional stability or does it only really benefit a few American allies by protecting certain Arab states against each other; ensuring certain Arab rulers remain in power and keeping Iran in check (the narrative given is the Iran and only Iran is responsible for most of the security issues in the region). Does the continued presence of U.S. (and other Western trios) troops in various countries in the region actually have the support of the locals (assuming they actually have a say?
For a long time Pakistan resisted American pressure to go in the tribal areas; fully aware that this would serve American and not Pakistan’s interests. The fear was civil war with the fiercely independent tribes which has long been left to their own devices. Ultimately the Pakistani’s had to go in because things were getting out of hand (a lot due to their own doing) and were also spilling over into other parts of the country. A lot of blood was spilled and various deals were made but the status quo was eventually maintained.
The Pakistani’s will continue to have huge influence over the Taliban but how things pan out in the futures really remains to br seen. The Taliban has proven to be far too independent for Pakistan's liking and impossible to fully control; despite the support from Pakistan, the Taliban having family and businesses in Pakistan and the fact that many operatives in the ISI’s Afghan Desk/Department are themselves Pashtun.
Two recommended books on Pakistan; relating to the country itself; as well as the tribal areas issue and involvement in Afghanistan
“Pakistan: A Hard Country” (Leven)
“Directorate S” (Coll).
Last edited:
I wonder if the chaos in the first pic are the Taliban’s “special forces” given that they are dressed very differently from other Talibs. I didn’t even know the Taliban had “special forces”. The first I heard of them was about 2 weeks ago.
The second photo at the bottom indeed shows Taliban “special forces”; practically indistinguishable from the ANA.
The second photo at the bottom indeed shows Taliban “special forces”; practically indistinguishable from the ANA.
