It looks like the Taliban are turning tail & running away. Maybe this war can be finished in a year or two. http://news.excite.com/news/ap/international/attacks-afghanistan Northern Alliance Takes Kabul Updated: Tue, Nov 13 10:33 AM EST By KATHY GANNON, Associated Press Writer KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) - Ignoring appeals to stay out of the capital, Afghan opposition fighters rolled into Kabul on Tuesday after Taliban troops fled. Residents, freed of the Islamic militia's restrictions, celebrated by blaring music from radios and shaving their beards. Heavily armed alliance troops roamed the city, hunting Taliban stragglers and their Arab allies from Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida movement. At least five Pakistanis and two Arabs were slain. Clashes broke out near the airport near Kandahar, the Taliban movement's headquarters in the south, when 200 fighters mutinied, a Taliban official, Mullah Najibullah, said at the Pakistani border at Chaman. There were signs the Taliban were abandoning Kandahar and other urban centers in the south, possibly to wage a guerrilla war from the mountains. The United Nations reported that alliance troops had executed 100 Taliban fighters hiding in a school in the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif on Saturday, and there were ongoing reports of reprisals. As the Taliban retreated from Kabul, they took eight foreign aid workers, including two Americans, accused of spreading Christianity in Muslim Afghanistan, witnesses told The Associated Press. "I saw them with my own eyes. They put them in the truck and then left at midnight. They said they are going to Kandahar," said Ajmal Mir, a guard at the abandoned detention center in the heart of the city where the eight had been held. The fall of Kabul set off alarms in key U.S. ally Pakistan, which strongly opposes a takeover by the opposition alliance in neighboring Afghanistan. Its foreign ministry Tuesday appealed to the United Nations to send peacekeepers to control the city until a broad-based government can be installed. "It is our hope that calm prevails and bloodshed is avoided," Foreign Ministry spokesman Aziz Ahmed Khan said in Islamabad, adding that Pakistan hoped a multiethnic government would be formed with U.N. help. President Bush had urged the opposition to stay out of the capital until a new, broad-based government could be formed to replace the Taliban. Alliance officials said the unexpected Taliban evacuation made it necessary for them to enter the city to maintain public order. The alliance's interior minister, Yunis Qanoni, said the main body of opposition forces would stay out of the city. Mindful of international concern over a potential wave of revenge killings in the city, the alliance was rushing in 3,000 specially trained security troops to maintain order. Alliance Defense Minister Mohammad Fahim and Foreign Minister Abdullah entered the city around midday. As the sun rose over the Hindu Kush mountains, Kabul residents shouted out congratulations, honked car horns and rang bells on their bicycles. Men shaved off beards - mandated by the Taliban - and the sounds of music returned after having been banned by the Islamic militia. In Kandahar - the birthplace of the Taliban movement and home to its supreme leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar - a resident contacted by telephone said many Taliban appeared to have left the city, except for uniformed militia police. The resident spoke on condition of anonymity. Sources contacted by telephone in Jalalabad said it appeared the Taliban were preparing to abandon that northeastern city too. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity. Taliban guards Tuesday also abandoned the Torkham border station along the Pakistani frontier. A group of local Afghan elders was trying to sort out who would man the station, near the Pakistani city of Peshawar. Pakistan has expressed fears that the opposition seizure of Kabul will spark bloodshed and revenge killings. U.N. spokeswoman Stephanie Bunker said the opposition was carrying out "punitive action" in Mazar-e-Sharif, which it seized Friday. "We have also heard that fighting is continuing in and around the city," she told journalists in Islamabad. In Kabul, bands of heavily armed northern alliance soldiers roamed the city in taxis, trucks and cars, seeking out Arabs, Pakistanis, Chechens and others who had come to Afghanistan to fight with the Taliban. Five Pakistanis were killed in a shootout early Tuesday, witnesses said. Their bodies lay in a public park hours later. Alliance troops were setting up roadblocks on streets where Arabs and others associated with al-Qaida movement had been living. The bodies of two dead Arabs lay on the street near a U.N. guest house. Close to the bodies were rocket launchers and a rifle. On the Shomali Plain on the road to Kabul, a large crowd stood around three dead Taliban fighters. Alliance soldiers stood guard outside the offices of some international aid organizations. Some, however, appeared to have been looted. "Some illegal people went through and took everything from the offices," said Ghulam Ali, an elderly resident. The alliance's special security troops drove into the capital in cars festooned with pictures of their late commander Ahmed Shah Massood, who was killed in September in a suicide bombing. Qanoni said there are no plans for the deposed president, Burhanuddin Rabbani, to return to Kabul immediately. Kabul's 1 million people are wary of the alliance because of the bloody infighting that marked the four years of rule by Rabbani and his coalition. That turmoil paved the way for the southern-based Taliban to capture Kabul in 1996, a move that was hailed by many residents as a step toward stability. However, the Taliban's harsh enforcement of strict Islamic rules alienated many urban dwellers. Bush launched the air campaign here on Oct. 7 after the Taliban refused to hand over bin Laden, prime suspect in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that killed 4,500 people in the United States. After weeks of heavy U.S. bombing, the opposition broke through Taliban front lines Monday and took the hills above Kabul after a string of victories that began with Mazar-e-Sharif's capture in the north. From the rooftop of the Intercontinental Hotel on a hill overlooking Kabul columns of Taliban vehicles could be seen heading south beginning Monday night. The exodus continued after sunrise. The Taliban forces were said to be heading toward the town of Maidan Shahr, about 25 miles south of Kabul. As they had in the north of the country, the Taliban appeared to have decided to surrender territory rather than fight. "I think it is great news. It means the initial phase of the campaign is going well," Army Secretary Thomas White said on CNN's "Larry King Live." The fall of Kabul may complicate efforts to establish a broad-based government acceptable to the dominant Pashtun ethnic group, the core of Taliban support. The alliance is dominated by ethnic Tajiks, Uzbeks and Shiite Muslims. At the United Nations, the United States, Russia and six nations that border Afghanistan pledged "to establish a broad-based Afghan administration on an urgent basis." The aim is to put together a transitional leadership that is broadly acceptable, possibly including Taliban defectors. However, alliance leaders have rejected bringing in former Taliban members. Holding the capital increases the alliance's claim on a dominant role in a future government. That could cause problems for Pakistan. The northern alliance considers Pakistan a patron of the Taliban even through Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf abandoned them after the Sept. 11 terror attacks. Musharraf has called for Kabul to be declared a neutral city. During an appearance Monday night on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, Musharraf said the alliance's move on Kabul was "dangerous" because "we are now getting information that there are certain atrocities being perpetrated in Mazar-e Sharif." "And that is exactly my apprehension that we have seen a lot of atrocities, a lot of killings between the various ethnic groups in Kabul after the Soviets left, and that's why we are of the opinion that Kabul should be maintained as a demilitarized city," Musharraf said.
What attributes to our quick, although incomplete, success in Afghanistan and Russia's total failure a decade ago? Did the Soviets not use airstrikes like we did?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was because the Afghans were united against the Soviet invasion and had support from the US.
Rich, they wanted to instill an extending communistic type of government....despite lack of resources the country had....so they had the complete country of Afghanistan against them....including the majority resisting northern tribe (now known as the Northern Alliance.) Additionally, they used a sweeping ground offensive approach (which would have been ideal against say China or Western Europe, but disastrous in the swooping, mountainous terrain) They absolutely could not gain safe ground anywhere...... That to me is the biggest difference. In addition we have more combat experience, better technology, and could appeal to a segment of the population.
We also have the benefit of the Russian's experience there & access to the intelligence they accumulated. We know what doesn't work. But, most of all, we're pretty d*mn good at kicking butt.
The difference was that the Soviets wanted to control Afghanistan, and we don't. We're not trying to capture the country, we're just replacing the Taliban. We're not putting a half million man army in there, just enough to tip the balance. But most importantly, we're not going to occupy Afghanistan. The Soviets captured all of the major cities, too. But they tried to occupy it for nearly 10 years, and they made themselves easy targets for guerilla warfare. International peacekeepers will have to be used in some areas, but they are not an invading force. Now, the Taliban is going to head for the hills and try to do the same thing, but who are they going to hit? Unlike the mujahadeen fighting the Soviets, they have almost no popular support; people are glad they are out of the cities. Without popular support they have no food source. So let them hide in their caves. They can die in their caves for all I care. As for the reprisals and "atrocities" - good. I hope the Northern Alliance kills every single Pakistani and Arab they find there, because they're all Taliban and Al Qaeda. These people invaded their country and enslaved them, and they are beyond reform in case no one's noticed. Oh, and they killed 5,000 Americans, so I don't have much inclination to ask the Northern Alliance to restrain itself.
I can't agree with your statement here. Why would we ever condone the total genocide of a culture? It has never been shown that the Taliban participated in the WTC disaster, just that they're giving refuge to Bin Laden. Also, the Taliban (according to the article) are from the southern part of Afghanistan, so they didn't invade & enslave the people of Afghanistan. The objective of this war is to remove the Taliban from power, capture or kill Bin Laden, & destroy the al-qaida network. Maybe you missed this part of the article: Qanoni said there are no plans for the deposed president, Burhanuddin Rabbani, to return to Kabul immediately. Kabul's 1 million people are wary of the alliance because of the bloody infighting that marked the four years of rule by Rabbani and his coalition. That turmoil paved the way for the southern-based Taliban to capture Kabul in 1996, a move that was hailed by many residents as a step toward stability. However, the Taliban's harsh enforcement of strict Islamic rules alienated many urban dwellers.
They pretty much had as much to do with it as bin Laden. Not only is he giving refuge to bin Laden, bin Laden is funding the Taliban while the Taliban is protecting. How many times have you seen where two people are involved in a murder, only one of them committed the murder, but the other is found guilty of helping the murderer? Aiding and abetting. That's what the Taliban has done. If I knew someone who killed someone you knew, and I hid them in my house for weeks, wouldn't you consider me just as guilty as the murderer?
When did I ever say anything about that? I said that I have no problem with the Northern Alliance killing those murderous scumbags who have held their country hostage for over 5 years. I don't see how that could be considered genocide by any stretch. I'd call it justice and good planning for the future. Do a little homework on who the Taliban really are. Most of them are not even Afghans. They were created by the Pakistanis in order to 1) gain "strategic depth" in Afghanistan (i.e. take it over), and 2) recruit non-Pakistani terrorists for use in Kashmir and Jammu. And as for enslavement, well, just look at how happy everyone in Kabul is now. The Taliban is the most repressive regime on the planet. Or should I say "was"... A large portion of the Taliban is Arab and Pakistani. Al Qaeda, which hosts the Taliban's "crack" 055 Brigade, is inseparable from the Taliban and is entirely foreign. And of the 12,000 troops who two days ago were on the front lines around Kabul, 9,000 of them were Pakistanis. The Northern Alliance has always regarded them as a foreign invader, and there's a reason for that. They are. Yes, and that will be accomplished with the help of the Northern Alliance. If they simply drive Al Qaeda (meaning the Arabs and Pakistanis) out of Afghanistan, then they just go somewhere else and continue their work. If the Northern Alliance kills them where they find them, then there is no better way to destroy the Al Qaeda network. No more final way. These bastards are just getting what they deserve. They wanted war with us, they got it.
No, I wouldn't consider you just as guilty as the murderer. However, I would consider you guilty of the crime of harboring the fugitive. There is a big difference here. What Treeman was implying was that both crimes are deserving of the same penalty & they're not. The actual committing of the act of murder is obviously, more serious & deserves the death penalty. Do you feel that if you were just hiding someone (a murderer in this case), that you should also be given the gas chamber? Either I've missed the news on this or the Taliban has never been directly linked or accused of the actual planning, financing, & execution of the attack on the WTC. If it has been reported or proven, then I'll retract my previous response to Treeman's post. My main reason for responding the way I did, is to point out that we shouldn't just label someone as being guilty of something that no one has proven yet. I think that the press does enough of that on their own, without needing our help.
Hottoddie, The Taliban and Al Qaeda are inseparable. You've got to understand that right off the bat. Bin Laden is the money behind the Taliban, the 055 Brigade is their best unit, the Taliban trains at Al Qaeda's camps... You figure it out. The Northern Alliance isn't killing the Taliban foreigners because they helped Al Qaeda blow up the WTC. The Northern Alliance doesn't care about that (most of them probably don't really know about it). They are killing these people because they invaded their country and forced draconian laws - most of which are punishable by death - on their people. Tens of thousands of Afghans have been executed by the Taliban for the most minor of infractions (like listening to music, or hanging a picture up in their home) the past few years. That is why the Northern Alliance is killing these guys. It doesn't have anything to do with 9/11. It has alot to do with the fact that the Taliban is packed full of insane murdering scumbags who have killed alot of innocent Afghans over the years. And there can be no peace in Afghanistan if these people are still alive. They are terrorists of the worst kind.
Prisoners of war should never be slaughtered, as it currently seems to be happening. It is a bad sign that this happens. It was to be expected, but I hope it will not mean that Afghanistan will get the same cruel kind of rulers, just other ones. Now I just hope they find Bin Laden and his aides and bring him to justice.
Det the Thret said: Prisoners of war should never be slaughtered, as it currently seems to be happening. It is a bad sign that this happens. It was to be expected, but I hope it will not mean that Afghanistan will get the same cruel kind of rulers, just other ones. Good post. It is good to see a post with morality, moderation and complexity. There are at least two important reasons for our special forces not to even condone atrocities against the Taliban, even the Arabs and non Afghans, because the truth usually comes out. Acting more civilized than the other side helps us in the nonmilitary side of the war on terrorism. This is still very important though, it may seem wimpish and unimportant for some on this board. People, particularly those who lack actual military experience and are enamored with the Special Forces, seem to forget that they are human, too. As the Delta Froces guys complained the armchair guys naively think that they are supermen. We should hate to see more of them than is necessary suffer from post traumatic stress disorders and guilt for the rest of their lives. They don't deserve it.
glynch: So let me get this straight - you're worried that we'll lose the moral high ground, and that our SF will be traumatized by this experience? As for the moral high ground, you seem to be under the illusion that we control the Northern Alliance. We do not. They are killing these bastards because they have been victimized by them, and there's nothing we can do about it. And again, if anyone deserves to die it's these people. And just so you've got things straight, most of them have died in battle, not been executed as some seem to think. A very few have been executed, but most of them died in gun battles - just as they wanted to. If they wanted to live then they'd have left with the rest of the Taliban; they want to become martyrs so that they are guaranteed a spot in heaven. They truly believe that dying in battle is a great honor that will get them more perks there than the prophets. Just ask boy if you don't believe me. As for those few who actually have been executed, the situation is analogous to the slaying of prison guards by concentration camp inmates in WWII. They are getting back at the bastards who have held them hostage for so long, and I for one don't blame them one bit. As for the notion that our SF are traumatized by this event... That's pretty ridiculous even by your standards, glynch. They are not supermen, but if anyone can take it, they can. These guys aren't squeamish. I just have to again at this suggestion... I swear, you will not be happy until every US soldier has come home and every Taliban commander is back in his village calling the shots. The cities are finally falling - the precursor to the aid shipments you claim to want to see running - and all you can do is complain.
CNN is reporting that it was the liberated Afghani citizens, rather than the Northan Alliance, who killed some, possibly most of the Taliban remaining in the cities.
Treeman, you just don't know what you are talking about. As I said I have a close relative who spent 20 years in the Special Forces. He tells me many of them have had problems with it. Of course in most cases it is isn't completely incapacitating. My professional work occasinally exposes me to soldeirs who have had PTSDT. A close social worker friend of mine who I see on the average twice a week or so works in the psychiatry at the VA. Go back to your novels, your geostrategic papers and talking to arms salesmen in think tanks. To be fair to you, maybe you have only talked to servicemen who came out of the war experience unscathed. They are fortuantely the majority.
glynch: I am not denying that PTSD exists, glynch, but these guys can take what they're seeing right now. In fact, they are initiating the combat. These guys are actually leading the Noprthern Alliance in battle - they are not shying away from it. And this situation is different than any war in the past half century. Need I remind you that 5,000 American civilians are dead, and the Pentagon has a big hole in it??? Our SF want revenge. They are eager to fight these scumbags. You should be ashamed to even attempt to disrupt support for the war by claiming that we need to protect the fragile psyches of our SF troops in the field. I repeat, . And I think the record will show pretty clearly when the dust settles that you are the one who is clueless in this whole thing. You haven't been right about a single thing yet. BTW, why don't you respond to mc mark's comment?
