[jinnzaman]

Originally Posted by ChotooMotoo

It certainly doesn't help that a) the western media labels practically ALL insurgents as Taliban, and b) there are some groups who label THEMSELVES as Taliban to scare people, and then go out and do really crappy things.

Which non-groups aren't Taliban that are engaging in resistance to the US occupation? I'm just curious, because I thought everyone was either directly or indirectly connected to the Taliban according to most news reports.

[ChotooMotoo]

Originally Posted by jinnzaman

Which non-groups aren't Taliban that are engaging in resistance to the US occupation? I'm just curious, because I thought everyone was either directly or indirectly connected to the Taliban according to most news reports.

Yeah, I'm not sure how accurate that depiction is though. Afghanistan is a relatively diverse place. Is it inconceivable that there are some warlords or other groups who are fighting against NATO, yet are also not Taliban, especially when those groups actions show little ideological similarity with the old Taliban? (like the groups involved in drug smuggling for instance)

[Variable]

Originally Posted by Jamroll

You don't have to count them as a force for good, but a lot of people did. They got rid of the feuding warlords, cut opium production, and slammed down hard on bandits and organised crime amongst other things. I'm sure all these groups - warlords, heroin producers and gangster firms - are scared to death of returning to life under them, but then again I don't think that's such a bad idea.

I wasn't talking about war lords or opium farmers.

Also, there's a difference between supporting al-Qaeda and being al-Qaeda. They seem to be moving into the latter.

I'm suspect of whether or not that difference was significant.

[MossadConspiracy]

Originally Posted by Jamroll

I think it'd be useful to simplify the terms and groups to aid understanding:

Old Taliban - strict, harsh, but generally a force for good. Brought law and order, but had some practices that raised eyebrows especially for those unfamiliar with Afghan culture

New Taliban - unpredictable, random, al-Qaeda tribute band, seemingly causing chaos and confusion everywhere

US government definition of Taliban: Any Pashtun with a gun (which is pretty much 99.9% of them) Scratch that... any person with a turban and a gun.

These simplifications include opinions, it isnt clarification its polemic

ws

[LEGALEAGLE]

A Pathan Warrior's Farewell

Beloved, on a parchment white
With my heart's blood to thee I write,
My pen a dagger, sharp and clean,
Inlaid with golden damascene,
Which I have used and not in vain,
To keep my honour free from stain,

Now when our house its mourning wears,
Do not thyself give way to tears,
Instruct our eldest son that I
was ever as anxious to die,
For when death comes the brave are free,
So in thy dreams, remember me.

The Golden Pomegrenate by John Baker (1966) - London

[jinnzaman]

Originally Posted by ChotooMotoo

Yeah, I'm not sure how accurate that depiction is though. Afghanistan is a relatively diverse place. Is it inconceivable that there are some warlords or other groups who are fighting against NATO, yet are also not Taliban, especially when those groups actions show little ideological similarity with the old Taliban? (like the groups involved in drug smuggling for instance)

No, I agree its conceivable, but the insurgency in Iraq, for example, has relatively identifiable separate groups fighting (ISI for example, Sadr's militia, the Sufi squadrons, etc). In Lebanon and in Pakistan, various groups and their leaders are identifiable. In Afghanistan though, I've never heard of any other group besides the Taliban claim an attack or any warlord doing anything on their own. When attacks occur, its usually under the name of the Taliban and often announced by a Taliban spokesman or official. Again, I'm not saying its inconcievable that there are any other groups resisting NATO and Afghani forces, but I just hadn't heard of any.

[Jaysh]

Originally Posted by jinnzaman

No, I agree its conceivable, but the insurgency in Iraq, for example, has relatively identifiable separate groups fighting (ISI for example, Sadr's militia, the Sufi squadrons, etc). In Lebanon and in Pakistan, various groups and their leaders are identifiable. In Afghanistan though, I've never heard of any other group besides the Taliban claim an attack or any warlord doing anything on their own. When attacks occur, its usually under the name of the Taliban and often announced by a Taliban spokesman or official. Again, I'm not saying its inconcievable that there are any other groups resisting NATO and Afghani forces, but I just hadn't heard of any.

I agree with Chotoo Motoo on this one. The recent craze nowadays has been for groups in the north of pakistan and afghanistan to claim that they are taliban, even if they do not have any direct link to the taliban proper. I also think Jamroll hit the nail on its head, namely that there is a difference between the former taliban and the current ones.

[jinnzaman]

Originally Posted by Jaysh

I agree with Chotoo Motoo on this one. The recent craze nowadays has been for groups in the north of pakistan and afghanistan to claim that they are taliban, even if they do not have any direct link to the taliban proper. I also think Jamroll hit the nail on its head, namely that there is a difference between the former taliban and the current ones.

Do you have a media source to substantiate this claim?

[Jaysh]

Originally Posted by jinnzaman

Do you have a media source to substantiate this claim?

JNN

10 char

[jinnzaman]

Originally Posted by Jaysh

JNN

10 char

Unfairly Imbalanced.

[Jaysh]

Originally Posted by jinnzaman

Unfairly Imbalanced.

lol it's awesome that i didnt need to explain what it stands for. we're meant to be together.

[kenneth]

Opium and heroin huh?

[jinnzaman]

Originally Posted by Jaysh

lol it's awesome that i didnt need to explain what it stands for. we're meant to be together.

Oh janu! Vhat vay!

[Aryan_]

Originally Posted by Rambo

so large that two aircraft were brought in to destroy the underground bunker in which the hashish was being stored."

Yeah right. These drugs will soon mysteriously find themselves on European and American streets being sold to scrotes. The CIA and western intelligence agencies still run the drugs trade. Nothing has changed since Iran-Contra.

[Variable]

Originally Posted by Jaysh

I agree with Chotoo Motoo on this one. The recent craze nowadays has been for groups in the north of pakistan and afghanistan to claim that they are taliban, even if they do not have any direct link to the taliban proper. I also think Jamroll hit the nail on its head, namely that there is a difference between the former taliban and the current ones.

The seizure was made in the south, not in northern Pakistan or Afghanistan.

Anyway, I don't know what's so hard to believe about it. It seems like an obvoious course for events to take. Sure the Taliban isn't the same group it once was. It was ousted forcibly from power, fractured, and now it's looking for whatever source of funds it can get its hands on. It wouldn't have been the first time a principled group turned against those principles to help itself out in desperate times.

That's not to say that it isn't made up of the rump authority left over from pre-Oct 20001.