Talk:War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Conditional Surrender

[Serious Question] Under what circumstances would the peace deal currently in discussions, be considered a conditional surrender by the belligerent? I am not a history buff so I am unsure of the meanings of these terms. Gabefair (talk) 21:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

A surrendering is of arms, materiel, or personnel. Not territory, which is ceded or occupied or transfered or invaded. So, not applicable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.179.134.88 (talk) 00:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Third Phase?

Since "Operation Freedom's Sentinel" is stated to have ended on February 29, 2020 could we now be in a third phase of this current conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:4A:402:9F10:ED0A:8CF6:9173:2E15 (talk) 04:09, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the above. In the intervening days since the peach deal, both the Taliban and United States have resumed offensive attacks. Frevangelion (talk) 22:18, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Well now someone changed it to state that the whole war is over, which I don't think is the case in the slightest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:4A:402:9F10:ED0A:8CF6:9173:2E15 (talk) 04:40, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

International Criminal Court threatened

In the War Crimes -> NATO and Allies section, a paragraph describes the U.S. threatening sanctions and charges against ICC judges who attempt to prosecute Americans. Should this section specify which officials and/or departments made this announcement? The sources War in Afghanistan (2001–present)#cite_note-283 and War in Afghanistan (2001–present)#cite_note-284 seem to indicate that it was announced by White House National Security Advisor John Bolton, with the Defense Department also objecting to possible ICC probing. 2601:2C4:780:4ED0:9DB4:B71A:EC6E:E002 (talk) 04:51, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

"Escalating Misinformation War"

Hi, a New York Times article published yesterday, entitled, "Afghan Leaders Sideline Spokesmen in an Escalating Misinformation War", highlights the misinformation mechanics happening on various sides. I considered adding a new subsection "Misinformation" to section 3 "Impact on Afghan society". Any thoughts about that? Any suggestion as to a better place to include this info?--JBchrch (talk) 16:13, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Wardak re Alipour's militia.

Wardak re Alipour's militia has captured Markazay Behsood district from the Afghani government. He has no relations with the Taliban, so you think his militia is a new belligerent.--Garmin21 (talk) 23:48, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Legitimacy of Wikipedia when faced with obvious disinformation

I don't know if anyone will see this, but this article on the war in Afghanistan is so abysmally propagandic that listing all its errors and lies is too much work. Seriously, Wikipedia has a lot to answer for. At this point, it's been completely taken over by the american propaganda machine — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.18.27.135 (talk) 12:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I have to agree. The levels of propaganda in this article achieve some ludicrous levels, such as the part of the article that states "According to Nicholas Kristoff, improved healthcare resulting from the war has saved hundreds of thousands of lives." A credulous reader might be tempted to think that war is healthy, and that the world might be a far better and safer place if the war in Afghanistan was expanded throughout the entirety of Asia, or maybe even worldwide. One wonders if the two world wars might be considered to have been humanitarian causes. Ianbrettcooper (talk) 11:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ianbrettcooper: Healthcare indicators have improved since the war began. Mortality rate for children under five went from 129/1000 in 2000 to 62.3/1000 in 2018 (source). Maternal mortality went from 1450/100,000 in 2000 to 638/100,000 in 2017 (source). How do you think this article should present that information to avoid bias? I'm thinking remove the part about improved healthcare "resulting from the war" and just say that since the war began, healthcare has improved. I know you're making a broader point, I'm just trying to fix the specific issue you mentioned. --Cerebellum (talk) 02:16, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Jalaluddin Haqqani

Not so easy to edit for me, but I report Jalaluddin Haqqani died of natural causes and was not killed in action as written in the infobox.--79.24.120.120 (talk) 19:41, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Fixed! --Cerebellum (talk) 02:25, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Ending this article?

In september, the US will pull out its troops. NATO will do so probably sooner. The NATO phase of the Afghan Civil War will end. Will there be a civil war afterwards? We can't predict that, but what is obvious is that in september a new phase of the war will begin.

So, is time to "close" this article end change the title to War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) when the time comes? Let's hear em. Coltsfan (talk) 20:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I disagree with this, and think that the article should say 2001-present because not only is the war still going on and you are putting its endpoint in the future, we also cannot be certain that the United States will actually pull out of the country by the appointed date. I don't even know how you could argue against this, unless anyone editing Wikipedia can peer into the future. ComradeKublai (talk) 23:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Also you would need to provide a source that NATO forces actually did leave Afghanistan on September 11, 2021 for this to be added to the encyclopedia, and as this has not taken place yet no source exists and it cannot be put in an article. ComradeKublai (talk) 23:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@ComradeKublai: the change wouldn't happen right away. It's just a discussion for now, and no formal proposal to change the name was made here. The idea is to debate whether that if the conditions are such, like the withdrawal is completed, we'll have a new conflict pretty much, a civil war. It would be the same case that we saw when the soviets withdraw, with the government that they left behind fighting the war on their own. It's almost the exact same scenario and we have two articles for that one too. Coltsfan (talk) 23:33, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Ps: And to your second point, yes, there are sources (here is one) that says that NATO will also withdraw, thus ending it's mission there. Coltsfan (talk) 23:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Coltsfan: It may not have been you, but someone did edit the page and the wikibox to say the war ended September 11, 2021. As for your second message, you seem to have misunderstood what I was saying. Obviously there are sources right now predicting that the withdrawal will happen, however no one can predict the future and so such articles are not a valid reason to close the article. You originally argued that "what is obvious is that in september a new phase of the war will begin" but it is far from obvious at this point that Biden will keep this promise (many like it have been broken before). You also explicitly asked if it was, "time to 'close' this article end change the title to War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)," clearly indicating that you were in favor of changing the article right now and engaged in the Motte-and-bailey fallacy in your response to me.

@ComradeKublai: first, i didn't change any dates in the article. Second, i used words like "probably", said "We can't predict that", plus i didn't at any point suggested changing the name of the article now, i suggest that we entertain the idea now to see if the change is visible when it we cross the withdrawal deadline. But the point of this discussion is not to see if i'm right or wrong, only to know other people's opinions on the subject. But feel free to discuss the semantics of what i said, i guess, but i'd much rather stick to the topic at hand. Coltsfan (talk) 01:07, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I made a supplement to the phrase to avoid confusion, hope it's better now. Coltsfan (talk) 01:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Coltsfan: It's against Wikipedia to edit your comments on talk pages, especially after someone else replies to you and even more so to cover up for the fact that you lost an argument. Please don't do this, there is no need for the admins to get involved. ComradeKublai (talk) 02:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@ComradeKublai: i don't know how long you've been editing Wikipedia, but technically it's not against the rules to edit my own comments, especially when i warned you i did it. Look, this is not a debate to see who is right and wrong and who "wins" the argument. This is a honest discussion about the prospects of the changing the article's name it might happen, or not, depends on a consensus among the users here). You mentioned that i wasn't very clear, so i decide to make my statement more, well, clear. There is nothing against the rules about that. Feel free to ask any Sysop, they will confirm it. What it's not very nice is you editing what other users have wrote. It's ok, i didn't mind, relax. You are sorta correct in your point as this "should be avoided", but i wasn't trying to "win any argument" or convincing anyone, i was trying to know what other people's opinions. That's it. Assume good faith on people's behaviour.

So again, you want to go back and debate the issue or not? If your answer is "no", fine, i'll just wait for other people to weight in their opinion, it's not a problem. Coltsfan (talk) 02:24, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Map of current military situation

The map of the current military situation in Afghanistan is over a year old. I know that not that much has changed since then, but it would be nice if someone could upload a new one and make that reflected in the caption. I'd do it myself except I have no idea how. Thanks. Display name 99 (talk) 02:44, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I second this request, what is going on in the country? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:36, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Someone working for someone probably removed this one https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Taliban_insurgency_in_Afghanistan_(2015–present).svg to lessen the negative PR impact of their forces withdrawing after a 20 year conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.248.137.44 (talk) 09:42, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Allied losses

Total dead in the infobox for Allied casualties should be 73,925+. I did the math. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:1D2:DEEE:5BB6:814A (talk) 17:23, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

If you have done it then edit it. No one pay heeds to everything on talk page. Khalidwarrior (talk) 03:42, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

A House of Commons paper puts the UK fatalities at 457, not 456. As the page is currently locked, I can't edit the figure. Source: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9298/CBP-9298.pdf</ref>. Tregonning6 (talk) 11:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Mabey the biggest loss for the American-led Coalition was America's dignity Source: https://time.com/6091183/afghanistan-war-failure-interview/

Results: Taliban Victory

Why does the "results" sidebar of the post-invasion say "Taliban victory" while the Iraq war article does not say "Allied victory"? Is victory in the context of Wikipedia wars articles just whoever currently controls the government? In which case should the Iraq war article be updated? Or this one changed? I'm confused. 47.157.129.133 (talk) 17:34, 31 August 2021 (UTC)