2 ms·

In these parts of the world, 'defecting to the winning side' is a basic survival skill. As soon as the US stopped its support it was obvious who'd win (the peop

by yyyk 5y ago

In these parts of the world, 'defecting to the winning side' is a basic survival skill. As soon as the US stopped its support it was obvious who'd win (the people still getting state support from Pakistan). So why should a smart faction fight and die? To make the people who aren't there anymore look better?

captain_price7 5y ago
I think you're overestimating Pakistan's capability. It gave Taliban leaders shelter at their worst moment, and that is about the only leverage ISI had. The moment Taliban started to carve out territory inside Afghanistan, that leverage was gone. There's some gratitude, but also lots of resentment among Taliban leadership about the way they were treated by the Pakistani authority.
- baybal2 5y ago
  Yep, totally right. I think you need to also tell about Afghan government itself "returning Pakistan a favour," and dispatching the Pakistani Taliban.
erklik 5y ago
The amount of support Pakistan provides Taliban is severly overblown. Did they provide them refuge when Taliban was on the back foot? Sure, probably. Is Pakistan aiding them in this current offense? It really doesn't seem like it.
- yyyk 5y ago
  ISI help is significantly more than refuge. That said, the Taliban didn't need help for this offensive. They've been handed the country on a platter.
bawolff 5y ago
I don't know that much about the region, but the us-supported side had 20 years and lots of money to prepare for this day. I would assume if they enjoyed more popular support in the near past they would have built something that would less obviously be the losing side today, and people wouldn't have jumped ship so quickly.
- yyyk 5y ago
  The US built their side so as to maximally depend on them and then pulled support abruptly, while all but grovelling to the Taliban in public. There could have been no other result the way this withdrawal was done.

by yyyk 5y ago

captain_price7 5y ago

I think you're overestimating Pakistan's capability. It gave Taliban leaders shelter at their worst moment, and that is about the only leverage ISI had. The moment Taliban started to carve out territory inside Afghanistan, that leverage was gone. There's some gratitude, but also lots of resentment among Taliban leadership about the way they were treated by the Pakistani authority.

baybal2 5y ago
Yep, totally right. I think you need to also tell about Afghan government itself "returning Pakistan a favour," and dispatching the Pakistani Taliban.

erklik 5y ago

The amount of support Pakistan provides Taliban is severly overblown. Did they provide them refuge when Taliban was on the back foot? Sure, probably. Is Pakistan aiding them in this current offense? It really doesn't seem like it.

yyyk 5y ago
ISI help is significantly more than refuge. That said, the Taliban didn't need help for this offensive. They've been handed the country on a platter.

bawolff 5y ago

I don't know that much about the region, but the us-supported side had 20 years and lots of money to prepare for this day. I would assume if they enjoyed more popular support in the near past they would have built something that would less obviously be the losing side today, and people wouldn't have jumped ship so quickly.

yyyk 5y ago
The US built their side so as to maximally depend on them and then pulled support abruptly, while all but grovelling to the Taliban in public. There could have been no other result the way this withdrawal was done.