Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6924|London, England
Kyrgyzstan's government has submitted a decree to parliament for the closure of a key US air base in the Central Asian state, Kyrgyz officials say.
The air base supports US and Nato operations in Afghanistan and is the only US base in Central Asia.
For Russia, on the other hand, it is a significant diplomatic victory as it seeks to reassert its influence in all former Soviet republics and beyond, our correspondent says.
President Bakiyev made his announcement on Tuesday in Moscow, where he was promised more than $2bn (£1.4bn) in Russian aid.
He said the Manas base - set up in 2001 to assist the US military operation against al-Qaeda and the Taleban in Afghanistan - was only meant to be open for two years at the most.
But perhaps more importantly, he made it clear the Americans had not been willing to pay what Bishkek regards as the right price to keep the base open, our correspondent says.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-p … 868586.stm
---

This could probably be a big blow to operations in Afghanistan. And what I find most interesting is how Russia is using its economic power to reassert itself in former USSR regions. And the fact that all this has popular support from the local populations doesn't speak well for the US.

Thoughts?

With the Taliban on the rise in Pakistan and constantly fucking up supply routes from there, even blowing up bridges and now with the probable closure of this base in Kyrgyzstan. Is the Allied operations in Afghanistan fucked? (like it was ever anything else, should've just gone straight for AQ and nabbed them all before they fucked off elsewhere, rather than get stuck into a fight with local Taliban/Pashtun nationalists which are probably impossible to actually defeat)


---

Especially with O talking about how Afghanistan operations are going to be ramped up a few notches, I guess this is a giant spanner in the works

Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-02-04 04:05:26)

Lieutenant_Jensen
Your cops are corrupt.
+200|6695|fåking denmark
Good one Kyrgyzstan!
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6708|North Carolina
Hey, now's the time to find a reason to leave Afghanistan.  Fuck 'em.  We gotta cut costs somewhere, and this is a good way to do it.

If Afghanistan becomes a problem again, we can always just bomb the shit out of them again.  Blowing them up is much cheaper than rebuilding them, and you don't have to rebuild them anyway.
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6803|so randum

Turquoise wrote:

Hey, now's the time to find a reason to leave Afghanistan.  Fuck 'em.  We gotta cut costs somewhere, and this is a good way to do it.

If Afghanistan becomes a problem again, we can always just bomb the shit out of them again.  Blowing them up is much cheaper than rebuilding them, and you don't have to rebuild them anyway.
Nah, i do agree with the Afghan invasion. Couldn't a carrier group + Turkey or some other country take the strain of a loss of base?
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6409|eXtreme to the maX
Unles you've worked out a way of landing a C17 on a carrier - no.
Fuck Israel
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6708|North Carolina

FatherTed wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Hey, now's the time to find a reason to leave Afghanistan.  Fuck 'em.  We gotta cut costs somewhere, and this is a good way to do it.

If Afghanistan becomes a problem again, we can always just bomb the shit out of them again.  Blowing them up is much cheaper than rebuilding them, and you don't have to rebuild them anyway.
Nah, i do agree with the Afghan invasion. Couldn't a carrier group + Turkey or some other country take the strain of a loss of base?
Perhaps...
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6456|what

I'd like to see Russia deal with the Taliban.

Don't think it is in their interests however.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6924|London, England
I have a novel idea, how about just using Afghanistan directly
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7020

TheAussieReaper wrote:

I'd like to see Russia deal with the Taliban.

Don't think it is in their interests however.
Got their ass kicked greatly last time. Well they did get US support during that time... Fuck the Russians.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6924|London, England

Cybargs wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

I'd like to see Russia deal with the Taliban.

Don't think it is in their interests however.
Got their ass kicked greatly last time. Well they did get US support during that time... Fuck the Russians.
I think that's why Russia is getting involved and getting cosy with former Soviet states etc.. that are friendly to the US (making them switch like Kyrgyz) thus fucking over the US in Afghanistan to do the same to them as they did to the USSR when they were there. Difference being the US/Allies are trying to be much, much more friendly with the locals (thus making the war not as harsh as it was last time) as well as Pakistan not being on the opposite side this time.

It was all because of the USSR in the first place that Afghanistan is what it is today, you can put blame on countries like the USA, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia too but no way near as much as the USSR.
Lieutenant_Jensen
Your cops are corrupt.
+200|6695|fåking denmark

Cybargs wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

I'd like to see Russia deal with the Taliban.

Don't think it is in their interests however.
Got their ass kicked greatly last time. Well they did get US support during that time... Fuck the Russians.
And now US are getting there arse kicked. With their own weapons... Fuck the Americans.
Ajax_the_Great1
Dropped on request
+206|6950

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

I'd like to see Russia deal with the Taliban.

Don't think it is in their interests however.
Got their ass kicked greatly last time. Well they did get US support during that time... Fuck the Russians.
And now US are getting there arse kicked. With their own weapons... Fuck the Americans.
wat?
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7020

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

I'd like to see Russia deal with the Taliban.

Don't think it is in their interests however.
Got their ass kicked greatly last time. Well they did get US support during that time... Fuck the Russians.
And now US are getting there arse kicked. With their own weapons... Fuck the Americans.
As Ajax said. Wat. I don't think Al Qaeda is using US weapons, and btw, I think US is winning the war, not the peace. There is a fine difference.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Lai
Member
+186|6454

Cybargs wrote:

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

Cybargs wrote:


Got their ass kicked greatly last time. Well they did get US support during that time... Fuck the Russians.
And now US are getting there arse kicked. With their own weapons... Fuck the Americans.
As Ajax said. Wat. I don't think Al Qaeda is using US weapons, and btw, I think US is winning the war, not the peace. There is a fine difference.
Maybe not dirrectly, but it wouldn't suprisre me if they drew from US resources. For example: Karzai's government has fairly recently started making the shift from AK type to AR15 type weapons (and 5.56 NATO ammo). That leaves a relative large numbers of surplus AK's. Considering many of the Taliban's suppliers are actually former Northern Alliance warlords (in it simply for the money),  I wonder if we know where all those AK's are going
andy12
Banned
+52|6961

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

I'd like to see Russia deal with the Taliban.

Don't think it is in their interests however.
Got their ass kicked greatly last time. Well they did get US support during that time... Fuck the Russians.
And now US are getting there arse kicked. With their own weapons... Fuck the Americans.
Actually the coalition wins pretty much every firefight they get into and there are far many more dead Taliban, take your attention seeking posts elsewhere.


as for OP, Uzbekistan was used in 2001 and 2002 for the SF fight. No doubt they can be used again, as well as the massive safe airfields in Afghanistan itself.
Lieutenant_Jensen
Your cops are corrupt.
+200|6695|fåking denmark

andy12 wrote:

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

Cybargs wrote:


Got their ass kicked greatly last time. Well they did get US support during that time... Fuck the Russians.
And now US are getting there arse kicked. With their own weapons... Fuck the Americans.
Actually the coalition wins pretty much every firefight they get into and there are far many more dead Taliban, take your attention seeking posts elsewhere.
I lol'd.
andy12
Banned
+52|6961

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

andy12 wrote:

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:


And now US are getting there arse kicked. With their own weapons... Fuck the Americans.
Actually the coalition wins pretty much every firefight they get into and there are far many more dead Taliban, take your attention seeking posts elsewhere.
I lol'd.
Why when it's fact...
Lieutenant_Jensen
Your cops are corrupt.
+200|6695|fåking denmark

andy12 wrote:

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

andy12 wrote:


Actually the coalition wins pretty much every firefight they get into and there are far many more dead Taliban, take your attention seeking posts elsewhere.
I lol'd.
Why when it's fact...
And how many Coalition Force soldiers are getting killed by roadside bombs and suicide bombs? Many.
How many Taliban and Al-Qaeda members are getting killed by (suicide)bombs? Not many.
andy12
Banned
+52|6961

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

andy12 wrote:

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:


I lol'd.
Why when it's fact...
And how many Coalition Force soldiers are getting killed by roadside bombs and suicide bombs? Many.
How many Taliban and Al-Qaeda members are getting killed by (suicide)bombs? Not many.
I'm not going to degrade soldiers lives to numbers to win an argument for some wannabe emo. The west doesn't use suicide bombs, what are you talking about? Taliban fire, Taliban take fire, air support is called in and the world is rid of said insurgents. Many more insurgents are killed than are soldiers, got anything else to add?
Lieutenant_Jensen
Your cops are corrupt.
+200|6695|fåking denmark

andy12 wrote:

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

andy12 wrote:


Why when it's fact...
And how many Coalition Force soldiers are getting killed by roadside bombs and suicide bombs? Many.
How many Taliban and Al-Qaeda members are getting killed by (suicide)bombs? Not many.
I'm not going to degrade soldiers lives to numbers to win an argument for some wannabe emo. The west doesn't use suicide bombs, what are you talking about? Taliban fire, Taliban take fire, air support is called in and the world is rid of said insurgents. Many more insurgents are killed than are soldiers, got anything else to add?
Civilians.


And then, why don't just go cry already?
andy12
Banned
+52|6961

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

andy12 wrote:

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:


And how many Coalition Force soldiers are getting killed by roadside bombs and suicide bombs? Many.
How many Taliban and Al-Qaeda members are getting killed by (suicide)bombs? Not many.
I'm not going to degrade soldiers lives to numbers to win an argument for some wannabe emo. The west doesn't use suicide bombs, what are you talking about? Taliban fire, Taliban take fire, air support is called in and the world is rid of said insurgents. Many more insurgents are killed than are soldiers, got anything else to add?
Civilians.


And then, why don't just go cry already?
What? Make some sense or get out of the section. WTF does "Civilians" mean?

Don't talk to me about crying, in bewteen begging for attention that's all you fucking do.
Lieutenant_Jensen
Your cops are corrupt.
+200|6695|fåking denmark

andy12 wrote:

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

andy12 wrote:

I'm not going to degrade soldiers lives to numbers to win an argument for some wannabe emo. The west doesn't use suicide bombs, what are you talking about? Taliban fire, Taliban take fire, air support is called in and the world is rid of said insurgents. Many more insurgents are killed than are soldiers, got anything else to add?
Civilians.


And then, why don't just go cry already?
What? Make some sense or get out of the section. WTF does "Civilians" mean?

Don't talk to me about crying, in bewteen begging for attention that's all you fucking do.
What do you think civilians mean?

How many civilians is it that coalition forces have killed in airstrikes? Bloody many.

And wtf are you? The Prime fucking Minister of DAST?
andy12
Banned
+52|6961

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:

andy12 wrote:

Lieutenant_Jensen wrote:


What do you think civilians mean?

How many civilians is it that coalition forces have killed in airstrikes? Bloody many.

And wtf are you? The Prime fucking Minister of DAST?
What does civilians dying have to do with the coalition winning every firefight they are in, winning ambushes and winning battles? Nothing.

Taliban drive bomb cars into schools and kill hundreds of civilians every year, if not thousands. Not that that has to do with winning any battles...

And wtf are you, a failed emo?
You are really stupid..
Says the guy that thinks the Taliban are winning against the coalition and does nothing but write piss poor attention seeking "poems". Hypocrite.
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|7020

Mekstizzle wrote:

Kyrgyzstan's government has submitted a decree to parliament for the closure of a key US air base in the Central Asian state, Kyrgyz officials say.
The air base supports US and Nato operations in Afghanistan and is the only US base in Central Asia.
For Russia, on the other hand, it is a significant diplomatic victory as it seeks to reassert its influence in all former Soviet republics and beyond, our correspondent says.
President Bakiyev made his announcement on Tuesday in Moscow, where he was promised more than $2bn (£1.4bn) in Russian aid.
He said the Manas base - set up in 2001 to assist the US military operation against al-Qaeda and the Taleban in Afghanistan - was only meant to be open for two years at the most.
But perhaps more importantly, he made it clear the Americans had not been willing to pay what Bishkek regards as the right price to keep the base open, our correspondent says.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-p … 868586.stm
---

This could probably be a big blow to operations in Afghanistan. And what I find most interesting is how Russia is using its economic power to reassert itself in former USSR regions. And the fact that all this has popular support from the local populations doesn't speak well for the US.

Thoughts?

With the Taliban on the rise in Pakistan and constantly fucking up supply routes from there, even blowing up bridges and now with the probable closure of this base in Kyrgyzstan. Is the Allied operations in Afghanistan fucked? (like it was ever anything else, should've just gone straight for AQ and nabbed them all before they fucked off elsewhere, rather than get stuck into a fight with local Taliban/Pashtun nationalists which are probably impossible to actually defeat)


---

Especially with O talking about how Afghanistan operations are going to be ramped up a few notches, I guess this is a giant spanner in the works
be careful what you wish for... don't let your thinly veiled hatred of the US get in the way...  Have fun in Europe if Russia continues to get more powerful and enjoy the Taliban when they expand to the rest of Europe given the chance...  Nothing to worry about though...

Last edited by [TUF]Catbox (2009-02-04 09:22:38)

Love is the answer
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6526|Escea

There's been about 4000 of the Afghan security forces killed, just over 1000 coalition and 20000 Taliban and their allies. Something tells me that the Taliban lose a lot more of their own.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard