Jump to content

Talk:Taliban insurgency

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 200.84.36.197 (talk) at 22:51, 19 November 2015 (→Iran no support Taliban: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Start

This is the article about the guerrilla war the Taliban are waging in southern Afghanistan, after the invasion. A short timeline is needed.--TheFEARgod 11:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MilHist Assessment

I do not know if the "outdated" tag is appropriate, as there is content updated as of June and July 2006. Nevertheless, this is an article that needs constant attention as the situation develops, and needs to have updates cleanly integrated into the text, not just added as new sections. I am surprised to see this article so short, considering how major a topic this is, and how widely reported this is. Take a look at half of the other articles in the War on Terrorism category (or many other articles related to subjects of the last 50 years or less) and you'll see that in the modern era, with the multitude of media outlets and advanced technologies, there is tons of material available to the average citizen (and therefore the average Wikipedia editor) to be added here. In particular, I second the call for a timeline or chronology. LordAmeth 02:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Medusa merge?

I believe Operation Medusa ought to be its own article; is is a major offensive involving thousands of troops, and has been ongoing for a week with no sign of stopping. Other operations such as Operation Anaconda have their own pages.

Should not the "Taliban insurgency" article focus on the activities of Taliban insurgents, rather than the people fighting against them?

Eleland 16:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I think that might lead to a POV fork though. --Guinnog 17:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

h-cz 14:09, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think merging would help anything. Operation Medusa is a military operation led by NATO with plenty of events and media coverage and it ought to be separate topic. More, taliban insurgency article is presents the other position to report on the events and structure the information about happenings in long term time interval in afghanistan.

we need here a short overview of Medusa. With a ||see: Operation Medusa|| header --TheFEARgod 17:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AgreedThat would solve this "merge issue", since Op. Medusa is a purely military operation, only partly associated with the insurgencyLan Di 21:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the merge tags. Eleland 18:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge altogether

Or change the 2001 war into 2001-2002 conflict only, and move everything since the return of the Taliban here. --HanzoHattori 16:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

why, we do have Iraqi insurgency also --TheFEARgod (Ч) 22:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Combatant flags

I have removed the NATO and Canadian flags.

To have both the NATO and ISAF ensignas is redundant and confusing, as ISAF is "[...] a NATO-led security and development mission in Afghanistan [...]". The ISAF consists mainly of NATO members, but NATO's role in ISAF is organisatory, not as a belligerent party per se.

I think no country in ISAF should have its flag in the box, they all work under an integrated command, and others countries have seen almost as much major action as the Canadians (particularly the Dutch). This only leads to "my country too"-ism.

The US stays because a major part of its forces are not under ISAF command. --Victor falk 06:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

I'd support renaming this to Afghan insurgency, since a large number of Afghans fighting are not related to the Taliban, other than through mass-media and politicians finding it easier to refer to them all as "Taliban". See Iraqi Insurgency for a similar name. Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 20:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

be careful, there can be a disambiguation. Please provide sources for the claim --TheFEARgod (Ч) 12:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Which claim? That many armed Afghan rebels aren't specifically related to the former ruling party? Easy enough...

Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 20:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why "insurgents" and not "freedom fighters"? Wikipedia is supposed to be unbiased. Danensis (talk) 13:37, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the use of the terms "insurgent(s)" and "insurgency" is laden with bias. While the phrase "freedom fighters" would be favoured by some, the term "resistance fighters" would be both more neutral and more appropriate, making the historic connection with the resistance groups that operated throughout Europe during World War II. Dlgrant (talk) 16:58, 16 July 2010 (UTC) dlgrant[reply]

What I find hilarious is that all these disparate groups are commonly referred to as a single group by western military and media - "the Taliban". Considering that none of them have declared allegiance to the previous government of Afghanistan - the Taliban - or, in fact, even declared any desire to overthrow the "legitimate" government, means they are clearly not insurgents. QuantumG (talk) 12:57, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Resistance fighters" is neutral and keeps us at academic distance.Parrotistic (talk) 21:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misc

The topic's locked atm. I found two websites holding info that could be used as citation for the car accident triggering riots in Kabul in 2006 in the "2006 Escalation" section. Can someone confirm and add them? http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5437226 | http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2006/jun/01/us-troops-fired-at-mob-after-kabul-accident/ --R04m3r (talk) 21:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

casaulties and army strength  !!

its written that the Talaban army strength is 25000 soldiers then why are the casaulties 40000 ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.52.101.32 (talk) 13:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the picture claim it would show fighters which SURRENDERED to police forces? they still hold their firearms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.154.195.115 (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

article name bias

why is the article named "taliban insurgency", not "afghan resistance"? Why is there no article called Afghan resistance? typing this redirects to the "mujahideen" article which is terribly misleading to suggest that all Afghani people defending their homes from invaders are religious fanatics. There is an article called "French resistance", why is it not called "French communist insurgency" then so that it would be consistent with "taliban insurgency"? Articles like this are obviously edited by the US military and public authorities, wikipedia needs to take steps against this practice. I guess nobody would like to see the German government officials editing "French resistance" to "French communist insurgency", right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.200.57.137 (talk) 13:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is called an insurgency because that is what the majority of reliable sources call it. It has nothing to do with who edits the article, it is Wikipedia policy. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:01, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Taliban in northern Afghanistan.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Taliban in northern Afghanistan.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Taliban in northern Afghanistan.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:41, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zar Ajam from North Waziristan in Pakistan.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Zar Ajam from North Waziristan in Pakistan.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Zar Ajam from North Waziristan in Pakistan.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Time line 2012

The Taliban insurgency continued into 2012.

Timeline[edit] August: 27 August: Taliban insurgents in the Taliban-controlled southern Helmand area killed 17 civilians – fifteen men and two women[130] – who were attending a party. A government official said that the victims were beheaded for celebrating with music and mixgender dancing[131] in the Musa Qala district of Helmand, which ran contrary to the Taliban's extreme brand of Islam. Later, however, a provincial government official said that the 17 people killed were due to a fight between two Taliban commanders over two women (who were also killed). The civilians were either beheaded or had their throats cut, but some showed signs of gunshot wounds or beatings.[130] The attacks were condemned by Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, who ordered an investigation into the attack,[131] the leader of the NATO coalition led by the United States, the United Nations, and the European Union. However, the Taliban has denied responsibility for the attack, saying that no Taliban members have ever killed civilians. The attack occurred on the same day when two United States troops were killed by an Afghan soldier.[132] 10 Afghan soldiers were killed by the Taliban, also in the Helmand province.[130]

Well this content is all bull shit no one prove this. As the Taliban were posting they said we will allow all journalists and everyone who wanna see the place can come and talk to local people. This was just a propaganda by the Afghan government. I wish you understand what i wrote here if you can prove this will be great or other wise please writhe something ells from that year you can find many facts that happened in that year. I will also look for those articles who were shared in some Afghan news sites about this matter.

Iran no support Taliban

Taliban is Sunni - Iran is Shia, Iran supported the Shias who are against the Taliban (Hasaras) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazaras

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Taliban_insurgency&oldid=691453202"