Afghanistan

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
It's too easy to make snap judgements and while Joe may have genuine reason to feel confident in his observation skills and thus make strong declarations, I know that I don't have that skill level, so I'm going to have to do it the hard way; working it out with picky attention to detail:

You started with a faulty premise for which there is no evidence and then began a search for evidence. Doing that, sure, you'll find some "evidence", but it will be filtered through your pre-formed bias, and therefore likely in error.
 
Last edited:

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
While she may have been indulging in some hyperbole, I didn't get the impression that Debra was being deliberately misleading or even wrong. What she said lines up with airport safety rules and the reports of other ground crew I've seen in discussion forums.

I didn't say she was doing it deliberately. What she said is factually incorrect.
 
Last edited:

Cosmos

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
He (and the fellow jogging directly beneath the engine intake) are inside the danger zone for a jet engine of that size, running at that speed. And his scarf is not even moving in the breeze.

You answered that „mystery“ yourself here:

the plane may have been moving on momentum.

Most likely the pilot started off initially by giving more power to the jets to get over the inertia to get it rolling. Once a mass of that size is rolling you need very little power to maintain or even increase the speed since the momentum kicks in (especially in wheels that turn easily because of ball-bearings, as is the case in planes) . So in all likelihood the pilot wanted to do what he normally does, namely, to get the plane to move in order to move the plane to a position to take off.

However, as soon as he saw that people were surrounding the plane he put the power down or even stopped the engines entirely since he didn’t want to injure people. What you see in footage is most likely at that point in time after the plane was already moving by its own momentum with little to no power at all. That also logically explains why you hear very little or no engines.
 
Last edited:

Michael B-C

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Something very obvious struck me powerfully today.

Watching the Afghani /Taliban celebrating the end of imperial occupation - carrying coffins, milling peacefully in large numbers, responding to the calls of their religion, the sun shining.... no masks...

The 'concerns' and bellyaching about a 'totalitarian' imposition of Sharia law by the Taliban pales into insignificance when you realize that COVID has installed western style 'Sharia' law and fundamentalism as the 'new normal' all over the 'developed' world - so that we can all be safe...

Masks, hand washing, social distancing, injections, lock downs, cult behaviour of all kinds including child sacrifice - they are all fundamentalist by nature and 'religiously dogmatic' and crushing...

I wonder who is better off now? If I was an Afghani I know where I'd rather be - and its not in a get away plane heading for freedom and democracy.
 

Woodsman

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
You started with a faulty premise for which there is no evidence and then began a search for evidence. Doing that, sure, you'll find some "evidence", but it is completely filtered through your pre-formed bias.
Yes. That's how it works.

Build an argument and then test it hard. And be open to the results.

I started with the premise that the plane was real, but didn't post that first half of my exploration. The: "This is silly and that's a real plane and this is Flat Earth stuff" part.

I made some headway, picking up some interesting details.

However, I've learned the hard way not to close myself off to the possibility that I might be wrong, performing an act of cognitive over-reach.

-So I opened myself up to the possibility that I might have been mistaken and had a deliberate look through the arguments presented in the other direction. Some of them seemed legitimate and still do.

Although, presently, I'm of the opinion that there was likely enough momentum in the plane to keep it moving without extra power from the jets, allowing joggers to jog unharmed; you can hear the plane's power being turned down in the news clip.

Interestingly...

When I got to that part of my thinking at the end of my previous post, the internet decided to freeze access to the SOTT forum, and I wasn't able to take advantage of the 10 minute edit window, so I could only watch in annoyance as the page refresh icon spun and refused to let me do anything.

FWIW, I'd aimed to clean up my comments about those fellows jogging under engines, and to give those remarks about your posting style another go-over just to make sure they were made in good faith. I think they were. I really do think you've got excellent observation skills, which is what prompted me to give my thinking another look.

-However, I also think it's fair to observe that you were being more than just factually accurate when describing Debra's comments. You seem lately sometimes abrupt and context-lite in your posting style. And those "Angry" icons you've been leaving don't help, (which is part of their design point, I suspect), they can lead people to lower-brain responses which may not accurately reflect your global intentions.
 
Last edited:

Laurentien2

The Living Force
FOTCM Member

loreta

The Living Force
FOTCM Member

Dozens of vehicles & Black Hawk flyover: Taliban holds military parade in Kandahar showing off seized US-made weapons (VIDEOS)​


A lot of people think that the Taliban are farmers with a 'K-47 Kalachnikov in their hands... when they are in fact a incredible army and with a lot of experience. I hope that peace finally will come to Afghanistan, but I doubted.
 

Mike

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I should comment on these, but the only thing I want to write right now is welcome to clown world any which way you cut it... 🤡🌎 - kind of the like the clown(s) from the movie 'IT' in positions of power throughout the world.

"NEW: Biden National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan says the US may deliver aid & economic assistance directly to the Taliban"

"Per former Deputy Assistant SecDef Roger Pardo-Maurer, the DoD had foreknowledge of the Kabul bomber AND denied permission to fire to the Predator drone that had a lock on the bomber."
 

Mark7

Dagobah Resident
FOTCM Member
I should comment on these, but the only thing I want to write right now is welcome to clown world any which way you cut it... 🤡🌎 - kind of the like the clown(s) from the movie 'IT' in positions of power throughout the world.

"NEW: Biden National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan says the US may deliver aid & economic assistance directly to the Taliban"

"Per former Deputy Assistant SecDef Roger Pardo-Maurer, the DoD had foreknowledge of the Kabul bomber AND denied permission to fire to the Predator drone that had a lock on the bomber."
I wonder about those hypothetical 'pallets of cash' the Taliban allegedly collected during the takeover. All that heavy equipment would have been a chore to move :P, but leave cash there as well? Hmmm. Pallets of cash may be part of the new Biden diplomacy strategy.

 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
However, as soon as he saw that people were surrounding the plane he put the power down or even stopped the engines entirely since he didn’t want to injure people. What you see in footage is most likely at that point in time after the plane was already moving by its own momentum with little to no power at all. That also logically explains why you hear very little or no engines.

That's what a person with no preformed bias would conclude.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
I really do think you've got excellent observation skills, which is what prompted me to give my thinking another look.

-However, I also think it's fair to observe that you were being more than just factually accurate when describing Debra's comments. You seem lately sometimes abrupt and context-lite in your posting style. And those "Angry" icons you've been leaving don't help, (which is part of their design point, I suspect), they can lead people to lower-brain responses which may not accurately reflect your global intentions.

Excellent observational skills are not necessary here, just the common or garden variety. By "lately" in the above I assume you mean my posts yesterday on this sub topic. Yes, my posts were curt and to the point, but the context was pretty clear, IMO. I'm pretty nonplussed any time demonstrable nonsense is posted on this forum, especially with the implied encouragement to others to buy in to it. That's just one of my 'triggers', although I think it's useful to the extent that it can protect others from having their heads messed with and protect this forum from becoming a haven for unfettered and unhinged subjective indulgent theory making.

That said, I apologize if my responses offended any one.
 

Ursus Minor

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
The Austrian 'Kronen Zeitung' on Aug 30 carried an interview with Zabihullah Mujahid, the official spokesman of the new Taliban government.

"We'll take back your delinquent asylum seekers!" ➡️ krone.at

Shams Ul-Haq, interviewer:

Mr. Zabihullah Mujahid, especially the Europeans are wondering, what are the Taliban up to in Kabul, where will their rule lead?

Zabihullah Mujahid: We are in the process of forming a government. Then normality will return. There is already a high level of security everywhere in Afghanistan, including Kabul.

You don't get that impression at the airport. Dozens of people died here recently. From the looks of it, IS claimed responsibility.

That's true. But it happened where the Americans are in charge. When the U.S. moved its troops from Kabul to the airport, they called everyone there who wanted to get to America or Europe. This could only result in the chaos that could be used for terror. The Islamic Emirate strongly condemns the attack on civilians at Kabul Airport. The Islamic Emirate pays great attention to the security of its citizens. Where we have control, we prevent such acts. Except for the airport, Kabul is safe, and so are the provinces.

630x356.jpg


Zabihullah Mujahid, Taliban spokesman (left), with Shams Ul-Haq, interviewer


Why do you think Afghans are leaving their homeland and want to go abroad so badly?

Some are afraid because of the propaganda. They want to leave even though we promise them their safety. Others simply want to emigrate to Europe or America. This is not new. Young people in particular have always tried to get to Europe via Turkey and Greece. This is not only a problem for Afghanistan. There is also poverty in Pakistan and other countries. Many now want to take the opportunity to escape it. That, too, has led to the enormous rush.

Do you let the Afghans go who want to travel?

On the one hand, we have people who want to leave illegally. That is not permissible. Those who have no documents and want to go abroad unsuspectingly experience miserable conditions there. Everybody knows that. But those who have a passport and a visa have the right to do so. In principle, Afghans have the right to travel wherever they want. But not right now with all the chaos at the airport. We are trying to break up this rush. Those who do not have documents should not come to the airport. We are not going to allow that. Later we will find a way that those who want to leave can leave.

Afghan refugees are a constant topic for Germany and Austria. So let's get back to the point: Do you allow people to leave? Yes or no?

We are not happy about people leaving Afghanistan. They should stay. For those who are worried, we try to take away their fear. We are not happy about Afghans going abroad.

So you want Afghans to stay?

Of course. Our goal is for Afghans not to leave their homes, not to embark on miserable escape routes. We know that the situation in Europe for our refugees is anything but rosy. Women and children are housed in horrible collective accommodations. Afghanistan is our common country. People who want to leave should be patient. Our economy will recover, jobs will be created. The security situation has already stabilized.

Would your government take back Afghan citizens if they are not eligible for asylum in Germany and Austria and perhaps have committed crimes?

Yes. They would be presented to a court. The court would have to decide what to do with them.

In your eyes, what was the Americans' intention in staying in Afghanistan for almost 20 years?

It was mainly for geostrategic reasons. They wanted to have bases here, to stay forever, to control the other Asian and non-Asian countries from here. But the Afghan people long for freedom and do not tolerate foreign powers. We have resisted the Americans and forced them to withdraw their troops. In 20 years, the Americans have done nothing for us except continue the war, bomb the people, and destroy the economy. Poverty and the production of drugs have been encouraged. The misery of the present is the achievement of 20 years of American occupation.

Women's rights in Afghanistan are viewed critically around the world, especially in the context of the Taliban. The Taliban force women to wear veils. Women are considered to have no rights. The issue is being debated in Germany and Austria. The media ask what the future of women in Afghanistan will look like. What guarantee of their rights and what opportunities for women's education will there be?

We will secure all the rights that women are entitled to under Sharia law. Women are our citizens and have the right to live well in our country. Our jurisprudence and tradition are not against women. These rights are for women to live and feel safe. We will give women Islamic rights, provide education, and create frameworks for work. We are in the process of shaping all of this.

How will you resolve the conflict with Ahmad Massoud? As long as he rules in Panjshir, there will be no peace in Afghanistan.

This is not a big deal. In a small area in Panjshir, there are two people who are against us. One is Ahmad Massoud, the other is Amrullah Saleh. Our troops have just moved into Panjshir from four sides. But we don't want the war to continue there. We want to reach a solution through dialogue. If we don't manage to do that, we can quickly solve the problem militarily.

And how do you settle your conflict with IS? The Europeans expect IS supporters to be increasingly drawn to Kabul.

As I said, there is no IS where we have control. Some Afghans who used to follow IS in Syria and Iraq have now returned, but we don't see any danger in them. They will not cause any problems for Afghanistan.

Germany and Austria have stopped paying development funds. How could you cooperate with EU countries?

We want to maintain good relations with Europe, even though Europeans supported the war in Afghanistan. Afghanistan urgently needs trade and diplomatic relations with these countries. If Europeans have concerns, they are welcome to tell us diplomatically. We are open to talks and hope to allay these concerns.

The Taliban make a lot of promises. Are you going to keep them?


We are forming a government to enforce what we promise. The sanctions, the freezing of our funds, are unfair to all 35 million Afghans living here. As I said, now it's a matter of Europe and the Islamic Emirate to talk to each other.

Destinations of refugees from the war-torn country

aaafg.JPG
Source: UNHCR
 

Ursus Minor

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
According to an article by avia.pro the U.S. helicopters and aircraft at Kabul airport were completely disabled by the withdrawing military.

There is a translation to the article in Russian ⬇️


"The United States deliberately destroyed all military equipment at the Kabul airport.

The Taliban, seemingly provided with helicopters and aircraft abandoned at Kabul International Airport, were furious after it turned out that no aircraft could take off without significant repairs. In fact, in the hands of the Taliban, it was not equipment that remained, but scrap metal. At the same time, even the likely allies of the Taliban who have already announced their intentions to recognize the transfer of power in Afghanistan, will not be able to repair aircraft.

If two days ago the terrorists announced that they would be able to get into service a whole fleet of military aircraft, upon examination of the equipment it turned out that none of the helicopters and aircraft at the Kabul airport would be able to take off because the American military completely disabled the equipment.

Nevertheless, equipment captured by the Taliban at other military facilities could still perform flights although the Taliban have significant problems with the availability of pilots, especially when it comes to aircraft pilots but without the presence of specialists, not a single machine can be operated."


 

seek10

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
According to an article by avia.pro the U.S. helicopters and aircraft at Kabul airport were completely disabled by the withdrawing military.

There is a translation to the article in Russian ⬇️


"The United States deliberately destroyed all military equipment at the Kabul airport.

The Taliban, seemingly provided with helicopters and aircraft abandoned at Kabul International Airport, were furious after it turned out that no aircraft could take off without significant repairs. In fact, in the hands of the Taliban, it was not equipment that remained, but scrap metal. At the same time, even the likely allies of the Taliban who have already announced their intentions to recognize the transfer of power in Afghanistan, will not be able to repair aircraft.

If two days ago the terrorists announced that they would be able to get into service a whole fleet of military aircraft, upon examination of the equipment it turned out that none of the helicopters and aircraft at the Kabul airport would be able to take off because the American military completely disabled the equipment.

Nevertheless, equipment captured by the Taliban at other military facilities could still perform flights although the Taliban have significant problems with the availability of pilots, especially when it comes to aircraft pilots but without the presence of specialists, not a single machine can be operated."


I read some articles saying US disabled them, but the numbers they quote are very small. It is clear that US left suddenly despite knowing 18 months in advance that they have to do it for whatever chain of command reasons that came along. Because of that, It is possible to say Most of the weapons are NOT disabled.

Most importantly, Taliban can easily take Pakistani technical experts help in enabling them in secret. US can complain of it, if it finds it out. By that time it will be too late. The real question is How Taliban is going to manage power it got over Afghan people. It is too early to speculate on it.
 

neema

Jedi Council Member
FOTCM Member
Debra's comment is completely untrue. Here's one example that proves that people do not get sucked into jet engines at low power.


Some on this forum appear to rely a little too much on their pattern recognition rather than your critical thinking abilities.

I think part of why people fall for such narratives so easily is because of movies and Hollywood. It’s the same thing with shootings and guns. Since most people are not experienced with actual firearms or actual real bloody situations, they relate to the movie/Hollywood narrative.
 
Top Bottom