Afghan "train, advise and assist" 1984 style

[Gospel]

It's not a much higher standard, it is the standard for the President of the US. I mentioned more than Just Biden so I don't know who you're talking about that is holding only Biden to that standard. To my knowledge (and Biden's admission Yesterday), not all of the remaining American's decided to stay so I don't know where you got all of them want to stay.

Edit: And negotiating with the Taliban is just insane to me. I hardly recognized America during the Trump Administration and now Biden is treating the Taliban like they are an official government or some shit.
Edit2: Ain't the Taliban allies to those who organized the attack on 911? If so that makes this even more nuts.

Because the Taliban *won*. This is what happens when you *lose a war*. You negotiate with the victors. At least, that is what reasonable, competent leaders would do.

For now, the Taliban *is the de facto government*.

I mean, I get that you are angry. Cool. I could probably take that anger more seriously if it had been expressed at some point during the last 20 years, where **much bigger** fuck ups were occurring daily in Afghanistan. But noted, Gospel is angry.

The Taliban hasn't been recognized as the Afghanistan Government by the USA last I recall. In fact, only a few countries recognize them as the Afghanistan government. I've been aware of Afghanistan the whole time & don't need to post on a fourm to confirm that to you. but I get it, you're angry and think I have no right to express myself about an occupation (not a war). I cant take you seriously.

 

[southernhybrid]

Not so fast mother fuckers!

https://wapo.st/3zHyPQj

Despite the dangers, dozens of Afghan women took to the streets in western Afghanistan on Thursday in a rare public demonstration against Taliban restrictions on their right to work and seek education.
Fed up with what participants said were the Taliban’s empty promises to protect their rights, participants marched toward the office of the governor of Herat, the largest city in Western Afghanistan, to demand the inclusion of women in the coming government. There they faced off with Taliban members standing guard.
“No government is stable without the support of women,” red one banner held up by participants, referring to worries that the government the Taliban is in the process of forming is unlikely to include women in leadership positions.

I am hopeful that if the women of Afghanistan unite, they can influence the future of their country. They obviously have more courage than the men. Time will tell, but why not look for some small ray of hope! Of course it will take more than a few dozen women to stand up to the powers that be, but perhaps the one thing that the women learned from our overly long occupation, is that if you want to obtain civil rights, you must be willing to unite and put your life on the line. I would imagine that a lot of women in Afghanistan are thinking that it's worth risking death in this situation. I would certainly feel that way if I was in their situation.

Maybe tomorrow, we will learn that this didn't accomplish anything. These women might disappear, but at least they had the courage to protest.

 

[Trausti]

https://wapo.st/3zHyPQj

Despite the dangers, dozens of Afghan women took to the streets in western Afghanistan on Thursday in a rare public demonstration against Taliban restrictions on their right to work and seek education.
Fed up with what participants said were the Taliban’s empty promises to protect their rights, participants marched toward the office of the governor of Herat, the largest city in Western Afghanistan, to demand the inclusion of women in the coming government. There they faced off with Taliban members standing guard.
“No government is stable without the support of women,” red one banner held up by participants, referring to worries that the government the Taliban is in the process of forming is unlikely to include women in leadership positions.

I am hopeful that if the women of Afghanistan unite, they can influence the future of their country. They obviously have more courage than the men. Time will tell, but why not look for some small ray of hope! Of course it will take more than a few dozen women to stand up to the powers that be, but perhaps the one thing that the women learned from our overly long occupation, is that if you want to obtain civil rights, you must be willing to unite and put your life on the line. I would imagine that a lot of women in Afghanistan are thinking that it's worth risking death in this situation. I would certainly feel that way if I was in their situation.

Maybe tomorrow, we will learn that this didn't accomplish anything. These women might disappear, but at least they had the courage to protest.

Good luck. But one of the problems from Biden’s incompetence is that the Taliban is now robustly armed with American war swag. The Taliban is not very popular. Other warlords might have carved out a territory more tolerable to these women. Ain’t no way they can do that now.

 

[lpetrich]

Maybe tomorrow, we will learn that this didn't accomplish anything. These women might disappear, but at least they had the courage to protest.

Good luck. But one of the problems from Biden’s incompetence is that the Taliban is now robustly armed with American war swag. The Taliban is not very popular. Other warlords might have carved out a territory more tolerable to these women. Ain’t no way they can do that now.

How was it Joe Biden's fault that the Afghan Army folded so quickly?


US completes Afghanistan withdrawal as final flight leaves Kabul | Taliban News | Al Jazeera - "Last flight signifies the ‘end of the nearly 20-year mission’ in Afghanistan, top United States general says."

Shows a picture of a US military helicopter being loaded aboard a US military transport plane. The US soldiers in Afghanistan couldn't do that will all their military hardware, so they left some behind in a deactivated state.

US looking at land routes to continue Afghanistan evacuations | Taliban News | Al Jazeera - "US officials welcome efforts by Turkey and Qatar to help reopen the airport in Kabul after American troop withdrawal."

"The United States is exploring ways to evacuate American citizens and Afghan allies looking to leave Afghanistan including via land routes, US officials said on Wednesday, reasserting a commitment to help eligible people who were not airlifted out."

That will be more difficult, but it may be possible. The Taliban seemed to have cooperated with the departure of the US troops and their associated Afghans, and they may want to continue further.


Rebels hold out in Panjshir, Taliban set up gov’t in Kabul: Live | Taliban News | Al Jazeera - "Taliban forces and fighters loyal to local leader Ahmad Massoud fight in Afghanistan’s Panjshir Valley, as Taliban leaders work to form a gov’t."


Afghanistan: Taliban to rely on Chinese funds, spokesperson says | Taliban News | Al Jazeera - "With the help of China, the Taliban will fight for an economic comeback in Afghanistan, Zabihullah Mujahid tells Italian newspaper."

Of Western wars and Muslim women | Women's Rights | Al Jazeera - "If Western wars are meant to ‘liberate’ Muslim women, why did centuries of Western military intervention fail to do so?"

Herat women protest against Taliban over right to work | Asia News | Al Jazeera - "About 60-80 women demonstrate in Herat city demanding Taliban’s commitment on women’s empowerment."

 

[Gospel]

The Taliban totally did try to play ball. We invaded and overthrew them anyway. The only people who had no interest in "playing ball" was the US. We wanted blood and revenge. I hope the 2 trillion dollar price tag was worth it.

I agree here. We should not have gone in there, to begin with.

Also, why wouldn't you expect them to be involved? *Why wouldn't the Taliban support the withdrawal of Americans*? That is pretty much their entire goal.

I'd say 100% of their goal is to establish a nation under Islamic rule. Anything they do to get there (including fighting America and Russia) is a sidenote. Thanks for showing me who really doesn't know shit about the Taliban & Afghanistan.

See, this is just a great example of the total lack of understanding Americans have about the Taliban and Afghanistan overall.

Yeah, ok.

 

[Harry Bosch]

https://wapo.st/3zHyPQj

Despite the dangers, dozens of Afghan women took to the streets in western Afghanistan on Thursday in a rare public demonstration against Taliban restrictions on their right to work and seek education.
Fed up with what participants said were the Taliban’s empty promises to protect their rights, participants marched toward the office of the governor of Herat, the largest city in Western Afghanistan, to demand the inclusion of women in the coming government. There they faced off with Taliban members standing guard.
“No government is stable without the support of women,” red one banner held up by participants, referring to worries that the government the Taliban is in the process of forming is unlikely to include women in leadership positions.

I am hopeful that if the women of Afghanistan unite, they can influence the future of their country. They obviously have more courage than the men. Time will tell, but why not look for some small ray of hope! Of course it will take more than a few dozen women to stand up to the powers that be, but perhaps the one thing that the women learned from our overly long occupation, is that if you want to obtain civil rights, you must be willing to unite and put your life on the line. I would imagine that a lot of women in Afghanistan are thinking that it's worth risking death in this situation. I would certainly feel that way if I was in their situation.

Maybe tomorrow, we will learn that this didn't accomplish anything. These women might disappear, but at least they had the courage to protest.

Good luck. But one of the problems from Biden’s incompetence is that the Taliban is now robustly armed with American war swag. The Taliban is not very popular. Other warlords might have carved out a territory more tolerable to these women. Ain’t no way they can do that now.

What hutzpha! Any republican who supported Bush or Trump has nothing to say here!

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

The nature of Afghanistan is that the Taliban takes over when the US leaves, whether that is in 2021, 2051, or 2121. It doesn't matter who the President is, it doesn't matter the party of the president. US leaves, the opposition to the US takes over. I have a hard time blaming Biden or Trump for the Taliban taking over now.

 

[Harry Bosch]

The nature of Afghanistan is that the Taliban takes over when the US leaves, whether that is in 2021, 2051, or 2121. It doesn't matter who the President is, it doesn't matter the party of the president. US leaves, the opposition to the US takes over. I have a hard time blaming Biden or Trump for the Taliban taking over now.

I don't disagree with you. However, here's the issue: out of all the bat shit crazy stuff that Trump did, I didn't condemn his Afghan policy. Because yea, it's a shitty no win situation. But if a Trumpster is going to blame Biden, then it's fair game. Trumpster's always like to blame someone else, never Trumpster.

 

[TomC]

The nature of Afghanistan is that the Taliban takes over when the US leaves, whether that is in 2021, 2051, or 2121. It doesn't matter who the President is, it doesn't matter the party of the president. US leaves, the opposition to the US takes over. I have a hard time blaming Biden or Trump for the Taliban taking over now.

I don't disagree with you. However, here's the issue: out of all the bat shit crazy stuff that Trump did, I didn't condemn his Afghan policy. Because yea, it's a shitty no win situation. But if a Trumpster is going to blame Biden, then it's fair game. Trumpster's always like to blame someone else, never Trumpster.

And to be even more pointed,
Imagine how well the actual pullout would have gone being handled by the same administration that handled C19 response.

<shudder>
Tom

 

[Swammerdami]

This opinion piece in Al-Jazeera may not have anything novel, but it seems like an interesting summary. Here's one excerpt:

The intrusion into Saudi Arabia in 1990 was the original sin, producing al-Qaeda; the 2003 invasion of Iraq produced ISIS; then the invasion of Afghanistan created a more viable Islamic emirate.

Simultaneously, the regional balance came unhinged. Ironically Iran, the supposed enemy, was handed multiple victories; the US neutralised its Iraqi (and later Afghan) enemies, and practically handed over Iraq to it. Simultaneously, Saudi Arabia, Iran’s nemesis, was destabilised by the disruptive presence of US troops on its territory.
... followers of Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini would be forgiven to regard this as a divine intervention: Heaven sent Iran’s archenemy to subdue its local adversaries and hand Iranians the spoils. The US acted practically just like one of the pro-Iranian militias in the region, doing its bidding from a distance, only for free.

In the same vein, instead of taking serious action to stop Bashar al Assad’s genocide of the Syrian people, the selective intervention against ISIS made the US and NATO the complimentary air force of the Syrian regime and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard’s Qassem Soleimani, this time handing over Syria to Putin and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

America’s most dependable ally, Turkey, was left carrying the can, hostage to the Russia-Iran alliance. Even good old Machiavellianism appeared elusive. Ethics is not the only casualty here, but pragmatism as well. By continuing to let down its allies through its fickleness and faithlessness, and helping its enemies prosper through its incompetence, America will be without allies next time it decides to face up to China or Russia.

 

[Gospel]

This opinion piece in Al-Jazeera may not have anything novel, but it seems like an interesting summary. Here's one excerpt:

The intrusion into Saudi Arabia in 1990 was the original sin, producing al-Qaeda; the 2003 invasion of Iraq produced ISIS; then the invasion of Afghanistan created a more viable Islamic emirate.

Simultaneously, the regional balance came unhinged. Ironically Iran, the supposed enemy, was handed multiple victories; the US neutralised its Iraqi (and later Afghan) enemies, and practically handed over Iraq to it. Simultaneously, Saudi Arabia, Iran’s nemesis, was destabilised by the disruptive presence of US troops on its territory.
... followers of Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini would be forgiven to regard this as a divine intervention: Heaven sent Iran’s archenemy to subdue its local adversaries and hand Iranians the spoils. The US acted practically just like one of the pro-Iranian militias in the region, doing its bidding from a distance, only for free.

In the same vein, instead of taking serious action to stop Bashar al Assad’s genocide of the Syrian people, the selective intervention against ISIS made the US and NATO the complimentary air force of the Syrian regime and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard’s Qassem Soleimani, this time handing over Syria to Putin and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

America’s most dependable ally, Turkey, was left carrying the can, hostage to the Russia-Iran alliance. Even good old Machiavellianism appeared elusive. Ethics is not the only casualty here, but pragmatism as well. By continuing to let down its allies through its fickleness and faithlessness, and helping its enemies prosper through its incompetence, America will be without allies next time it decides to face up to China or Russia.

I'm at work and took a quick look & stopped at Iran and Afghanistan being Enemies. Unless I'm reading the bolded red part wrong they are saying the US indirectly handed Iran victory over its Afghanistan enemies? When was Iran an enemy of Afghanistan?

 

[Gospel]

The same Taliban that stood in the way of the US getting to Al-Qaeda and fought the US Tooth and nail as the main target in this 20-year war. The same Taliban that was in charge of Afghanistan where the 911 attack was planned under their watch is to be trusted with getting American's out safely?

Dude, seriously and I say this without the intent to cause offense, but this is a completely ignorant perspective.

You calling it a perspective is ignorant. What part of what I said isn't true?

 

[TomC]

The same Taliban that stood in the way of the US getting to Al-Qaeda and fought the US Tooth and nail as the main target in this 20-year war. The same Taliban that was in charge of Afghanistan where the 911 attack was planned under their watch is to be trusted with getting American's out safely?

Dude, seriously and I say this without the intent to cause offense, but this is a completely ignorant perspective.

You calling it a perspective is ignorant. What part of what I said isn't true?

For one thing, your assumption that the Taliban cared about, or even knew about, 9/11. I'm sure some did, and were cheering on their hero bin Laden. But that isn't the same as the Taliban(much less Afghanistan) earning an violent 20 year invasion/occupation.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You calling it a perspective is ignorant. What part of what I said isn't true?

For one thing, your assumption that the Taliban cared about, or even knew about, 9/11. I'm sure some did, and were cheering on their hero bin Laden. But that isn't the same as the Taliban(much less Afghanistan) earning an violent 20 year invasion/occupation.
Tom

You know, I realize that the Afghanistan occupation ended only a few days ago, but I thought some people might remember what actually happened, and that terminology like a "violent 20 year invasion/occupation" wouldn't be used due to ridiculous levels of hyperbole.

As a reminder, Afghanis were mobbing the airport to GTFO of Afghanistan. The Afghan military, those that could, were heading to the border to GTFO Afghanistan. There is no mistake things were much better during the Occupation than before or after. It wasn't without violence, the occupation was poorly planned by the initiators that doomed it, but the Afghani reaction (fleeing, hiding, fearing) to the US leaving and the Taliban resurgence speaks for itself.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The same Taliban that stood in the way of the US getting to Al-Qaeda and fought the US Tooth and nail as the main target in this 20-year war. The same Taliban that was in charge of Afghanistan where the 911 attack was planned under their watch is to be trusted with getting American's out safely?

Dude, seriously and I say this without the intent to cause offense, but this is a completely ignorant perspective.

You calling it a perspective is ignorant. What part of what I said isn't true?

The truth is, the al Qaeda attacks in '96 and '98 on American interests under the protection of the Taliban led to America warning the Taliban. Then the USS Cole was attacked. The Taliban already overstepped their bounds there. Had Clinton or W strategically sent a message via a few bombs after the Cole, 9/11 might not have gotten the green light from the leadership of the Taliban. We'll never know. But certainly, the leadership of the Taliban had a say, and were culpable for the al Qaeda attacks.

 

[TomC]

, and that terminology like a "violent 20 year invasion/occupation" wouldn't be used due to ridiculous levels of hyperbole.

Hyperbole?
You don't think that the last 20 years were violent? What?

Like it or not, the Taliban was vastly better supported by Afghanis than the U.S. military. You may not understand why, and consider them primitive, undemocratic, theocrats. But the fact remains, Taliban support far outweighed support for the Godless invaders. That's why the Taliban kicked American ass.
Tom

 

[Swammerdami]

This opinion piece in Al-Jazeera may not have anything novel, but it seems like an interesting summary. Here's one excerpt:

The intrusion into Saudi Arabia in 1990 was the original sin, producing al-Qaeda; the 2003 invasion of Iraq produced ISIS; then the invasion of Afghanistan created a more viable Islamic emirate.

Simultaneously, the regional balance came unhinged. Ironically Iran, the supposed enemy, was handed multiple victories; the US neutralised its Iraqi (and later Afghan) enemies, and practically handed over Iraq to it. Simultaneously, Saudi Arabia, Iran’s nemesis, was destabilised by the disruptive presence of US troops on its territory.
... followers of Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini would be forgiven to regard this as a divine intervention: Heaven sent Iran’s archenemy to subdue its local adversaries and hand Iranians the spoils. The US acted practically just like one of the pro-Iranian militias in the region, doing its bidding from a distance, only for free.

In the same vein, instead of taking serious action to stop Bashar al Assad’s genocide of the Syrian people, the selective intervention against ISIS made the US and NATO the complimentary air force of the Syrian regime and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard’s Qassem Soleimani, this time handing over Syria to Putin and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

America’s most dependable ally, Turkey, was left carrying the can, hostage to the Russia-Iran alliance. Even good old Machiavellianism appeared elusive. Ethics is not the only casualty here, but pragmatism as well. By continuing to let down its allies through its fickleness and faithlessness, and helping its enemies prosper through its incompetence, America will be without allies next time it decides to face up to China or Russia.

I'm at work and took a quick look & stopped at Iran and Afghanistan being Enemies. Unless I'm reading the bolded red part wrong they are saying the US indirectly handed Iran victory over its Afghanistan enemies? When was Iran an enemy of Afghanistan?

That part also confused me but (a) the author, Abdelwahab El-Affendi, a Professor of Politics in Qatar, probably understands the complex politics of that region better than any of us; and (b) that detail is inessential to the larger point just in this excerpt.

I don't understand Mideast politics well, but the Sunni-vs-Shia conflict seems to be very important. Shi'ite Iran was indeed given a Shi'ite (formerly Sunni) Iraq for free, and there is a de facto alliance of Syria, Russia and Iran; and they are opposed to Sunnis. ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and most Afghans including most Taliban are all Sunnis, so are all natural enemies of the Russia-Iran-Syria axis. (ISIS is Wahhabist, like Saudi Arabia.) I think El-Affendi is correct that the U.S. actions in the Syrian and Iraqi conflicts have implicitly helped the Russia-Iran axis.

The Kurds, mostly Sunni, are one benign group in the region and the U.S. has betrayed them repeatedly. The U.S. got involved in a complicated game of chess and behaved as though they didn't know which pieces were on which side.

 

[lpetrich]

Women stage protest in Taliban-controlled Kabul - CNN

A group of Afghan women activists staged a small protest in Taliban-controlled Kabul Friday calling for equal rights and full participation in political life, CNN has confirmed.

In spite of the risk, a group called the Women's Political Participation Network marched on the street in front of Afghanistan's Finance Ministry, chanting slogans and holding signs demanding involvement in the Afghan government and calling for constitutional law.

Footage showed a brief confrontation between a Taliban guard and some of the women, and a man's voice could be heard saying, "Go away!" before chanting resumed.

The gathering was relatively small -- video of the scene livestreamed by the group showed just a few dozen demonstrators -- but represented an unusual public challenge to Taliban rule.

Taliban have a 2-front war headed their way | Fox NewsTaliban have a 2-front war headed their way | Fox News - "The Taliban are currently fighting ISIS-K and the Panjshir Valley resistance"

ISIS-K claimed responsibility for the devastating terrorist attack at Hamid Karzai International Airport on Aug. 27 that killed 13 U.S. soldiers and at least 170 Afghans. The mayhem that ensued following the suicide attack severely damaged the credibility the Taliban had been trying to exert as the guarantors of security and stability surrounding Kabul’s airport while the U.S. and its allies completed the evacuation.

...
Complicating matters for the Taliban while they attempt to contain ISIS-K is the resistance movement from Panjshir Valley, known as the National Resistance Front (NRF). Panjshir Valley, which is not yet under Taliban control, is a historic hotbed of anti-Taliban resistance where many former Afghan security forces and other militias have sought refuge from the Taliban. Clashes between the Taliban and the NRF are already underway as the two compete for control of the last anti-Taliban holdout.

So it's the Taliban vs. ISIS-K vs. the Panjshir Resistance (Northern Alliance)

 

[lpetrich]

US military escape from Afghanistan: Air Force crews describe ‘apocalyptic’ final scenes | Fox News

For the U.S. military pilots and aircrew about to make their final takeoffs out of Afghanistan, the sky was lit up with fireworks and sporadic gunfire and the airfield littered with battered shells of airplanes and destroyed equipment. Stray dogs raced around the tarmac. And Taliban fighters, visible in the darkness through the green-tinged view of night vision goggles, walked the airfield waving an eerie goodbye.

Lined up on the runway at the Kabul airport Monday night were the five last C-17s to leave the country after a chaotic and deadly airlift evacuation that marked the end of America's involvement in the Afghanistan war. In the final hours, there were no more rocket defense systems to protect them on the runway, and no one in the airport control center to direct them out.

...
For more than three hours, they methodically went through about 300 items on their checklists, packing up the last four Little Bird helicopters, and ensuring they had all their troops and equipment.

...
One by one, each C-17 was told to "clamshell" — or close up the ramp. Then Pelbath's final order: "Flush the force." With that, Wedan began to move her C-17 down the runway.

"It was definitely different. I've never been on an airfield where I didn’t really have permission to take off," said Wedan, noting the absence of air traffic control in the tower.

As they lifted off in rapid succession, cheers broke out from the troops on board — most of them special operations forces and soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division.

"It was a visible relief," said Wedan. "You could tell that they had been working really hard. Many of them hadn’t showered in a couple of weeks. They were all incredibly tired. ... You could tell that they were just relieved to be out of there and that their mission was accomplished."

As the last C-17 cleared Kabul airspace, Pelbath's delivered a welcome message: "MAF Safe" — shorthand for saying that the Mobility Air Forces were out of harm's way.

Maj. Gen. Chris Donahue, commander of the U.S. Army 82nd Airborne Division, had been the last soldier to walk up the ramp on the final C-17 to depart. He had been in charge of security for the evacuation mission. Soon after the aircraft were in the air, he sent his own message: "Job well done. Proud of you all."

Crammed onto the floor of the aircraft, exhausted troops found places to sleep. "Everyone was kind of sitting on top of each other — whatever we could do to have them get them on the aircraft and get them out," said Wedan.

Maj. Gen. Chris Donahue, commander of the U.S. Army 82nd Airborne Division, had been the last soldier to walk up the ramp on the final C-17 to depart. He had been in charge of security for the evacuation mission. Soon after the aircraft were in the air, he sent his own message: "Job well done. Proud of you all."

It was rather cramped, with everybody was sort of sitting on top of each other, but after about half an hour, everybody was asleep. The planes took 4 hours to make it to Kuwait.

 

[Gospel]

I'm at work and took a quick look & stopped at Iran and Afghanistan being Enemies. Unless I'm reading the bolded red part wrong they are saying the US indirectly handed Iran victory over its Afghanistan enemies? When was Iran an enemy of Afghanistan?

That part also confused me but (a) the author, Abdelwahab El-Affendi, a Professor of Politics in Qatar, probably understands the complex politics of that region better than any of us; and (b) that detail is inessential to the larger point just in this excerpt.

I don't understand Mideast politics well, but the Sunni-vs-Shia conflict seems to be very important. Shi'ite Iran was indeed given a Shi'ite (formerly Sunni) Iraq for free, and there is a de facto alliance of Syria, Russia and Iran; and they are opposed to Sunnis. ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and most Afghans including most Taliban are all Sunnis, so are all natural enemies of the Russia-Iran-Syria axis. (ISIS is Wahhabist, like Saudi Arabia.) I think El-Affendi is correct that the U.S. actions in the Syrian and Iraqi conflicts have implicitly helped the Russia-Iran axis.

The Kurds, mostly Sunni, are one benign group in the region and the U.S. has betrayed them repeatedly. The U.S. got involved in a complicated game of chess and behaved as though they didn't know which pieces were on which side.

There are a whole lot of people who understand the complexities more than I do. I can't honestly say I understand it all, and likely never will. I asked not because I had anything better to offer, I was genuinely curious. Off hand I think it would be something related to a mixture of religion and ethenic history or some such; nothing governmentally official.