Jump to content

Talk:War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by CoatGuy (talk | contribs) at 13:09, 23 August 2021 (→‎War is still ongoing, parts of Baghlan province have been retaken from the taliban). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured article candidateWar in Afghanistan (2001–2021) is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
In the newsOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 18, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 13, 2010WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on March 2, 2020.
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 7, 2004, October 7, 2005, and October 7, 2015.
Current status: Former featured article candidate


Typos

The picture of the Chinook helicopter mistakenly refers to "USAF pilots." The US Air Force does not have pilots for the Chinook. They're "US Army pilots," as the citation notes.

First paragraph, last sentence "andwas" appears as one word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.60.35.95 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 19 June 2013

Under Casualties and Losses on right hand side "but reports suggest a higher number compared to coalition forces" may read better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.91.1 (talk • contribs) 17:15, 20 March 2014

"2001: Overthrow of the Taliban" - boming should be bombing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.183.22.30 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 9 May 2014

Map of current military situation

The map of the current military situation in Afghanistan is over a year old. I know that not that much has changed since then, but it would be nice if someone could upload a new one and make that reflected in the caption. I'd do it myself except I have no idea how. Thanks. Display name 99 (talk) 02:44, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I second this request, what is going on in the country? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:36, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Someone working for someone probably removed this one https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Taliban_insurgency_in_Afghanistan_(2015–present).svg to lessen the negative PR impact of their forces withdrawing after a 20 year conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.248.137.44 (talk) 09:42, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

End of the war

Various sources are reporting the 18 years war has ended after the truce was signed with Talibans on February 29, and now troops are just being withdrawn: [1], [2], [3] , [4] and so many more. According to sources any further actions by Talibans would be insurgency but the war itself has ended with the February 29 deal. Well just pointing out, not an editor of this article so its upto editors of this article to decide. Dilbaggg (talk) 08:30, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The withdrawal has begun, but I'd say the war is ongoing at least until all coalition forces have left Afghanistan. Even then, Taliban and ANDSF may continue to fight. --Cerebellum (talk) 15:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In that case it will be civil war/insurgency. But the international war should be over with foreign troops withdrawal, like the Iraq war (2003-2011), Soviet-Afghan war (1979-1989), etc. Dilbaggg (talk) 04:36, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm I see what you're saying, make sense. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with much of this The conflict ended for Western forces as far back as 2014 when Resolute Support became the new mission (Advise, Train, Assist). Combat missions officially at that point. Since then its been only minor involvement from Western forces. It has been a largely Afghan Government vs Taliban/Insurgency/Opposition conflict for many years now

"Overthrow of coalition-backed Islamic Republic of Afghanistan on 15 August 2021".. by persons unknown? Surely someone is responsible, why not state it? Furbian (talk) 14:30, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Njofallofall (talk) 06:24, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence: "Since 2001, Afghanistan has experienced improvements in health, education and women's rights" should be removed from the introduction as soon as possible, given the Taliban takeover of the country. Ending the introduction with the statement that more than 6 million Afghans are internal or external refugees is much more appropriate.

Allied losses

Total dead in the infobox for Allied casualties should be 73,925+. I did the math. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:1D2:DEEE:5BB6:814A (talk) 17:23, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you have done it then edit it. No one pay heeds to everything on talk page. Khalidwarrior (talk) 03:42, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A House of Commons paper puts the UK fatalities at 457, not 456. As the page is currently locked, I can't edit the figure. Source: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9298/CBP-9298.pdf</ref>. Tregonning6 (talk) 11:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mabey the biggest loss for the American-led Coalition was America's dignity Source: https://time.com/6091183/afghanistan-war-failure-interview/

Taliban losses?

There are of course no real estimates of Taliban losses. However, there are various sources that have compiled different numbers for different periods. None of them are truly cohesive though

The Watson Institute for example, undercounts Taliban losses. and I will provide reasons as to why that is the case...

take for example the 2016 Estimate https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2016/War%20in%20Afghanistan%20and%20Pakistan%20UPDATE_FINAL_corrected%20date.pdf

This gives a tally 42,100

if we also take the 2019 Estimate https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2019/Direct%20War%20Deaths%20COW%20Estimate%20November%2013%202019%20FINAL.pdf

You will notice that the tally of 42,100 is also used.

The Newest estimate (Which is used within both the Taliban Insurgency, and War in Afghanistan article) give the new estimate of 51,191

Which only incorporates 2 separate 4 month reporting periods for the Ministry of Defense as stated within the source https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/figures/2021/Human%20and%20Budgetary%20Costs%20of%20Afghan%20War%2C%202001-2021.pdf "From July 1 through November 5, 2019, Afghan National Defense Forces reported killing 10,259 militants/insurgents/terrorists and reported killing 10,091 from 6 November to 13 April 2021"


This is a clear undercount, simply considering even from 2016-2019 there were no additions. Within the 2014 version, they admit that any estimates are likely undercounted, and no records are actually kept https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2015/War%20Related%20Casualties%20Afghanistan%20and%20Pakistan%202001-2014%20FIN.pdf


However, I would like to highlight that various sources do give Taliban losses for certain periods of time For example, the "Taliban at War: 2001-2018" specifically page 261 by Antonio Guistozzi gives yearly totals (according to Al Somud) from 2002-2016 (omitting 2013) Overall, we can see nearly 80,000 Taliban deaths during that reporting period.

On top of this, the Ministry of Defense has at times given yearly totals, or various seasonal estimates Take for example this article https://www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/officials-count-around-30000-war-dead-afghanistan-year Which states in the year 2016, there were 30,000 deaths in the Afghan War, 18,500 of them Taliban Also various reports from the MOD can be found here https://mod.gov.af/en/press-release or also the Twitter account (which tends to be updated more often) https://twitter.com/MoDAfghanistan We see that in this month (June) alone so far over 1,300 Taliban have been killed in ANDSF operations?


I think it would be interesting to incorporate these numbers because as I highlighted above.. the Watson study is very flawed (at least in regards to Taliban figures) However, I am unsure about how to do that They could very quickly increase the Taliban fatalities of the war well over 100,000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Njofallofall (talk • contribs) 05:51, 11 June 2021 (UTC) Njofallofall (talk) 05:57, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In Regards to Afghanistan territorial control map. How can we define it as accurate or impartial?

I add this information also in the Taliban Insurgency page (and Taliban insurgency detailed map page), but I found it relevant here. In this case, I am speaking specifically to the map that comes from the "Taliban Insurgency detailed map" page which can be seen in the section for 2019 in the War in Afghanistan article

Going through the edit sections of this map I have noticed that there has been a heavy reliance on a singular source for the updates? Specifically, an anonymous Twitter account by the name of "RisboLensky" Which seems to be quite a questionable source? (Especially given the accounts political takes on certain issues which seems to be the opposite of impartial).

The fact of territorial control is that it is a contested issue (and often confused as to what "Control" means). There are various sources that give different standards Some of them clearly being Pro-Taliban, and others clearly being Pro-Afghan Government. ^ both of which are sources upon themselves. Each claiming to control the majority of the country.


Various other outsider sources apply different standards, and have come to different conclusions. (Which clearly at times can be debatable to the methodology)

For example, https://www.longwarjournal.org/mapping-taliban-control-in-afghanistan Which applied would give a completely different map lays out a methodology (though a questionable one) that deals with issues

Or perhaps the SIGAR reports (which will return in June) https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/quarterlyreports/2021-04-30qr-section2-security.pdf <-- as you can see it will return to reporting territorial control the last territorial control report was this one https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/quarterlyreports/2018-10-30qr.pdf None the less it will be returning, and will likely provide a different answer IF I supplied the SIGAR map of June 2021, will that then be added and updated to this map?????

There are also other sources that compile claims such as https://afghanistan.liveuamap.com/ which also highlights territorial control or various other sources that give completely different stats https://feminist.org/our-work/afghan-women-and-girls/taliban-controls-3-of-afghanistan/ ^ older of course, and I dont mean for you to use it.. but an example of how "Control" can be used to develop narrative as opposed to reality.

The List is honestly quite endless... and I am curious why we should take this map seriously when it seems to rely heavily on an anonymous twitter account? which absolutely discounts MOD reports https://mod.gov.af/en/press-release and seems to have a great deal of personal bias on certain issues JUST A few examples from the past couple of days......... proving it lacks impartiality and clearly has a lean on this issue.

https://twitter.com/RisboLensky/status/1397834662492479490

https://twitter.com/RisboLensky/status/1397901353268228096

https://twitter.com/RisboLensky/status/1397816361850748929

https://twitter.com/RisboLensky/status/1397463526810210306

https://twitter.com/RisboLensky/status/1397459159650557954


These are just from the last couple of days, and random ones I could find These are not the comments of an impartial source. RisboLensky has a clear Taliban leaning, and is far more likely to report their claims. While ignoring other claims, and highlighting their own political views ^ this is what I have noticed while going through the claims, though I could be wrong.


So I ask Why are the majority of updates on this page of a singular anonymous twitter account?

This account is used as a source well over 700 times, since October 2018 which in that period saw only slightly above 1,000 separate edits. It makes up the vast majority of claims??????


While all other sources (which give completely different accounts) are completely ignored? Why is this? TRULY Why is an anonymous twitter account with 7,000 subscribers and a self claimed "Marshal and all inclusive, comprehensive and verified troll. Polytheist magician" the very basis of this map???

I find it very silly. Njofallofall (talk) 06:06, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Njofallofall - The map is out of date anyway since it hasn't been updated since 2019. I agree that if the map is sourced to anonymous Twitter comments then it is not reliably sourced. Time to delete it. FOARP (talk) 09:42, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
FOARP - Thank You so much for taking the time to deal with this.

Sadly, the same map is still used on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_insurgency and as you can see from the edit history https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Module:Taliban_insurgency_detailed_map&limit=500&action=history This anonymous Twitter account is STILL used as the main source for updating this map. There are plenty of more reliable sources that can be used (Some of which I have labeled up above). Njofallofall (talk) 04:22, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Muttawakil's supposed unconditional offer to hand offer Bin Laden over

I've struck the section discussing this. The only source is IPS which is not an established news service, but instead an NGO. Even taking the source at face-value, this appears to be reporting of how Muttawikil himself described what happened ten years after the fact, and is not corroborated by any other source. FOARP (talk) 09:39, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, you're wrong. [[5]]'s the Guardian discussing exactly this, as it was happening, in 2001. As a brief aside, I understand the neolib bias in political articles is strong in Wikipedia nowadays, but are you guys even trying anymore? The sentence "the Taliban refused, stating that Osama bin Laden was protected by the traditional Pashtun laws of hospitality" is literally followed immediately by a footnote linking to an article titled "Bush Rejects Taliban Bin Laden Offer." The content of that WashPost article supports exactly what's said in the title and exactly the opposite of what's stated here. 2600:1700:4671:DAF0:A8F1:E4AB:7C0F:F932 (talk) 08:50, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Result (as of 30 June 2021)

The result should be "Withdrawal of U.S and their allied forces from Afghanistan" instead of "Withdrawal of U.S forces from Afghanistan". Yamato Bismarck Hood Iowa (talk) 07:15, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Given the sole victory condition for US and Allies was complete destruction of the Taliban, we should think about posting it as Taliban Victory. They have endured and seen America and Allies driven out. Taliban win.
The war continues and although the Taliban are gaining ground they haven't won. Other countries & private military companies could join to support the Afghan government. Jim Michael (talk) 15:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We can't base a wiki article on things that could happen, only on what has happened. Furthermore, any private military contractors conducting what would amount to illegal non-state actor action would be acts of terrorism, not war. The Taliban have driven America out, and the sole victory condition America and NATO allies attached to their combat operations was the destruction of the Taliban. The Taliban have won, and America has lost another landwar in Asia.
It would be legal for the Afghan gov to hire PMCs - many countries have done so in various wars. Unlike the Taliban, PMCs aren't categorised as designated terrorist groups. Jim Michael (talk) 18:18, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How could you say the war is over just because an actor pulled out? The Afghan government still exists and is still fighting the Taliban. There are also other militias who oppose the Taliban for one reason or another that are still fighting too. Wowzers122 (talk) 22:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
From the look of things, the Taliban have consolidated control over 3/4s of Afghanistan, essentially being restored to their 1996 extent of territorial control. Most of the government enclaves are isolated and besieged. Would say that’s probably significant to the outcome of the war: that a belligerent reversed near all the coalition gains before the withdrawal is even over. Perhaps it’s worth noting in the results that most of Afghanistan is under Taliban control.131.96.223.33 (talk) 19:55, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Told you so. What reason for not calling it a Western Defeat now? The lengths people will go to to try and not admit America just had another humiliating military defeat in Asia. It is literally begging the Taliban not to attack as it runs away. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/08/14/afghanistan-taliban-advance-humanitarian/
That's not how Wikipedia works. It's not for us to decide, we wait until reliable sources start describing it as such. — Czello 13:36, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was over weeks ago, the removal of US forces and personnel should go in the aftermath section. Reliable sources, including the American Government itself with its surrender and withdrawal agreement by Trump, all admitted so. Wikipedia's mission should not include protecting the egos of American editors who just don't want to admit losing. However, this article needs to be changed to reflect the final loss and rout of America and we can close out the war in Afghanistan conflict as ending today, August 15th 2021.
If you want to provide some sources that declare the war is over, go ahead. — Czello 18:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Head of British Military ops in interview to the London Times good enough for you? https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/taliban-could-force-us-out-of-afghanistan-at-any-moment-defence-chief-admits-g70z80kb3

Reliable Western news sources are beginning to refer to Taliban as "undisputed victor[s]": https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/15/talibans-abdul-ghani-baradar-is-undisputed-victor-of-a-20-year-war Vitomontreal (talk) 12:40, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BBC and all western media sources referring to it as a "Taliban Vicotry": BBC News The Guardian News Prawndisama (talk) 12:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Haymaker

Article needed: Operation Haymaker. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 02:01, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 15 July 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jack Frost (talk) 10:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

War in Afghanistan (2001–present) → Afghanistan War (2001–present) – I have two reasons for this move. First, Afghanistan War has 384 million Google hits, and War in Afghanistan has only 304 million, so WP:COMMONNAME applies here. Second, Afghanistan War is shorter and easier to type. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 10:05, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Drug trade photos

I think it's over the top to have three consecutive images about opium production in this section. One image should suffice. GreenCows (talk) 20:29, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done! --Cerebellum (talk) 09:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 August 2021

Update it with the current actions from coalition forces such as the United States and United Kingdom such as evacuating others. Blazefuse (talk) 18:21, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. (pinging Blazefuse) — Lauritz Thomsen (talk) 19:00, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Imminent Taliban victory

It now seems clear that the Taliban will conquer the entire country by the end of the week, what would suffice in order to change "Result" to "Taliban victory" in the infobox? If we have major international newspapers like the New York Times putting it on the front page, would that be enough? --RaphaelQS (talk) 09:17, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • While there will certainly be continued fighting even after final surrender of the IRA government -- not unlike the last time the Taliban took over in '96 -- I would support (assuming RS report it) putting a pin on this article by crediting it as a Taliban victory (again, assuming RS report it thusly) and then starting a fresh article "War in Afghanistan (2021–present)" to cover the ensuing conflict. The belligerents infobox will get too confusing and cluttered otherwise. Chetsford (talk) 09:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a conflict which has concluded with the end of the Kabul regime which occurred today. Therefore rename the article appropriately.SAMBLAman (talk) 13:50, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet. There are thousands of American troops still there, even if their purpose is just to protect the evacuation. And the Taliban has not yet taken control of Kabul or of the organs of government. It's true that everyone seems to think that is inevitable, but it's not a RESULT from Wikipedia's point of view until it actually happens. If one sports team has a huge or insurmountable lead in a game, do we declare the result in our article before the game actually ends? -- MelanieN (talk) 18:21, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps we should wait till the evacuation is finished, but all major cities including Kabul and its palace are in Taliban hands, the Taliban is about to declare an emirate, and what’s left of the Afghan government that hasn’t gone into exile is negotiating surrenders. It seems to be a textbook case of debellatio. I would recommend using the Soviet–Afghan War as a frame of reference and adopting the result of “NATO failure and Afghan Taliban victory”. Certainly with the Taliban conquest of the country and destruction of the Afghan government prior NATO’s withdrawal, it would seem to be what the overwhelming majority of reliable sources say.Freepsbane (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Taliban took control of the presidential palace and are sitting in the president's chair (and the president fled the country), which has been widely covered by the news media. What more is needed to declare this a Taliban victory? Someone Not Awful (talk) 01:05, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The entire war should not be listed as a Taliban victory, it should be listed as satus quo ante bellum. The Taliban conquered no American soil or extracted any unilateral concessions from the American government in a peace. The Taliban is in power as it was in 2001. This is a return to the status prior to the war.
You forget that the war in Afghanistan was also a civil war. The so-called "North Vietnam" (Democratic Republic of Vietnam) is considered to have won the Vietnam war, although no North Vietnamese soldier ever put his foot on the American soil. And besides, South Vietnam and Afghanistan were effectively "American soil" because they had been occupied by US troops for years, just as British India or British Kenya were "British soil" in some sense. JJohannes (talk) 09:26, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well then, if this is a “status quo antebellum” instead of a Taliban victory, for consistency’s sake we would have to change the Soviet–Afghan War to “Soviet Victory” as not only did their foes fail to conquer Kabul or any major city while they were in there, but also left a puppet government that lasted for years, crumbling only after Russia ended their aid. Not status quo either since lots of reliable resources are starting to say the losing side in this war seems set to suffer serious prestige damage and the Taliban themselves have seized billions in arms, and where they only controlled part of the country in 1996, they seem to hold all. The Taliban have expanded territorially from the war, and taken arms as spoils, surely very typical for a victory.Freepsbane (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Taliban did actually expand its territory over what it possessed in 2001 since the Taliban never conquered the northern provinces at the end of the 1990s Afghan civil war. Today, territory that was controlled by the US allied Northern Alliance prior to the 2001 invasion is now controlled by the Taliban. They have not only achieved their 'war objectives' of the withdraw of US troops and conquest of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, but have also expanded their pre-war territory. N0thingbetter (talk) 00:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Status quo ante bellum is a meaningless, American, face saving term. Afghanistan was invaded and the invaders were kicked out. That is a victory for the defenders and a sound defeat for the invaders, no matter who is who on this one.
Term is certainly not an American one. That being said, the Americans/Coalition members showed up, occupied the nation, basically ran the country for as long as their military was present and then left without losing a battle. The people of Afghanistan suffered tremendously for the better part of two decades. Sure, this recent offensive by the Taliban against the former Afghani government is a Taliban victory, but to call the entire two decades an American/coalition defeat is an oversimplification.
Surely then you must edit the outcome of the Soviet–Afghan War to a Soviet victory as not only did they not lose a major city (when the NATO lost every city) prior to withdrawal, but they left a strong client government which could defeat jihadist offensives like the Taliban’s. This war is not status quo though, the Taliban expanded territorially from controlling part of the country before the war to having conquered everything including the old northern alliance, and taken an army’s worth of spoils. Also NATO was losing even before the peace treaty they had already lost control of half of Afghanistan [6] and then lost the other half while withdrawing. Their withdrawal now is continuing under the graciousness of the victor. This is as through a defeat of an outside power as Yorktown and the American revolution.Freepsbane (talk) 18:03, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Because the wider debate about if the war is over is happening below this thread. — Czello 19:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's all but a fait accompli. That said, just to be by the book, I'm going to wait till the evacuation is finished. There still is a chance the situation could deteriorate and lead to fighting, but so far, it seems the Taliban has agreed to allow the NATO members to retreat in peace[7]. Assuming that holds, once it's done, it might make sense to gather a constellation of reliable sources describing the war's result as “NATO failure and Taliban victory”. There already are a ton but I don't feel like provoking controversy by making that edit till the evacuation is fully complete.Freepsbane (talk) 19:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sources

  1. ^ Shams, Shamil; Saifullah, Masood (16 August 2021). "Afghans fear return to the past after Taliban victory". Deutsche Welle. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
  2. ^ Gall, Carlotta; Khapalwak, Ruhullah (15 August 2021). "Afghanistan News: 20-Year U.S. War Ending as It Began, With Taliban Ruling Afghanistan". The New York Times. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
  3. ^ Krauss, Joseph (16 August 2021). "Taliban take over Afghanistan: What we know and what's next". Associated Press. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
  4. ^ Borger, Julian (15 August 2021). "Taliban's Abdul Ghani Baradar is undisputed victor of a 20-year war". The Guardian. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
  • Comment as i partly agree and partly disagree. I think the results should be two for the War in Afghanistan: US-led coalition victory over Al-Qaeda and Taliban victory over US-backed Republic of Afghanistan. Or maybe just AL Qaeda defeat and Taliban victory. It makes sense to have two results since both Al Qaeda and the Taliban have been indicated as the main enemies of the US (and allies) in this war. Most importantly, this is also based on what Biden said: our mission against Al Qaeda was a success, our mission to build a democratic Afghanistan was not. So he basically declared victory in one fight and defeat in another. I think that's a fair take. Barjimoa (talk) 09:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I’m under the impression we don’t vote, we vote, the reliable sources “vote” a consensus for us. And right now I see no “coalition victory over AQ” as what the NYT, what WaPo, what any say. In fact most say AQ would join in on the victors spoils and that his is one of the most comprehensive defeats ever. That said, if we want to redefine what victory means… then as a show of faith you should edit other wars by similar standards, obvious candidate being Soviet–Afghan War. Should be easy for you to do as they did not lose any major city, versus a Cornwallis surrender type situation in Kabul, and left a relatively lasting an enduring client, versus Ghani falling before the withdrawal was complete. Part of our strength is we have universal standards, do not treat people or countries with favoritism, so if we now re-evaluate how we rate success, the best way to prove its no ‘where we live’ kinda favoritism is to apply it to outsiders. But no, plenty of sources saying AQ is joining in on the spoils, how could they be defeated when their brothers in arms now have completely and utterly prevailed in the war over the country.Freepsbane (talk) 14:37, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As an addendum, while the comparison to Yorktown is shocking, it is not at all exaggerated:, despite frenzied air strikes by strategic bombers and gunships (nato participation in battle) the coalition could not keep the Taliban from completely defeating their clients and taking billions in tax payer paid plunder. The Taliban subsequently seized the capital with coalition citizens and troops still there, and the coalition was reduced to asking for permission to evacuate in exchange for deconflicting/not fighting the Taliban[8] it’s a very surrender of Cornwallis type moment. Which is why I think if we are going to redefine victory (against what the overwhelming majority of reliable sources say) then to prove we aren’t just a nationalism or favoritism project, we should start with other countries. And what better than the last war which ended in a comparatively dignified way for the Soviets with a client regime enduring for a respectably long period of time. That would prove to readers we are not just letting nationalism and sentimentality get in our head.Freepsbane (talk) 14:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Freepsbane: Don't bother with this guy, he's been going around altering items like the infobox without any consensus or sources other than "Biden said" (hardly an unbiased source there) to insert claims about Al-Qaeda as being a coalition win. Clearly a biased user wanting to insert their own preferred narrative rather than evidence-based sourcing of outcomes. Apache287 (talk) 16:43, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I find this comment offensive honestly. I'm just stating facts, and i only added Al Qaeda defeat when others added Taliban victory (which obviously i'm fine with). One cannot doubt my objectivity.Barjimoa (talk) 06:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't care if you find it "offensive", you are trying to spin fairytales that we only invaded to remove Al-Qaeda when we invaded to remove the Taliban from power and prevent Afghanistan from being used to harbour terrorists. Now are there still terror groups using Afghanistan as a base? Yes. Do the Taliban control Afghanistan? Yes. We failed completely. Also you're sharing opinion pieces as evidence. An opinion piece isn't journalistic reporting Apache287 (talk) 11:21, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sources do claim that Al Qaeda has been defeated in Afghanistan, both of this year (url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/ten-years-later-islamist-terrorism-isnt-the-threat-it-used-to-be/2021/04/29/deb88256-a91c-11eb-bca5-048b2759a489_story.html) and of the past (https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/president-obamas-secret-100-al-qaeda-now-afghanistan/story?id=9227861). I don't know if AQ will come back in the future (by the Doha agreement it technically shouldn't). But still, so far their network has been basically wiped out of Afghanistan. Barjimoa (talk)
Not only is the first an oped by an architect of the war, and the second a puff piece by a country from the war, but those predate the decisive Taliban victory and so are badly out of date. It’s like a 1972 paper claiming the Vietcong are defeated when they’re a few years away from joining the north in their triumph. It seem they’re joining on the spoil and as part of the winning side see it as their victory too.[9] I would challenge you to produce a post fall of Kabul source that so much claims any shred of victory. And as a sign of good faith in redefining what victory means,I would urge you to edit Soviet–Afghan War, to prove we are not practicing favoritism. It should be easy since they lost no major cities during their tenure and had no Yorktown type humiliation where they had to ask their foes for safe passage out the country.Freepsbane (talk) 16:08, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a side, if a puff piece from before the war went south is enough to support “USA victory” (in any capacity) claim, then the overwhelming stream of sources claiming the lost war badly damaged American prestige must be cited as well. It makes no sense to use marginal deprecated sources not in agreement with the consensus to claim an outcome but also exclude a stream of universally scathing sources from America and the world on its outcome. Clearly there is substantially more reliable sources, and more current sources arguing ‘’United States Prestige Significantly Damaged’’ than there is victory over anything.Freepsbane (talk) 16:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[1][2][3][reply]
Sources

  1. ^ Hudson, John; Ryan, Missy (August 17, 2021). "Withdrawal from Afghanistan forces allies and adversaries to reconsider America's global role". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2021-08-18.
  2. ^ Cohen, Roger (2021-08-17). "For America, and Afghanistan, the Post-9/11 Era Ends Painfully". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2021-08-17.
  3. ^ Sanger, David E. (2021-08-15). "For Biden, Images of Defeat He Wanted to Avoid". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2021-08-17.

Requested move 15 August 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to War in Afghanistan (2001–2021), somewhat early. There is overwhelming consensus that the war is (practically) over, and even if it is technically not, it will almost certainly be by the end of the year. While Wikipedia should be conservative and "follow, not lead" the sources, protracting the inevitable and continuing the discussion does not seem like a constructive way forward. No such user (talk) 13:52, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

War in Afghanistan (2001–present) → War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) – We don't know how the future will be, but the war we knew, the one started in 2001, is over. The history of Afghanistan is not over, and there may be new wars in the future, but I think this one should be closed. Theklan (talk) 17:45, 15 August 2021 (UTC) -Theklan (talk) 17:45, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support on the basis that, regardless of the situation on the ground, either title [(2001-Present) or (2001-2021)] could potentially be factually correct between now and 31 December 2021. However, only one title [(2001-Present)] could potentially be factually wrong between now and 31 December 2021. If, on December 31, the war is still ongoing, we can move it back to 2001-Present because WP:WORKINPROGRESS. Chetsford (talk) 19:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    We shouldn't be deciding an article title based on what may or may not happen on December 31st, we should be deciding it on what is happening now, and right now the war is not over. Assigning an end date to it is simply incorrect. Zoozaz1 talk 21:28, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As of right now, August 15, it is factual and correct to say (2001-2021) and -- regardless of what happens on the ground, whether the war is over or it's entering a new phase -- it will be factual and correct to title it that way for at least four months. The title (2001-2021) does not, nor will it, imply the war is over until 1 January 2022. Chetsford (talk) 01:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Saying 2001-2021 is technically correct, but in that case why wouldn't we have said 2001-2020 in 2020? Having a final date in the title certainly implies that is the end date, which it is not, as of the time I am writing this. Zoozaz1 talk 02:52, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Saying 2001-2021 is technically correct, but in that case why wouldn't we have said 2001-2020 in 2020? I have no objection to you retroactively making that change in the past. Chetsford (talk) 04:40, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, the war in Afghanistan is over, and is being reported by the news as such. Aasim (talk) 05:54, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, if the Northern Alliance political leaders somehow use the last provincial capital to turn around the Taliban takeover then another article called Afghan Civil War (2021-present) should be created if that doesn't come to pass however there is no credible opposition force to the taliban and they have unitary control over all of Afghanistan including the former Northern Alliance strongholds in the north. - || RuleTheWiki || (talk) 03:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, We have to wait until a new peace agreement is signed, or the Panjshir government collapsed, or the UN security council agreed to do something. Mhatopzz (talk) 00:15, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support The President of Afghanistan formally relinquished power to the Taliban and the Taliban has taken over Kabul. I see no reason to consider this war as ongoing. JackyTheChemosh (talk) 20:17, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the Panjshir rebellion is still going, just wait until UNSC or a new peace agreement is signed. Mhatopzz (talk) 00:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Taliban have just announced the end of the war. Tarek lb (talk) 21:30, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support once all international forces leave the country. --Cerebellum (talk) 21:35, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Too soon. We still have troops and civilians including government officials there, our embassy is still operating, and the Taliban has not taken control of Kabul or of the government. Right now the war is still "the present". When we make an official announcement, or when Reliable Sources agree that it is over, then we will make the move (and we won't need an RM discussion to make it). -- MelanieN (talk) 21:38, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. What do you mean "we"? Not everyone here is American. And, regardless, when the US "officially" concedes defeat isn't the measure of when we should change it. CompactSpacez (talk) 03:49, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That’s begging the question, CompactSpacez. The US evacuation is an ongoing military operation, and the US President said in an address today that it will respond with devastating force if the Taliban attempts to interfere. I don’t see you presenting a substantive argument as to why the end of US occupation shouldn’t be considered as the end of the war.2600:387:0:80D:0:0:0:88 (talk) 04:04, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The war, as a physical conflict, is over and has a defined outcome - the Taliban have succeeded in taking over the country. A new government is set to be imminently established as the country officially "changes hands". All rescue troops/leftover international personnel will have left the country within no more than a week in the best scenario possible. The Afghan army themselves have indisputably succumbed to the Taliban, who have themselves also declared the war as over. Accordingly, to claim that the war is still ongoing, would seem to be factually incorrect, or at the very least incorrect by the time any such title change to the article would take place. The end of the war need not be determined by an official announcement if it is already the reality. ArbDardh (talk) 21:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)ArbDardh[reply]

Support. The war is over. As of today Sunday, 15 August 2021 the Taliban have captured the capital of Kabul. We are no longer engaging in any battles, and our diplomats have evacuated. It’s over. Not to mention both sides have agreed that it will end this year and in this month. Cj7557 (talk) 21:57, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support: It is over. The only victory condition attached to the conflict was the eradication of the Taliban. That has not occurred, and Western forces have withdrawn. Taliban victory, Western Allies defeated.
Sources
  • Support: If the conflict enters a new phase, make a new page for that. But it's clear that the current phase of the conflict, where the US and a US-backed state fight the Taliban, is over.
  • Oppose While the end result is clear, evacuations are ongoing and the U.S. has informed the Taliban that it will take military action in response to any attacks on evacuees. While unlikely, this is a possibility in the near future. While I agree the war is nearly over and this page should be moved soon, I don't believe it has met that bar quite yet. Caleb 1223 (talk) 23:32, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Conflict will continue in Afghanistan, but the period of the American led intervention against the Taliban that began in 2001, and finally withdrew in 2021 marks the end of this phase of the conflict.--Caltraser5 (talk) 23:46, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal all describe the government of Afghanistan to have fallen. That there are still some forces there to help with the evacuation is not a continuation of the war. The war is over. (Narkstraws (talk) 23:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC))[reply]
  • Oppose Per WP:NOTACRYSTALBALL, wait until reliable sources state it's end, fighting is still ongoing in pockets of Kabul, and no on knows what is going to happen. Des Vallee (talk) 00:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The Taliban won, even though it was through a US retreat. The result of the war is total Taliban control of the country. It can be spun as a "strategic withdraw" (as happened with the Vietnam War for decades) but that is ideological pedantry, not factual. Someone Not Awful (talk) 01:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The Taliban won and now there's a transitional government being set up, while fighting may and will go on, they won't be the same forces as the begging of the war. I'd also support the creation of an article called "War in Afghanistan (2021–present)" to distinguish between ANA vs Taliban and whatever comes next.--Garmin21 (talk) 01:22, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's over, the Taliban won. While it's nice to think we can "take it back" and it's uncomfortable to think "What the Hell did they all die for?" when you look at the bodies, it's over. War in Afghanistan 2001-2021. The fight is over, these poor people are dead, let the ashes cool. It. Is. Over. --User:18-Till-I-Die (talk)
  • Support: this stage of the war, involving the United States and Western allies, has ended. Any more conflicts should rightly open a new article. Though to be safe we can wait a few days until the handover of powers to the Taliban is complete. NoNews! 01:57, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: I think that, with the collapse of the government and fall of Kabul, this war is clearly over. Taliban has won…. District9123 (talk) 02:08, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: The Taliban has declared the war over, if you consider Al Jazerra a reliable source
  • Comment It appears that USA Today and Al Jazeera have both announced the end of the war. If more sources do the same, I will strike my previous comment. Until then, I am off to bed. Scorpions13256 (talk) 02:18, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Joe Biden lost. He is hiding in his basement and CNN said he is expected to make a statement "in the next few days". He is having a mental breakdown, but wikipedia isn't Joe Bidens personal project, if he wants to admit it or not, doesn't matter. The Taliban took over the country and officially declared it over. Multiple media outlets did the same. 212.95.5.216 (talk) 02:23, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Pretty much all WP:RS say the war is over and the Taliban is victorious. Both parties claim the war is over. There will be an aftermath, of course, but that can be dealt as such in this article or a new one. Loganmac (talk) 02:48, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: The country, while not at peace, certainly isn't currently in any equal war. Even if there's still lots of fighting (there will still be lots of fighting) it's most accurate to say that *this* phase of the war is concluded. NekomancerJaidyn (talk) [she/her] 02:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The discussion and !votes here seem to be almost entirely about individual views on if the war in question is "over." While that is a perfectly fine discussion to have, that is not how Wikipedia determines page titles, or really any content. When it is clear that the majority of reliable sources are saying this, we should reflect that, but until then what everyone's view here about if they think the war is now over is not meaningful for this decision.--Yaksar (let's chat) 03:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: I'm with Yaksar. My personal beliefs aside, reliable sources haven't exactly claimed the end of the war, and, moreover, not all of the coalition troops have left yet. Think, for instance, of the Soviet–Afghan War, which we have lasting until Colonel-General Boris Gromov, the last Russian soldier, left Afghanistan, in 1989. Should we not also do the same here? — Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 03:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Taliban declares 'war is over' as president and diplomats flee Kabul https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/talibans-rapid-advance-across-afghanistan-2021-08-10/ . Conflict may continue in Afghanistan, but the period of the American led intervention against the Taliban that began in 2001, and finally withdrew in 2021 marks the end of this phase of the conflict.Nafis Fuad Ayon (talk) 04:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now At this point, there are still some pockets of Afghanistan that remain under government control, and the Taliban have not yet established a stable government. I have no doubt that this phase of the conflict, at least, will end in the coming days, but I would suggest waiting until the situation on the ground becomes a bit more clear. --LordNimon (talk) 05:53, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The media reporting unanimously frames the war as over Nickelpro (talk) 06:34, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hold on for a few days, then support. I think we have enough evidence and sources proclaiming that the war as we know it has ended: one of the two major combatants has virtually ceased to exist, either by surrendering (Afghan government) or withdrawing from the country (NATO forces, not counting the specific forces in the Kabul Airport which constitute a mere evac relief mission). Other conflicts resulting from the war's aftermath may ensue (an Afghan gov-led insurgency? Subsequent international interventions?), but those should be treated independently and analyzed in a case-by-case basis. This stage of the conflict is essentially over. Nonetheless, I think we should not rush the move and wait a little couple days out of prudency, but the timespan of this discussion will probably be enough for it. Impru20talk 07:00, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Kabul is back under Taliban control, the Afghan government has collapsed, the president has fled and after 20 years, America’s longest war is over. --Saqib (talk) 07:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Islamic Republicans have fallen, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has been restored, Article 2021 Taliban offensive already mentions Taliban victory, Taliban insurgency article also states. Taliban officials said the war is over, I agree with them, there is no one in the Afghan region to lay down resistance or sought to form an alternative government.--Dr. Ivan Kučera (talk) 07:24, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until August 31st This war started as, and will continue to be the American-led intervention in Afghanistan until said intervention formally ceases on 31st of August. While the war may be lost, it's not over until all foreign troops have left. --Kaisersauce1 (talk) 09:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Look at this source from BBC, it says the conflict ended after the fall of Kabul https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-58223231 “ The Taliban has claimed victory in Afghanistan after taking over the capital Kabul, bringing to a swift end almost 20 years of a US-led coalition's presence in the country.” ArabMan719 (talk) 09:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment So Kaisersauce1, it seems that the Second World War didn't end on 2nd of September 1945 after all? You see, there were a couple of German soldiers in Svalbard who had no functioning radio and only surrendered on 4th of September upon meeting some Norwegian hunters. Actually, I think that even more appropriate date for the end of the war would be 18 December 1974, which is the date when the last known Japanese holdout was arrested in Indonesia. So, going by your logic, the Second World War lasted from 1939 to 1974, whole 35 years. JJohannes (talk) 10:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 100% no different than the fall of Saigon. Its over.--Fruitloop11 (talk) 10:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support All major government/military officials including President Ghani have fled the country or switched allegiances to the Taliban. The advances by the Taliban have not been disputed and there appears to be no popular uprising against their advances, on the contrary their advances have met virtually no resistance. Thus, hostilities have essentially ended with only sporadic lawlessness and peaceful transfers in progress.ElderZamzam (talk) 11:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (for now) - as per WP:NOTACRYSTALBALL, feel like this is jumping the gun a little bit. We need reliable sources that say it’s over, as it stands there are still numerous foreign troops in the country and Taliban have not yet gained total control. At this time the situation could rapidly change at any point, citing precedent in naming these things is redundant as each of those cases was decided with the benefit of hindsight; I think “to present” is appropriate at least for the next couple of weeks as anything else is basically speculation. John wiki: If you have a problem, don't mess with my puppy... 11:08, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Until war is truly over. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 11:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Agreed, Just wait until a peace agreement is signed Mhatopzz (talk) 00:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support moving the title, the war won't continue beyond 2021, strong oppose at stating the war is over in the infobox. Super Ψ Dro 11:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relevant Info UK Defence Secretary, while not recognising them formally as the government, has stated the Taliban are "in control" of Afghanistan. Apache287 (talk) 11:32, 16 August 2021 (UTC) [1][reply]
Sources
  • Support It doesn't matter whether or not the US considers its involvement to be over on August 31st. I'm sure they weren't expecting this when they said that. Kabul has fallen, the Afghan government has fallen, the Taliban has won and no country is currently challenging this. They're all recalling their ambassadors. Prinsgezinde (talk) 11:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The war is clearly over. I think the reluctance here has to do with Americans failing to come to grips with the fact that they have lost, yet again. CompactSpacez (talk) 12:01, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support, and the "result" should be changed to "Taliban victory." No crystal balls here, it's all pretty obvious to everyone, no matter what a bunch of governments might say for propaganda effect. MaeseLeon (talk) 13:03, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment After BBC news said the war was over, NY Time said that the war is over too www.nytimes.com/live/2021/08/15/world/taliban-afghanistan-news.amp.html ArabMan719 (talk) 13:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose for now I agree with Yaksar and Javert2113. There are still several thousand U.S. and Nato troops at Kabul Airport, and the situation there is still developing. While the end of the war appears imminent, I support waiting several days while the situation develops before moving the article. The U.S. is set to withdraw all personnel by August 31, 2021, so maybe we should set that as time to rename the article as well. CoatGuy (talk) 14:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The former combatant forces left there are, well, former combatants. They are losers shipping out. There is no grand plan to sweep out of Kabul airport and retake Afghanistan. It is over. Saying it is still ongoing beyond the fifteenth of August is just plain deliberate falsehood at this point.
  • Comment You misunderstand me; I'm not suggesting that the U.S. will rally at the airport and continue the war past August 31. What I mean is that the ongoing evacuation at Kabul airport is a military operation with the potential for short-term continued hostilities. A Washington Post article published in the past hour describes violence at the airport as U.S. troops try to control the crowds. U.S. troops have reportedly shot and killed armed men at the airport today: August 16, 2021. The conflict will soon be over, but as others have said, Wikipedia is not in the business of predicting the future, so I don't think we should be overly hasty in closing this chapter of history while the last few sentences are being written. CoatGuy (talk) 16:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment We might also look to the article on World War II as an example; Japan announced it's intention to surrender on August 15, 1945, and there were widespread V-J Day celebrations on that day in Allied countries, reflecting popular sentiment that the war was over. However, Wikipedia's article on WW2 places the end of the conflict on September 2, 1945, when Japan formally surrendered. While popular sentiment today might hold that the war in Afghanistan is over, that doesn't reflect the reality yet. We should wait for a more formal end to the conflict (i.e. the withdrawal of all U.S.-led forces from the country) to make the proposed change. CoatGuy (talk) 14:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The war has de-facto ended. If the US was to re-intervene that would be a different war. 212.74.201.233 (talk) 14:52, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The Taliban has already declared victory, the president of Afghanistan fled the country and made a statement (which can be interpreted as a surrender) and the Resolute Support Mission has already been disbanded. The president of US, Joe Biden stated that the official conclusion to the war in Afghanistan will be on August 31, 2021. So in my opinion the year could be stated in the title. BnC78 (talk) 15:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC) — Bn678 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Oppose: I think we should wait until the American troops in Kabul are gone or stood down, and the dust has settled. I'm thinking a timeframe of maybe a week or so. It will have to be moved at some point soon, however. Lazdona (talk) 15:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support While I support this in theory, I think we should wait and see until an official announcement from the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and until the Taliban recaptures the country. The war has effectively ended though. Dabaqabad (talk) 15:53, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dabqqabad, The Taliban have already announced that the war is over Mausebru the Peruvian (talk, contibs) 15:56, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think we have enough Support votes for the change to be made.--Fruitloop11 (talk) 17:15, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mausebru: If that's the case then I'll change my vote to Strong Support. Dabaqabad (talk) 18:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Both sides declared the war was over. It's pretty much done and finished by now. Any future conflicts in Afghanistan will probably be separate wars. Justrz (talk) 12:34, 16 August 2021 (EST)
  • Oppose: Per WP:NOTACRYSTALBALL. There has been no formal peace treaty, ceasefire, or surrender by the Afghan government or the US. (There may never be.) But we don't know what the future holds. It obviously would have been premature to declare the war over the day after the US took Kabul in 2001. A resistance to Taliban rule may yet emerge that further prolongs the war, or an event may trigger active fighting again between the US and Taliban. If not, then after sufficient time and once credible sources declare the war has ended, we can update the title and retroactively set the end date as 15 or 16 Aug. Mgruhn (talk) 17:27, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Both the American government and the Taliban outright stated that the war has come to an end. The American troops that were deployed recently were only meant to escort embassy staff and Americans to safety, and these evacuations were completed yesterday. As an American, I hate to see my country waste so much time, money, and human lives, but my country has washed its hands over this loss and I'm ready to have Wikipedia call the results and finally move on from this endless waltz.--Nexenhero91 (talk) 17:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support-there is no longer any organized opposition against taliban rule, the national army no longer exists as a military force capable of opposing the taliban Grimaldilines (talk) 17:54, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Very Strongly Support – Unfortunately, the war is over. The Taliban has won. The Afghanistan Government collapsed and surrendered. If that isn't a defeat decisive enough to mark the end of a war, then I don't know what is. The Fall of Kabul (2021) was basically the Fall of Saigon all over again (even worse, IMO). The Fall of Kabul marks the end of the 20-year-long War in Afghanistan. Any further conflicts or insurgencies would constitute a new conflict, in the same way that the Iraqi Civil War (2013–2017) and the Second Libyan Civil War constituted their own wars after the outbreak and conclusion of a preceding conflict. To my fellow American editors who are voting "Oppose" out of some belief that the war isn't over yet: I hate to say this, but get over it. We lost. Again. It's over. Even the majority of reliable sources are reporting on the Fall of Afghanistan, and declaring the Taliban in control of the country. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 18:22, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weaker-than-average support - while I do have some concerns about this being too soon, this war is essentially over. I am, however, opposed to declaring this war as having ended until reputable sources explicity say this. Bneu2013 (talk) 18:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There have been attempts to change it. I've been undoing them until there's a consensus on the main article before the infobox is altered to avoid mismatch. Apache287 (talk) 20:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but flexible Sorry, unfortunately all major sources are saying it's over and no point being in denial now. It's reported constantly that both sides have declared it's over and so it is obviously over. When one side declares victory and the other side admits defeat, the war is over. If for some unusually low chance the war isn't over, we can then retract it but the Wikipedia article needs to note the current situation and not delay it given the importance of the article. It's very unlikely there will be a change and it may take many years if never for Taliban and the former government reps to ever sign an official peace treaty doc. The Taliban ultimately doesn't need to agree to anything with them and the president has fled and publicly acknowledged defeat. That is sufficiently all that is required to mark the end of the war as far as everything is concerned.MangoTareeface9 (talk) 19:40, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'm not going to cite any particular editor but I agree with other supporters of the move. This thing is over. At some point the denial and pedantry become shamelesness. The end date should be the fall of Kabul as an effective date for all parties involved. --Killuminator (talk) 20:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The events of the past few days are a textbook example of how wars end. Both sides agree that it's over. What more do you need? Later edit: The future tense ("We will end...") of this Biden 16 August sub-tweet does give me pause that the article title shouldn't be changed right away though, I'll admit: https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1427429837053079553?s=20 Moncrief (talk) 20:22, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: this RM has been open for a day and already has >50 users chiming in. It is pretty clear that this discussion will turn into a no-consensus close. This is why I am proposing that this discussion is closed early per WP:SNOW, and reopened at a later time, due to the fact that the title of this page is affected by a very current topic. Wikipedia can wait. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 20:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now- too soon; open to a split into War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) and Afghanistan conflict (2021–present) once it becomes clear how much internal resistance remains. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 20:40, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We arent creating another Afghanistan conflict Article. We still have the 1978-present one that is open.--Fruitloop11 (talk) 21:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now, although almost certainly support in the long run There's still clearly activity taking place here, and regardless the War isn't TECHNICAL over until the proverbial fat lady things. It is scheduled to be over very soon though so this is just a matter of timing rather than denying that the Taliban are actually victorious, because that would be foolish since they clearly are. StrexcorpEmployee (talk) 21:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strongly oppose - The war is coming to a close, yes, but it has not officially ended. We should wait until some sort of announcement has been made that the war is over, but there has not been one yet, so I oppose. Once August 31st comes, then I'll be open to it being changed, but for now, it should remain (2001-present). Presidentofyes12 (talk) 22:43, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The war is over, the state fell, with the President exiled. As per user CompactSpacez, the reluctance here has to do with Americans failing to come to grips with the reality that the state which their country supported did indeed fall and the war is over. Yeungkahchun (talk) 22:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the war is essentially over, kabul and all other provincial capitals has fallen to the Taliban and as such i believe we can change the name to indicate it ended this year TheHaloVeteran2 (talk) 23:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Talibans claims its over, The US Government claims its over, most major WP:RS agrees its over, the war lasted from October 7, 2001 to August 15, 2021. If anything happens after that it will be seperate incident, perhaps a separate war. but this war ended like the Vietnam War (fall of Kabul has drawn comparison to fall of Saigon the end of that war), Iraq War and all. Unless clear WP:RS (not just one but many) states that this specific war is still ongoing, we are no one to say it is. As of now all parties involved in the war (Talibans, US Government, etc) and all major WP:RS, including major news channels, CNN, AlJajera, BBC, etc, etc, etc, agreess the war ended, so it should be listed as ended unless there are sufficient WP:RS saying its still ongoing. Currently saying its ongoing is a clear WP:NOR violation as parties involved in the conflict and most WP:RS have declared it over. Dilbaggg (talk) 00:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment btw I hate the outcome, I hate that terrorists like Talibans took over, maybe in future they will be gone, but as of now we should cite history the way it is and the war is indeed over. Dilbaggg (talk) 00:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Panjshir hasn’t fallen yet and there seems to be news of former Northern Alliance warlords gathering there. Let’s wait for Taliban to actually either take it or for the resistance to fizzle out first - maybe in the next 2 weeks we’ll see how it works out. At this point Taliban still doesn’t control the Kabul airport and that one town. Juxlos (talk) 00:08, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: If the NA wants to start a new war, that is on them, and would be the subject of a new article as a new conflict. This conflict, between the Western Powers and the Taliban is over. Same as the stuff about the evacuation. That is for a section on the aftermath of the Taliban victory, or if it gets complicated enough then it can be given its own article. I imagine that the aftermath of this Taliban victory will need its own article. This war, though, is over.
  • Comment Juxlos the American Civil War ended in May 9, 1865 when it was declared formally over, there was still fighting as the last Confederate troops surrendered in June 23, even after that there were some insurgency for a while, but that doesn't state the fact the war ended on May 9, the war ends after formal declaration, as was the case here after the fall of Kabul in August 15, 2021. After every war some minor insurgency always remains, but that doesn't change the end of the war. The troops at the air port are just there to help evacuate people wanting to escape the hell that Afghanistan has become now with the Taliban regime, they are not there to fight. Eitherways as of now all parties involved and all major WP:RS declared the war over. That should be sufficient enough. Dilbaggg (talk) 00:22, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: That’s really interesting and I can’t wait to read your peer reviewed doctoral dissertation about the end of the war, but until you finish writing and publishing it, this is just your unsubstantiated opinion on what very recent events in an ongoing situation mean. Saying that the troops evacuating and securing the airport aren’t part of the war is just an opinion without any reliable sources to back it up, which doesn’t seem like a good basis to make decisions about editing an encyclopedia...
  • Support as per Dilbaggg. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 00:54, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A lot of people are obviously feeling very emotional about current events, but just because you write “It. Is. Over.” here doesn’t mean that there aren’t still several thousand US and British soldiers in Afghanistan. The war will be over when the occupation forces leave, per US President Biden’s address on August 16. US leadership clearly sees this as a war in the process of ending, so saying “it’s. over.” is an oversimplification of a complicated situation and you’re just passing off speculations (however accurate they might be) as fact. It’s funny that so many people are saying “both sides have declared the end” without providing any sources for the US saying the war is actually over RIGHT NOW, and sources such as AP and NYT are saying that the war is “ending,” not that it has “ended”... If you’re feeling emotional about this, write an angry Facebook post or go stand on a street corner wearing a sandwich board, but leave the presentation of facts to more level headed people. Wikipedia is not an appropriate place for you to seek personal closure about the war’s end by asserting your emotions on a encyclopedic article.
    They are literally only there now to evacuate people from the country. Thats it. The coalition backed government has fallen and most troops are out of the country.
    From Wikipedia's perspective, the war is "over" when reliable sources claim the war is "over". Nothing more, nothing less. That condition has been met, so your argument is meritless. CompactSpacez (talk) 04:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Exactly, and there isn’t consensus among reliable sources (eg US President, AP, NYT) that the war is “over.” It’s “ending” or “will end.” You don’t get to pick and choose which sources we’ll use just to suit your worldview, CompactSpacez. Your comment is meritless. And please read the entire post next time before responding.2600:387:0:80D:0:0:0:88 (talk) 04:24, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per reliable sources: [10][11]. Of course, the situation on the ground could change at any given moment, but RS are generally accepting that the war has concluded. IronManCap (talk) 01:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support since reliable sources say it's over. If the count shows no consensus, just wait a few days (or hours even) for it to become obvious. TFD (talk) 02:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment should the move go through, a whole host of categories under Category:War in Afghanistan (2001–present) will need to be renamed per WP:C2D, as will many articles in this cat. IronManCap (talk) 02:45, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This phase of the War in Afghanistan is finished. RSes agree that the war is over. I can see the argument that an insurgency continuing (or lack of surrender or whatever) means that the "war" might not actually be over. That's more or less WP:CRYSTALBALLing on the part of editors that seem to disagree with reliable sources and want to impose their own WP:OR views on the article. If the war ends up not actually ending though as some editors have predicted, it may be appropriate to create a new article on the "War in Afghanistan (2021-present)". If by some bizarre miracle, the sole Afghan government controlled province manages to take back Afghanistan and defeat the Taliban, then we might have to move the article back. But these are issues we can deal with when we get to those points, and what matters is what reliable sources are saying now, not what they might say in the future. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply)Template:Z181 02:52, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until all foreign troops leave Afghanistan. While true that the Taliban have recaptured the country, there are still foreign forces in Afghanistan. The war does not officially end until August 31st. It is wrong to imply that the war ended prematurely. This is a very tense situation that is still under the scope of a military operation. There could also be developments that change the war unexpectedly (for example mass civil unrest or revolution against the Taliban even if extremely unlikely). It should only be changed when it is declared to be officially over by the US/NATO. Evercool1 (talk) 05:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment That’s an arbitrary date and cant be used when making a rational statement. European theatre of World War II ended on May 9 even though the Prague offensive was happening. Vietnam War ended April 30, 1975 even though the Mayaguez incident happened in May 1975. The war is over the evacuation process is not part of a war, nor has it ever been part of any war.--Fruitloop11 (talk) 10:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Reliable sources state the Taliban have won and that the war is over[1][2][3][4]. From a Wikipedia standpoint, this is all that matters (and not the original research or geopolitical opinions of community members). Those opposing have not, as far as I can tell, provided reliable sources to support their position. Vitomontreal (talk) 13:37, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sources

  1. ^ Shams, Shamil; Saifullah, Masood (16 August 2021). "Afghans fear return to the past after Taliban victory". Deutsche Welle. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
  2. ^ Gall, Carlotta; Khapalwak, Ruhullah (15 August 2021). "Afghanistan News: 20-Year U.S. War Ending as It Began, With Taliban Ruling Afghanistan". The New York Times. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
  3. ^ Krauss, Joseph (16 August 2021). "Taliban take over Afghanistan: What we know and what's next". Associated Press. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
  4. ^ Borger, Julian (15 August 2021). "Taliban's Abdul Ghani Baradar is undisputed victor of a 20-year war". The Guardian. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
  • Support. Yet another reliable source stating the war is over is this tweet by the AP. Dylanvt (talk) 14:35, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support This article is not about the perennial Afghan infighting and multiple successive wars. It is about the specific War initiated in 2001 when the United States - having suffered the 9/11 attacks - invaded Afghanistan (with the support of an international coaltion of allies) with the goal of liberating the contry from the Taleban's Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan regime, and of preventing the use of Afghanistan as a base for terrorist organizations. That war that began in 2001 is now over. Combat operations have ceased. That war ended with the defeat of the US-led coalition on August 15, 2021 when the US-backed Islamic Republic of Afghanistan fell as a consequence of America's decision to completely withdraw its military forces from Afghanistan even without the conditions set out in the February 2020 Doha Peace Agreement being met, and of the Taleban's military success in its 2021 offensive to retake control of the country. As a result of that US decision, first to end combat operations and then to withdraw its military from Afghanistan, the war is over. Unfortunately, the taleban prevailed in that not only the US was unsuccessful in eliminating them, but also the taleban succeeded in regaining control of the contry and reestablishing its Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan rule. The fact that one does not like that result does not change the fact that, by America's decision to stop fighting, the war is over. The Northern Alliance had been fighting the Taleban Emriate before 2001 and they may continue a localized insurgency against the Taleban in one specific province from now on. That pre-existing internal struggle was not material to the start-date of the "War in Afghanistan", an international military conflict, in 2001 and its possible continuation now as a small scale internal struggle is also not material to the termination of the "War in Afghanistan", as an international military conflict, in 2021. Antonio Basto (talk) 16:59, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

•Support. The war is mostly over, the taliban controls 99% of the Afghan territory except for the Panjshir valley. It is expected that the conflict now will be a small scale insurgency between Amrullah Saleh's forces and the Taliban Araukan (talk) 16:48, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Given that we are now days after the signifying event in question (namely the Fall of Kabul) and have increasing numbers of reliable sources that are declaring the US-led War to be over (which this article pertains to) and that there is an absence of reliable sources from those opposed to moving the article to show the world considers the war ongoing and are instead using WP:Crystal claims that fighting could start again surely it is time to move the article? Apache287 (talk) 16:56, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agree. Many of the early Opposes said they wanted to wait for RS. Several reliable sources have now been provided. Since the reliability of the sources have not been challenged, I think there is a strong argument for a consensus to move if those early Opposes are now Supports. Vitomontreal (talk) 17:22, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've created Conflict between the Taliban and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (2021-Present). This is not a resolution to the current question as the aformentioned conflict has not yet metastasized into a war per se and so far is merely a one-way war of words. However, should we have RS that confirm military operations here, I'd suggest this article be pinned with a 2021 end date and we move over there. Chetsford (talk) 17:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose (for now). It doesn't matter who we think won or how well-reasoned our arguments are. Wikipedia does not do WP:Original Research. Wikipedia is not a WP:Crystal Ball. Ask again in three weeks, once there's better RS support and the US withdrawal is formally over, and we'll probably be able to WP:Snowball this. Intralexical (talk) 17:30, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • As demonstrated, almost all reliable sources agree the war has now concluded, whilst a single RS claiming the war has not yet concluded has yet to be presented. I'm not sure where the OR claim originates from, therefore. IronManCap (talk) 18:59, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • I would conter that the US Forces are now performing non combatent duties only, related to their withdrawal. Accordingly, combat operations having ended, the war is over. The fact that the Forces still neeed to complete their evacuation does not change the fact that the war is over and all combat operations were terminated. Antonio Basto (talk) 19:56, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • I wouldn't lose a moment's sleep if the title were changed now (obviously the conclusion is clear), but to play devil's advocate, see the subtweet here from Biden's account from yesterday, 16 August: https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1427429837053079553?s=20 -- "...And once we have completed this mission, we will conclude our military withdrawal. We will end America’s longest war." (Emphasis mine.) It seems somewhat odd to change the title when the US president is still using the future tense, no matter what the RS say. I would say wait a week or so, which is probably what will happen anyway as I can't imagine any admin is in a rush to close this !vote. The !votes on changing the title of the article about January 6th took most of the summer. Moncrief (talk) 19:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support we rarely get such participation for Requested Page Moves these days. The political situation is clear: the war is ending in 2021. There are debates above that suggest it's CRYSTAL to move the article while it still is 2021. It is not. The Ghani government is gone; therefore the war has ended. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 20:30, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The vast majority of media outlets are reporting that the war has ended. The Taliban now has full control of Afghanistan and the United States has no plans to return to the country. There may be some small armed resistance, but as far as the war goes, its over.BlueShirtz (talk) 21:52, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per the other users. The occupying countries have practically fully withdrawn, the talibans control not only the government but also every province of the country and the "president" has peacefully fled to his home nation of Tajikistan. 2001:1970:564B:4700:4127:F83C:F478:DD0F (talk) 22:31, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support WP:Crystal Ball doesn't say it has to be 100% certain, only if it isn't it needs WP:RS that is sufficient. The Resolute Support Mission was disbanded on 12 July. The Afghan Armed Forces collapsed on 15 August. The Operation Freedom's Sentinel is set to end on 31 August. Also Biden stated that "We will end America's longest war.". Future tense doesn't necessarily mean WP:Crystal Ball (for example 2024 U.S. presidential election and 2028 Summer Olympics). Biden stated that the war will end after the withdrawal mission and he also stated that the withdrawal will end on 31 August. It isn't speculation or original research, it is a drawn conclusion. BnC78 (talk) 23:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the Afghanistan conflict (1978–present) is not over: the Panjshir resistance still exists and they actually have a President (Amrullah Saleh). But this phase of the war is definitely over: we should change the title and move the following events to the page Conflict between the Taliban and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (2021).-Karma1998 (talk) 23:50, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The war in Afghanistan, according to almost all sources, recently concluded with the withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan and the Taliban conquest of the country. Several reliable sources have been provided by previous commenters. Crossover1370 (talk | contribs) 06:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (for now) I urge restraint, since there currently still are "Western" boots on the ground (in Kabul), the fighting has not subsided (e.g. Panjshir, other regions), and the waves are full of rumours, half-truths and disinformation. I simply see no rush, and, as one user here said: "Wikipedia is not a news ticker". Ivario (talk) 11:46, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. To suggest that the War is “ongoing”, as the article currently states, is clearly a mistake at this point in my opinion. The fact that there are still “Western boots on the ground” is also clearly immaterial, since those troops are only carrying out non combat duties relating to the evacuation. World War II ended on September 2nd, 1945 when Japan surrendered. It did not end when the last American Forces withdrew from Japan. Similarly, WWII in Europe ended when combat ceased upon the surrender of Germany on May 8-9, 1945, not when the last Allied troops left. To suggest that a War is ongoing because a withdrawal is still taking place, is therefore clearly wrong, especially when there is an Agreement between the belligerants (in this case, the Doha Agreement of Feburary 2020, supplemented by contacts on the ground between US forces in the Hamid Karzai International Airport and Taleban forces outside the Airport) governing the US withdrawal. The fact that a Northern Alliance insurgency has regrouped in Panjshir is also irrelevant, since this article is not about the broader Afghanistan conflict (1978-present), but is instead about the War initiated in 2001 when America invaded Afghanistan with the goal of rooting out the Taleban Emirate. That War is now over, the US has been defeated, and the Taleban Emirate rule has been restored. One cannot gloss over the simple facts. Antonio Basto (talk) 13:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Also there might be "Western" boots on the ground as long as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is the government. Currently it is because of U.S. Forces Afghanistan Forward mission. BnC78 (talk) 13:57, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The war in Afghanistan is effectively over. The Western allied forces have withdrawn, and the Taliban have seized control of the country.(PaulThomas92 (talk) 13:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC))[reply]
  • Support While war in Afghanistan is sadly far from over this phase is. Maxime12346 (talk) 23:03, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now... As of right now, we hadn't got news from any of the belligerents in the War in Afghanistan (like the US, the Islamic Republic of the Afghanistan government, or the Taliban) saying that the war is declared "over". Until then, it should not come to a close, at least not yet... because there are still some resistance from anti-Taliban groups ongoing. Plus some of the foreign troops still remain, mainly for protecting their embassies or any of their nationals evacuating from Afghanistan, and there are still pockets of Afghanistan not taken yet (unless stated otherwise) ROBLOXGamingDavid (talk) 15:26, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:NPOV, WP:CRYSTAL. It will require more details and confirmation by WP:RS than mere claim of power grab by one side. AnM2002 (talk) 17:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • But not anymore. Mainstream  media sources are clear now that the war is ongoing.

[12][13] Making conclusions by depending on cherrypicked and limited information is nothing but POV pushing. AnM2002 (talk) 17:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Putting aside the mild personal attack in the section below, the BBC source does not mention that the war is not over, whilst the Times makes it clear this is from a certain group of people's perspective (i.e. WP:UNDUEWEIGHT). This is not cherrypicked and limited information but in fact the consensus among RS. IronManCap (talk) 17:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly Support It is physically and technically over, and it is a Taliban Victory and that should be listed in the infobox as the outcome. Colliric (talk) 01:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Its over, its time for Americans to put down the Cool-aid and accept the hard reality.

  • Strong Support The war is over, the US is leaving in peace as the sole term of surrender. I declare the war is over.
  • Oppose - Clearly foreign forces are still deployed in Kabul carrying out the evacuation, so this war is still ongoing. Fighting may well continue in Afghanistan even after the withdrawal is complete given the news of anti-Taliban forces regrouping in the Panjshir valley and nationwide demonstrations against the Taliban. FOARP (talk) 12:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
evacuations have nothing to do with a war.War is about fighting not running away --2601:3C5:8200:97E0:BC85:B847:A261:82C5 (talk) 12:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just off the top of my head:
All treated as a part of the conflict they were linked to, because that's the way reliable sources treat them. It's too soon to say whether history will see the withdrawal as somehow not part of the war but it seems very, very unlikely that it will be considered seperate. FOARP (talk) 13:48, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2021

79.75.108.78 (talk) 18:49, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --Ferien (talk) 19:26, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Norway missing from infobox

Why is Norway missing from the info box of countries participating in the invasion in 2001 ? Norwegian special forces has been participating in several missions from the get go, including operation Task Force K-Bar and has been in Afghanistan for 20 years. Why has Norway been removed from the infobox ? This is revisionist history and it's wrong. Mortyman (talk) 13:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Again, why has Norway been removed from the list of countries participating in the invasion in 2001 ? Mortyman (talk) 10:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mortyman: Find a WP:RS and add it in yourself, or ping me here with a news article and I'll add it. I think calling it "revisionist history" is unnecessarily paranoid— More likely, it's just our bureaucracy removing it due to not having a citation for it, or at most a semantic argument at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Countries or somewhere about the level of involvement needed for military infoxboxes. Intralexical (talk) 17:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. It's just annoying that something is removed without checking the info better. The info had source. But the urls was outdated. Wikipedia and it'¨s editors can't expect every detail to be uppdated with a new source every few months: Here is one url about Norwegian special forces taking part in Task force K bar: https://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/operation-enduring-freedom-the-first-49-days-6/ . Here is a source about Norwegian comitment in general: https://2001-2009.state.gov/coalition/cr/fs/12753.htm . Norwegian special forces and other forces has been in Afghanistan sice october 2001 to 2021. I was not able to add it to the infobox. Seems to be off limits to me. I appreciate if you can uppdate it. Mortyman (talk) 18:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mortyman: Well, this is a bit embarrassing. Norway is actually already in the infobox— There's a "[show]" button next to the "ISAF" entry, and Norway is listed in there. The ISAF page itself goes into more detail on Norwegian involvement. There's also an entry for "Resolute Support", which links to another article that includes Norway. Sorry for sending you to get new citations; I probably could have checked for it more diligently first! BTW, talk pages usually don't send notifications automatically when you reply to someone. I had to check this page manually to see if you'd replied. You can use Template:Reply to in the future if you want to get someone's attention. Intralexical (talk) 16:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Intralexical: Message text. Mortyman (talk) 15:48, 19 August 2021 (UTC) Yes, but Norway invaded Afghanistan already in October 2001, so before ISAF and therefore, it should be added to the main list of invading countries in my opinion. As pointed out Norwegian forces was already part of the Task Force K-Bar in October 2001Mortyman (talk) 15:48, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mortyman: Hm. Right. I'm missing the background history, but that does seem to be the case. I'll look more into the timeline later to make sure I get it right, and then ping you again when I've added it. Intralexical (talk) 16:13, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Biden statements

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X20mGH266r4

Last month Joe Biden made important statments like: - The Afghan troops have 300 thousand well equiped and trained soldiers and an airforce, while the Taliban have just 70 thousand - The Taliban will not take over Afghanistan - There is no chance. Zero. That it will be like Saigon. You will not see helicoters evacuating an US embassy

All of those statements made just a month ago. Currently this article is very partisan and just quotes of Biden get posted, sometimes out of context, that are strongly in his favor. For completition sake, all the statements that he made in his press conference a month ago should be included. If you need reliable sources, you just need to choose a random newspaper of your liking and see what they wrote about this conference. 212.95.5.216 (talk) 02:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree these need to be put in the article. Wikipedia has become far to partisan. Cj7557 (talk) 05:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

America is going home now. Biden's statements on Afghanistan haven't been this unimportant since Bill Clinton mattered. We should start trimming contradictory English rhetoric and needless partisan snippets, not adding more. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:44, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would argue that these statements have a relevant historical value, as they highlight the position of US officials in contrast to the actual situation as it unfolded. The context surrounding these statements is a matter worth evaluating alongside the rest of the history of the War in Afghanistan. Jade Phoenix Pence (talk) 08:49, 16 August 2021 (UTC)Jade Phoenix Pence[reply]

Change the title to (2001-2021)

There is already a move proposal open on this page which will govern the consensus on this topic. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 20:02, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The box at the top right hand side says:

War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)

and in the article

> On 15 August 2021, the president of Afghanistan Ashraf Ghani fled the country and the Taliban declared victory and the war over.

But the title says (2001-present)

There is a discussion, above, about when to change the article title to 2001-2021. It will probably happen soon. BTW just because one side declares victory doesn't mean the war is over. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:30, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Every side is saying it is over now, with even the US signing a joint statement calling for the Taliban ruling government to allow safe passage of all their citizens and allies out of the country. https://www.jpost.com/international/world-reactions-to-fall-of-afghanistan-676772
I hate to break it to you but both sides are now saying that the war is over and the Taliban are in full control. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think the end date of the war should be set to when the Hamid Karzai International Airport is fully evacuated and the last US soldiers leave Afghanistan. This will likely be in the next weeks, per US government. - Netanyahudi (talk) 21:18, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The US troops currently in Afghanistan are not doing any fighting, so it is fair to say the war is over even though some are still there. BakedGoods357 (talk) 22:08, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The war clearly isn't over, as an anti-Taliban coalition appears to be forming, but this phase of the war, that was defined by the domination of the Islamic Republics forces and its predecessors, and the presence of the United States, is over. The page should be re-named and a new one created for the new phase of conflict Afghanistan is about to enter. --KingSepron (talk) 14:52, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The London Times is reporting UK military commanders as saying they conducting the evacuation only with the Taliban's permission, and that that consent could be removed at any time and the evacuation shut off. A clear admission of a loss, and that the war is over with no combat phase left. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/taliban-could-force-us-out-of-afghanistan-at-any-moment-defence-chief-admits-g70z80kb3
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2021

Because the Taliban have clearly won the war. The west have withdrew and the Taliban have taken control. The war has now ended with Taliban victory. 2A00:23C6:F13:501:166:28C2:F931:8A3C (talk) 19:47, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Result(s)

I think the results should be two for the War in Afghanistan: US-led coalition victory over Al-Qaeda and Taliban victory over US-backed Republic of Afghanistan. Or maybe something along the lines of AL Qaeda network in Afghanistan dismantled and Taliban Emirate restored following the US withdrawal. It makes sense to have two results since both Al Qaeda and the Taliban have been indicated as the main enemies of the US (and allies) in this war. Most importantly, this is also based on what Biden said: "our mission against Al Qaeda was a success, our mission to build a democratic Afghanistan was not". So he basically declared victory in one fight (dismantling Al Qaeda network in Afghanistan and counter-terrorism) and defeat (nation-building and counter-insurgency) in another. I think that's a fair take and it's going to be easy to find the sources for both claims, starting with the Biden speech. Barjimoa (talk) 09:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't want accuracy, but some sort of US face saving title, then do that. It won't be true though. There was no US victory here, it was a clear defeat of the US led forces.
Even though Joe Biden himself is lying in the speech, as per his previous comments where he was pro-"nation building". [1] Even if you wanted to be generous and claim NATO had two objectives, to remove the IEA/Taliban and to degrade Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups then clearly given that Trump had to bomb ISIS in Afghanistan and that the Taliban have just seized control of 33/34 province centres in less time than most people go on holiday it's clear the US/NATO mission has been a complete failure and we are now at the exact same position as when we went in. Apache287 (talk) 16:39, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I want accuracy and I am not being generous. It's just that NATO did in fact always claim to have two objectives (from Bush to Biden). Dismantle Al Qaeda and defeat the Talibans. Dismantling Al Qaeda has been achieved, defeating the Talibans has been a failure. Do you really think AL Qaeda shouldn't be mentioned in the infobox? It was the main reason the US went to war in the first place.Barjimoa (talk) 06:52, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The infobox template is pretty clear that this parameter may use one of two standard terms: "X victory" or "Inconclusive"; we don't generally do "X victory but ..." (Template:Infobox military conflict). Chetsford (talk) 16:44, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Taliban victory and Al Qaeda defeat. That's what i am saying. Barjimoa (talk) 06:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Apache287. The result of the war has been a Taliban victory and their takeover of Afghanistan. It's as simple as that. Whether the US/NATO withdrew or lost is irrelevant. Prinsgezinde (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's obviously not irrelevant. But even if was, Al Qaeda lost. I do agree that Taliban won, obviously. Barjimoa (talk) 06:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anglosphere news sources have slowly started using «Taliban victory»;[2] this comes a few days later than sources in other languages.[3] Ffaffff (talk) 20:41, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But i agree with that, i am not saying this is not a Taliban victory. I'm saying (like Biden in his speech) that the US and allies lost to the Taliban insurgency (taliban victory) but defeated Al Qaeda (al Qaeda defeat). One has been defeated and the other hasn't. Many sources are out there to back this up. Barjimoa (talk) 06:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Al Qaeda still exist and Islamic terror they support has only grown since 9/11. They haven't "lost" in any way. The invasion was about punishing the Taliban and removing them from power for their support of Islamic terror groups like AQ. The Taliban are still in power. Stop just repeating what Biden said in a face-saving speech where he also blamed Afghan civilians for not evacuating earlier as some well-supported fact. Apache287 (talk) 11:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, as a network and force, has been dispersed and dismantled. I'm not repeating everything Biden said, certainly not the part of Afghan civilians. However, one cannot exclude the true things Biden said just cause he is Biden. Note that now Boris Johnson also said something along those lines (and even exaggerated with calling the whole mission a succcess because of that). Even by the Doha agreement the Talibans agreed to not give bases to Al Qaeda.Barjimoa (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your "sources" are two different politicians, one who is infamous for lying frequently, giving speeches during massive criticism of the collapse of Afghanistan as to claim why losing isn't actually losing. Funnily enough plenty of leaders throughout history have done this but we don't take their face-saving as gospel. Reliable Sources are not considering the dismantling of Al-Qaeda as the primary war goal, instead it was the removal of the Taliban regime. 2A00:23C7:62A3:3A00:FD21:BFBF:5F0C:F61E (talk) 00:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wow I knew wikipedia was full of trolls and propagandists but are you guys serious? If you're conclusion is that the US "lost" then you're a fool or a liar, maybe both. Germany lost WW2. Argentina lost in the Falklands. To label this mission a defeat, when the overarching goal of dismantling the threat of Al-Qaeda in the country has been achieved and then some, is completely misleading and wrong. Then again, Jimmy Wales and his army of basement dwellers excel at lying on this free "encloypedia."

Wikipedia is a joke and Jimmy Wales should be in prison. You people are pathetic degenerates for your fake result on this page.

Good you agree with me (altough i don't agree with your language). Sign yourself though.Barjimoa (talk) 06:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn’t encourage people to be disruptive(and I doubt you agree with his “basement dweller” claims he uses as bizzare “evidence” of rightness), but regardless; I could not find so much as a single, current source to argue: US-led coalition victory over Al-Qaeda and I see no reason why we should make this article a puff piece where instead of applying what the overwhelming mass of sources say, we cite something more comforting to our nationalism, it would discredit us. And yes, no shortage of sources described this as a Taliban victory over the US lead coalition. That said many sources now also said it had destroyed Washington’s prestige so as a counter proposal I recommend: US Prestige Significantly Damaged as there is a veritable wellspring of contemporary reliable sources claiming that versus nonexistent contemporary sources claiming the war was a victory of any sort.Freepsbane (talk) 16:37, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[4][5][6][reply]
Sources
Of course the sources of these days would talk more of the Taliban victory. But the sources about Al Qaeda network in Afghanistan being dismantled have been out there for the last months and years and i have provided a couple. Now Johnson too, even more than Biden, has also made that claim (i actually think he went too far by saying that the whole mission has been a success, but certainly one objective has been achieved). This is not in conflict with Taliban victory or US prestige going down.Barjimoa (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am just here to add more sources.[1][2][3]

Sources

Ffaffff (talk) 19:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • No. This is a «Taliban victory» in the media in every language that I'm able to read or grasp. There's a real country called Afghanistan with the Taliban in power, this country was attacked and invaded to depose the Taliban, and after 20 years they've managed to recover it. So this is a clear Taliban victory. Those are the historical facts and what history will remember. Wikipedia is not for propaganda, publicizing propaganda goals or whitewashing, American or otherwise. MaeseLeon (talk) 20:33, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is a Taliban victory, but also an Al Qaeda defeat. Afghanistan was attacked to depose the Taliban and dismamtle the network of Al Qaeda there. How can one even deny that? The two things are not in constrast. How is this propaganda and whitewashing? Please let's not get paranoid. Barjimoa (talk) 07:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly Oppose - **(For Now)**
While I agree things will likely end sooner or later as a loss for NATO. US President said in an address that they will respond with devastating force if the Taliban attempts to interfere with remaining operations.
And that troops will continue to be added possibly even beyond August/Sept in new news reports
Relevant Sources:
https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1427429837053079553?s=20
https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1428240577473220615?s=20
I feel like this is the same as changing end date to 2021 early because of the Battle of Kabul was also premature when things haven't ended yet and should have a move review due to issues with WP:Original Research WP:Reliable Sources & WP:Snowball Clause
Can't we just wait and see what's relevant after August 31st? People seem to be rushing to mark this phase of current events as closed. Daseiin (talk) 15:20, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: An additional source from current news reports
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/18/biden-us-troops-afghanistan-31-august-deadline Daseiin (talk) 15:24, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question:
People have had this debate before and the page has had to have dates changed following that, and now for the 15th during a situation that keeps developing
Surely the international recognition of the Government and it's President (Ghani) and his refusal to cede him being President of Afghanistan nor having signed any UN Peace treaty/UN Security Council Decision would be cause to wait until US & NATO have left after August 31st or whenever considering the instability in Kabul still and the airport being under control still? (There has been reports of fighting and shots aswell)
There's also more troops going in now aswell which has caused the August 31st retreat to be in doubt (Bidens own words on video and his Social Media Posts)
I'm not saying this is likely to end in a coalition victory for remaining people who are being joined by more troops with the rebels & rally protesters~ resisting and managing to gain the upper-hand back but I will say it's too early to declare the situation closed until all parties have pulled out which could be soon or could be a while away after 31st
Relevant Sources:
nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/afghan-protests-spread-to-kabul-in-early-challenge-to-taliban (For recognition not being given)
today.ng/news/world/protests-afghan-taliban-spread-early-signs-resistance-384143 (Caretaker President siding with Opposition & Resistance)
msn.com/en-us/news/world/whats-next-for-afghanistan-peace-talks-in-qatar-resistance-in-the-valley/ar-AANsV6l (A coalition of anti-Taliban resistance forces in the last region of Afghanistan not under Taliban control.) Daseiin (talk) 17:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. Even western media is referring to it as a «Taliban victory»[1][2] Please don't suggest a clearly invalid double-result or things such as «AL Qaeda network in Afghanistan dismantled» That should instead go in an "Aftermath" section with valid sources as seperate discussion. Please read the template if you don't understand Prawndisama (talk) 21:03, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sources
Again, Taliban victory does not disprove that Al Qaeda lost. Are you seriously proposing to not mention Al Qaeda in the infobox?In the War in Afghanistan?Barjimoa (talk) 07:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously Barjimoa? Please read the template like I requested. We all saw/read your opinion the first time you posted it, you don't need to re-spam it over and over again in the same discussion. Wikipedia isn't your personal opinion site. Please don't make us create a mod page about you. Prawndisama (talk) 18:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a total NATO failure, keep coping.

Whether the US lost or not is actually an interesting question. My impulse is to say the US clearly lost in terms of treasure and lives lost, but there is a legitimate question of how long the war actually was. The invasion was to fight Al-Qaeda, after that goal was completed the US just kind of stayed and occupied Afghanistan. I would argue that an occupation isn't a war, and that the war was won by the US when Al-Qaeda was utterly destroyed. We might want to consider stating that the war ended at that time and then splitting information about the occupation into another page. The Gentle Sleep (talk) 12:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research doesn't answer this question, the consensus of impartial sources does, and as the dozens of reliable sources, ranging from top American ones like the NYT, to international all near universally say, the war ended a US failure and Taliban victory. That said, if you think your point of view should be featured, you are welcome to establish a preponderance of reliable sources make that claim. Please no dated opeds by the defeated belligerents though, else you would also be forced to edit the Yugoslav wars because Karadžić and friends claim it was a legendary victory. When in doubt, follow the overwhelming consensus of sources.Freepsbane (talk) 19:30, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As a side, the occupation, just like the soviet occupation was a war. Especially since the Taliban were openly trying to drive Nato and clients from the country and before the peace deal had already succeeded in clawing back half the country though war[14]. Their relative success by the deal, and complete success afterwards attests to the military nature of their victory. But as mentioned, the most important thing about what to write is that sources from everywhere, including the US universally refer to the Afghan war as a Taliban victory, we write that down, not rationalize though original research that the climax of the war can't count as the war.Freepsbane (talk) 19:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2021

The war in Afghanistan has ended, I suggested changing the title to "War in Afghanista (2001–2021)", but I can't find any reliable sources that provides information about a supposed Taliban victory, but according to president Joe Biden, U.S reached all its objectives against Al-Qaeda and the perpetrators of 9/11 in the war, so I suggest changing "Taliban victory" to "U.S Coalition victory", as in this article. XMk8000 (talk) 21:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: See above, sources have been provided supporting a "Taliban victory", this should not be changed without clear consensus. About the title, see the requested move above. IronManCap (talk) 21:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, did we already close the debate? I don't think so. I do agree that Taliban victory should be added, but also Al Qaeda defeat as XMk8000 says and another unnamed user commented (idk if it's the same guy, probably not, it was unsigned). Sources claiming that AL Qaeda has been dismantled in Afghanistan are multiple and span all these years. A couple of examples found by just googling (but i'm sure we can find many more): https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/ten-years-later-islamist-terrorism-isnt-the-threat-it-used-to-be/2021/04/29/deb88256-a91c-11eb-bca5-048b2759a489_story.html AND https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/president-obamas-secret-100-al-qaeda-now-afghanistan/story?id=9227861. Also, there's Biden speech in which he admitted failure in counter-insurgency against the Taliban but success in counter-terrorism against Al Qaeda. And that was an objective claim, not a biased one. In any case, the infobox should definetely mention Al Qaeda, it would be absurd otherwise. It was still an important part and reason of the war. Barjimoa (talk) 06:40, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I remember and the main problem with claiming any victory over anything is that you could not provide a single current source to make those claims, let alone objective ones. That said, as others have posted, there is a sea of sources describing this as a Taliban victory and US defeat/failure. It would be bizzare to count an extinguished candle of a couple of puff pieces from ten years ago, while ignoring a roaring bonfire of sources describing it as a Taliban victory and American defeat/failure.Freepsbane (talk) 16:46, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A)The first source is from 2021. Biden's speech and Bojo's speech are from this week. There are many other sources as well claiming that Al Qaeda in Afghanistan lost: camps destroyed, network destroyed, leader killed, their numbers reduced to 100 dispersed members. There are dozens of articles about this.
B)You keep mentioning that I don't want to add that the Taliban won: not true, i obviously agree with that. What i am saying is that this concurs with the fact that Al Qaeda in Afghanistan lost. The two things are not in contrast. It's obvious that there were two objectives in the war: take down Al Qaeda and remove the Taliban from power. All US presidents said this, from Bush to Bide, since the war started. First mission was a success, the second one a failure. This page is about the whole war, not about the Taliban insurgency alone. Barjimoa (talk) 07:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you gave us more talk but no current sources, let alone nonopeds. No it’s more of trying to find face save for the results and so then willing to use any tenuous claim keep that long extinguished candle of victory lit. Like I said, we don’t trust politicians on outcomes otherwise let’s ask Vlad if he thought they beat Afghanistan(and Serbian politicians galore will say they won their war). We do use reliable sources, and no source has as all other editors note claimed victory. You could prove us wrong but given that your pre war loss sources were either an oped by a war architect, or a puff piece from a now defeated belligerent, I doubt you’ll find many. As I said, you want to make extraordinary claims, provide extraordinary evidence, not original research: we aren’t sources.Freepsbane (talk) 15:11, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • As noted by many international editors and some cynical American ones this foot dragging and claiming victory with out a single contemporary source that doesn’t belong to a politician from the vanquished makes it seem like we let nationalism cloud our judgment. That we are so desperate to avoid recording a comprehensive defeat for the motherland that we ignore the sea of sources (many who have been posted here) for 1 or 2 deprecated claims of victory made years ago. That we bend rules and exempt countries we like from the norms of notating history. I recommend as a sign of good faith you extend the same benefits to stranger countries, edit Soviet–Afghan War like you would want the current one edited. If you prove this isn’t just favoritism I and others who are worrying about nationalism interfering will be mollified.Freepsbane (talk) 15:11, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

“ This page is about the whole war, not about the Taliban insurgency alone” indeed, the entire war just ended with the Taliban’s victorious conquest of Kabul. To lop off the climax of the war because you don’t like it is to abandon our fact recording mission for ultra-nationalism.Freepsbane (talk) 15:21, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As an update, it seems that many Russians, including leaders are now declaring their war in Afghanistan a victory.[15] IF politician statements are reliable sources then I recommend you show your motivations are not merely American ultra-nationalism by editing Soviet–Afghan War to Soviet Victory. Surely you can't evade it by claiming they're not credible, when they established a lasting client government and never lost a single major city in their tenure, wheras the leaders of the defeated belligerents in this war were insisting the Taliban could never take Kabul mere weeks before they did. As I said, apply your standards universaly and fairly, it will prove you care about fact recording more than nationalism and favoritism. Freepsbane (talk) 18:11, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Taliban Statement after Victory

Here is the translated statement of the Taliban that they made live on AlJazeera after taking Kabul. An unbiased wiki would have interest to add it. Pick any newspaper you want as your source, i don't care, i am not getting money from a SuperPAC to edit wikipedia like you. Do your job Nciiiiieedd (talk) 21:28, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For the last 40 years, we have struggled to establish peace in Afghanistan. We have defeated the forces of the atheistic Communists and the Zionist west and we have liberated our country.

We invite all Afghans to participate in our Islamic Emirate and we promise we will work for the betterment of our people. Our priorities are to bring peace to all regions of Afghanistan and to ensure the fairness of law. We will punish those who have done evil and we will pardon those who fought against us, but have now submitted themselves. Allah is the most merciful and we can only thank Allah for our victory. Islam will be upheld in Afghanistan.

We have but a few things to say to the world. If you want peace with us, end your hatred for our government of Afghanistan and recognize our rule. We are the rulers of this land graced by Allah, and no matter how hard you have tried, you have never defeated us.

To the people of this world, especially the Palestinians, we hope that our victory over the superpowers of mankind will inspire you, as our faith in Allah has been confirmed for all to see. How can you deny Allah and his will when he has delivered such a great victory to the believers? We dream of a world in which there is peace between all and we ask all world governments to recognize our government. Our message to the American people and people of the western powers who fought us, who we know are hurt by this defeat, is simple: we do not have any hatred for you. Your government, ran by Zionists and atheists, who want to spread their anti-Islamic views here, were our enemies, not you. We will pray for the day when you liberate yourselves from their grip and there can be peace upon this planet. One day, in the future, we hope the whole world will see the truth of Islam. Allah is the most merciful.

Yes this article is now misleading. The war is over and the Taliban won and everyone knows it. Hilarious to see Democratic editors attack this article. Colliric (talk) 01:45, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’m arguing the same as you but I think it best if we not talk about editors politics. And anyways, the Afghan disaster could just as easily be read as the collapse of the neoconservative project of using military force to convert other lands to our image. Fukuyama himself sees it as marking the end the US as the superpower.[16] Many interpretations abound.Freepsbane (talk) 05:07, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 85 (Al Jazeera article) points nowhere, as the article has been removed. Another source needs to be used. Hdwardeson (talk) 22:29, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Title of article should not be platform for pro U.S. propaganda

  • The war ended on 15 August 2021 with DECISIVE Taliban victory. This is accurate statement reflecting unbiased description of what happened, not propaganda. The Afghan army completely and totally collapsed, the President fled the country, his government dissolved on all levels, Taliban controls entire country. This is DECISIVE Taliban victory. Overwhelming media reporting on this event in majority of mainstream media in the world in all languages state that this is a Taliban victory and that the war is over.27.104.210.6 (talk) 06:48, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion regarding the title of the article is ongoing, above. You're welcome to contribute to it. However, please note that we avoid phrases like "decisive" in the infobox. — Czello 07:08, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You can't win a war "decisively". Prinsgezinde (talk) 14:53, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
True, and I don't disagree with you, but a debellatio like what the Afghan republic just suffered, along with the capture of near all northern alliance is as close as you get to a total victory.Freepsbane (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request move 19 August 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Boldly closing this per WP:SNOW. BnC78, it is disruptive to open a concurrent move proposal even before the previous ended. Now that I closed it and moved the page, I can say with certain confidence that your proposal is not going to succeed, and having a doomed proposal tag on probably the most-visited article of this month is disruptive. No such user (talk) 13:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

War in Afghanistan (2001–present) → The U.S. War in Afghanistan (2001–present) - This war started with the United States invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 so it should end with the Withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan (2020–2021). It is part of the War on terror military operation which was launched by the United States government.
I propose this title change so it is more clear what this article is or should be about.

Currently the Panjshir conflict/Panjshir resistance is stated to be part of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present) by most wikipedia articles. But in my opinion it should not be part of the War on terror and therefore it could not be part of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present).
Although there are articles[1][2] which call this war "War in Afghanistan", most of the articles only state that there is a war in Afghanistan but not say it as a name for the war.
Moreover, there are articles[3][4][5] which call it the "U.S. War in Afghanistan" and there are articles that state that this war is a U.S. war in Afghanistan..

Sources

BnC78 (talk) 13:44, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rename to Afghan Civil War (2001-2021)?

Since the war is declared over on both sides, and it meets the qualifications for being called a civil war on almost all fronts. Justrz (talk) 14:48, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly Oppose - **(For Now)**
While I agree things will likely end sooner or later as a loss for NATO. US President said in an address that they will respond with devastating force
if the Taliban attempts to interfere with remaining operations.
And that troops will continue to be added possibly even beyond August/Sept in new news reports
Relevant Sources:
https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1427429837053079553?s=20
https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1428240577473220615?s=20
I feel like this is the same as changing end date to 2021 early because of the Battle of Kabul was also premature when things haven't ended yet and should have a move review due to issues with WP:Original Research WP:Reliable Sources & WP:Snowball Clause
Can't we just wait and see what's relevant after August 31st? People seem to be rushing to mark this phase of current events as closed. Daseiin (talk) 15:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: An additional source from current news reports
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/18/biden-us-troops-afghanistan-31-august-deadline Daseiin (talk) 15:26, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question:
People have had this debate before and the page has had to have dates changed following that, and now for the 15th during a situation that keeps developing
Surely the international recognition of the Government and it's President (Ghani) and his refusal to cede him being President of Afghanistan nor having signed any UN Peace treaty/UN Security Council Decision would be cause to wait until US & NATO have left after August 31st or whenever considering the instability in Kabul still and the airport being under control still? (There has been reports of fighting and shots aswell)
There's also more troops going in now aswell which has caused the August 31st retreat to be in doubt (Bidens own words on video and his Social Media Posts)
I'm not saying this is likely to end in a coalition victory for remaining people who are being joined by more troops with the rebels & rally protesters~ resisting and managing to gain the upper-hand back but I will say it's too early to declare the situation closed until all parties have pulled out which could be soon or could be a while away after 31st
Relevant Sources:
nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/afghan-protests-spread-to-kabul-in-early-challenge-to-taliban (For recognition not being given)
today.ng/news/world/protests-afghan-taliban-spread-early-signs-resistance-384143 (Caretaker President siding with Opposition & Resistance)
msn.com/en-us/news/world/whats-next-for-afghanistan-peace-talks-in-qatar-resistance-in-the-valley/ar-AANsV6l (A coalition of anti-Taliban resistance forces in the last region of Afghanistan not under Taliban control.) Daseiin (talk) 17:18, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree with the proposed rename. We will need a new article, with a new name, describing whatever turns out to be the situation after the dust settles here. But what has been going on from 2001 to 2021 is not accurately described as a civil war; it is accurately described as "war in Afghanistan". It was launched by what amounted to a foreign invasion by the U.S. and allies, and when their presence ends, this conflict ends. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:38, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MelanieN So do you think that anything new that happens in the near future should require the dates and page to be changed after as opposed to another differently tagged page for after the 16th August 2021? Daseiin (talk) 18:42, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Second Resistance

Should Second Resistance be in this article? Or is this part of the wider Afghanistan_conflict_(1978–present)?Manabimasu (talk) 14:51, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It should probably be in an "Aftermath" or "Legacy" section. Intralexical (talk) 16:16, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Panjshir conflict

The 2001-2021 war is over but the long conflict that began in 1978 still goes on. The Panjshir conflict should be counted as part of the Afghanistan conflict (1978–present) and not the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) of which it is the "aftermath". I hate the outcome of the 2001-2021 war but this is what WP:RS states. My best wishes to the Taliban resistance, hope Afgnahistan will be free from the terrorist Talibans again someday and people will find peace and have their rights restored. Dilbaggg (talk) 17:39, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no separate "Panjshir Conflict", it is the same conflict as this article. There are no reliable sources which say it is a separate conflict.XavierGreen (talk) 18:43, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, can't seem to see why it should branch out into more pages.
At the moment still potentially in 2nd or starting a 3rd Phase of already the existing conflict and making more pages with different names could be messy and confusing with non-original and verifiable sources Daseiin (talk) 18:59, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is no WP:RS that claims Panjshir conflict is a continuation of the 2001-2021 war, its like saying the 1996 civil war which never ended before NATO intervention is ongoing, there have been multiple wars since 1978, so Panjshir conflict is a separate "insurgency". After Iraq's defeat in the Iraq War in 2011, there was some insurgency until a new civil war begun in 2013. Either ways consensus agreed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%932021)#Requested_move_15_August_2021 its over, [{WP:RS]] agrees its over. Do i like the outcome/ Never, its disgusting that terrorist Talibans took over and are now torturing the people and there is bound to be protest agaisnt their brutal regime. But this particular war, until WP:RS states its not over, multiple sources, it is over, and all I am doing is complying with Wikipedia policy just one out of 1000s already: [17] says its over. Hopefully in the future the Taliban's evil regime will fall, but taht will be a different war, this one has ended.Dilbaggg (talk) 21:11, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are plenty of sources that say the war is ongoing, try for instance the LongWarJournal.XavierGreen (talk) 02:13, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thats not even a reliable source, like say New York Times that agrees the war ended: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/15/world/asia/afghanistan-taliban-kabul-surrender.html , either ways I hate the outcome and I hope that the Afghan people would be free from the terrorist Talibans, there will be new revolts, but this phase is over. The 1978 conflict is ongoing, the 2001-2021 period was a phase of it, NATO involvement is over for now and solidiers are just there to evacuate people. But soon a new rebillion will gain momentum and I hope they succeed in defeating the Taliban terrorists. But that will be a new part of the 1978 conflict, this part 2001-2021 is over per most major widely accepted WP:RS. I read a young footballer died trying to escape the Taliban's reign of terror, it broke my heart, hope these radical terrorist Talibans are ousted from power.Dilbaggg (talk) 03:19, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) was a phase of the long-running Afghanistan conflict (1978–present). That phase is over now and a new phase of the conflict that started in 1978 has now started, the Panjshir conflict. EkoGraf (talk) 14:23, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That and I would like to add the Afghan Civil War (1996–2001) never officially ended, before its end the NATO led 2001-2021 war begun, now all major WP:RS, the Talibans, the US Government everyone agrees its over, the Panjshir conflict is a new and seperate conflict, saying its part of the 2001-2021 war is like saying the 2001 to 2021 war is part of the 1996 war which was never officially over, 2001-2021 was about NATO led intervention which is over, and they are now only helping people evacuate. Only thosse who know nothing about history claim these are the same war. The Afghan Civil War (1996–2001), War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) and the new Panjshir conflict are all distinct phases of the ever lasting Afghanistan conflict (1978–present), so learn histroy please.

Dilbaggg (talk) 03:08, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

End of War date

Are there WP:RS that state that August 15, 2021 is the end? This source has August 16th as a date. The move didn’t have a consensus on the specific date in 2021 for the end of the war.Manabimasu (talk) 19:13, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It would make sense that 16th would be end of Battle of Kabul since that's when it was declared even if I do think we should wait to see what comes out to avoid unnecessary creation of a split for current phases and pages after the fact.
Also s agree on not seeing a consensus either, could someone perhaps clarify the edit reasoning? Although this point has already been made in the past Daseiin (talk) 19:32, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the RFQ above, the admin closing the conversation said that consensus was the war was still ongoing "but would end before the end of the year". Irrespective of that, sources clearly state that the conflict is still ongoing as anti-Taliban forces are still operating in Panjshir. Those forces have been fighting the taliban there continously for the past several years, its the same conflict that has never ended. See for example here [[18]]XavierGreen (talk) 20:54, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
16 August was an informal claim, they never said the war ended that date and the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has been declared officially on August 19, most major WP:RS cites August 15 as the end date, so we go along with it. Dilbaggg (talk) 21:10, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The RFC closing admin stated consensus is exactly as follows: "There is overwhelming consensus that the war is (practically) over, and even if it is technically not, it will almost certainly be by the end of the year." The Admin clearly thus stated that the war is in fact actually still going on.XavierGreen (talk) 21:23, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Could always just put August 31st 2021 and then review if Biden stays longer as he said he would to be consistent with the other linked articles on here that say Phase 2 is still ongoing, I'm confused myself at this point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Freedom%27s_Sentinel Daseiin (talk) 23:19, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawal of remaining troops is not part of the conflict itself in a true sense, but an outside issue (for example, the withdrawal of troops in WWII is not taken into account for end dates). Unless the fighting starts again the only things we can go on are whether there is armed conflict ongoing involving Islamic Republic or US/NATO forces and the answer is no. The Pentagon themselves confirmed that airstrikes had stopped on the 15th[1] and unless I've missed something they've not started up again. Apache287 (talk) 00:37, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Proposal: Temporary "August 2021"

Perhaps it would be optimal to compromise by replacing the "present" with "August 2021" (without a day in month). Since it is (mostly) agreed upon that the war is over, "present" should be replaced. The day in the month could be added later when it gets clearly officially agreed upon and "August 2021" covers all potential exact dates (15, 16, 19 and even 31 if the official end of the withdrawal becomes the official end of war date). 193.198.162.14 (talk) 08:30, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Naw there is no reason why it shouldn't be August 15, 2021.--Fruitloop11 (talk) 13:14, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. The war ended 15 August for all intents and purposes. The Taliban had defeated the IRA and the US confirmed it had ended all military operations. Just like Vietnam the Fall of Kabul is the final event of this conflict and the potentially emerging I think Third Afghan Civil War will be a new conflict marked by a return to it being a purely Afghan affair (outside clandestine support I'd imagine) and not a war led by foreign intervention to support a foreign-backed government. Apache287 (talk) 13:49, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Vietnam War ended on 30 April 1975 with the Fall of Saigon. The American Civil War ended on May 9, 1865 with President Johnson's declaration, although the last confederate forces did not surrender till November 6 1865. The Fall of Kabul on 15 August 2021 is officially recognized as the end of the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) by all major Wp:RS and should be as such. Dilbaggg (talk) 03:34, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Any End of War date is incorrect, as the war has not ended

The war is not over at all, given that the Panjshir resistance yesterday drove the Taliban out of three districts.[2] The article is incorrect in stating an end date to the war. 174.63.102.231 (talk) 19:45, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

War is still ongoing, parts of Baghlan province have been retaken from the taliban

Parts of Baghlan province were retaken from the Taliban today. See here [[19]]. There is also a force of 600 Afghan Army soldiers deployed at the airport assisting in holding it against the Taliban. See here [[20]].XavierGreen (talk) 16:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about US involvement in the Afghanistan war, as far as I know, and this part has been declared as over by numerous reliable sources, including the Taliban and the US government themselves. Aasim (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Awesome Aasim. As I stated above, this article (War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)) covers one phase of the long-running Afghanistan conflict (1978–present). That phase is over now and a new phase of the conflict that started in 1978 has now started, for which we have a separate article already. EkoGraf (talk) 18:16, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unsure, Setting aside whether or not everything in this event is closed or if there is no new battle/relevant information that could possibly come up during the current operations since the debate on whether to call the war over & pick an end date has now been considered multiple times.
No matter where we stand on it, that debate is over and even has a move review considered. I disagree with the interpretation of the consensus but i'm leaving it aside with the trust that it would be retroactively amended later should the available info & views change as needed.

...With that being said I would like to raise the possibility that this should be put in an "Aftermath" section here instead if the sources check out.
My reasoning being that while a lot of this particular conflict may be considered "practically" over to editors rn, adding this as Aftermath to "War In Afghanistan (2001)" anyway could still be a better fit than the 'Afghanistan Conflicts (1978-Current)' page which seems to be more a compilation of different conflicts overtime as opposed to being one wider one that would have everything in.
But if it gets big enough then this proposed part of the aftermath should have its own page with a new name and links to it from here & in the sections of the "1978-Current" compilation.
As things presently stand we don't have consensus on if these smaller scale clashes are protests declaring themselves to be against the current offensive who would be quelled as the dust is still settling or start of another war that has an Anti-Emirate Coalition fighting against the forces initiating the current offensive. Both noteworthy of course but should be dealt with differently depending on what they are counted as.
I want to boldly put out another way of keeping things up to date but still being acceptable to everyone in good faith without causing more disagreement with seemingly warring-type behavior beyond just the standard edits or reverts and beating a dead horse. It might be better to have this stuff in an aftermath section first because we don't have a crystal ball to see which of those two statements fit the events more accurately.
---
A Compromise:
I suggest this situation being placed into this article first in the manner stated above
And/Or
Any proposed pages to be merged into it until we know enough more to say otherwise or that the section becomes too big and complex to avoid having too many unnecessary splits/requests that don't fit well together in the wider topic which I have already seen before.
---

That's just what I think and would love to hear any thoughts or feedback on the idea :) Daseiin (talk) 02:25, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Or an "Aftermath & Legacy" section (Provided this proposal wouldn't conflict with WP Policy) as mentioned before in this talk page Daseiin (talk) 02:34, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/2733523/pentagon-press-secretary-john-f-kirby-holds-a-press-briefing/
  2. ^ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/21/world/asia/resistance-fighters-taliban-afghanistan.html. {{cite news}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
The Afghan Civil War (1996–2001) never officially ended, before its end the NATO led 2001-2021 war begun, now all major WP:RS, the Talibans, the US Government everyone agrees its over, the Panjshir conflict is a new and seperate conflict, saying its part of the 2001-2021 war is like saying the 2001 to 2021 war is part of the 1996 war which was never officially over, 2001-2021 was about NATO led intervention which is over, and they are now only helping people evacuate. Only thosse who know nothing about history claim these are the same war. The Afghan Civil War (1996–2001), War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) and the new Panjshir conflict are all distinct phases of the ever lasting Afghanistan conflict (1978–present), so learn histroy please. Dilbaggg (talk) 03:08, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I support @Daseiin:'s proposed compromise. Most articles about wars have an aftermath section, and I'm sure the "War in Afghanistan (2001-2021)" will get one sooner or later. For now, I hope that adding one now could be a stopgap against some of the unconstructive behavior surrounding this article. (I would title it "Aftermath" rather than "Aftermath & Legacy," however, because the war's legacy has yet to be interpreted and debated by historians. While there's a lot speculation in the media about what the war's end will mean for U.S. power and what other countries will try to step into the power vacuum, for our purposes those opinion pieces get into Crystal Ball territory, and we should leave off on talking about the legacy until history books and articles start to be published on the subject.) CoatGuy (talk) 13:08, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2021

Change “Taliban victory” to “Afghan Government defeated by Taliban. ISIS defeated by Taliban and NATO/Afghan Government. Al Qaeda weakened by NATO intervention”

The war is too complicated to simply label it a Taliban victory. Yes the Taliban defeated the Afghan government but NATO was not defeated. NATO just simply decided to leave and the Afghan government lost their own civil War. Also, both NATO and the Taliban fought ISIS and ISIS was defeated. Additionally, Al-Qaeda was weakened in the region and no longer has major bases in Afghanistan Jab1998 (talk) 18:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please add in this edit Jab1998 (talk) 18:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. This will be a contentious change, please establish consensus. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:29, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should the war be divided into three phases?

I think it might be worthwhile to say the first phase ended on 22 December 2001 with the formation of the Afghan Interim Administration, the second phase ended on 28 December 2014 as the article currently states the first phase ended on, and the third phase ended on 15 August 2021. Alternatively, the first phase could end on 17 December 2001, which is when Wikipedia says the "United States invasion of Afghanistan" ended. New Wiki User 2021 (talk) 18:30, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are two official phases, and we must not divide it to three phases based on WP:OR. Either ways this war was a part of the long lasting Afghanistan conflict (1978–present). I hate the outcome, I that terrorists like Tlibans are now torturing the poor civilians there, hopefully, they will be overthrown and peace will be restored in Afghanistan. But that would be a different phase, which is not part of this, which according to WP:RS is definitely over. I am just following Wikipedia guidelines, thats all. Dilbaggg (talk) 03:13, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what either of you mean by "phases". User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 06:03, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The second phase has not finished yet. Sgnpkd (talk) 20:18, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

pictures

why the main picture depicts only one side? Why are Taliban fighters not displayed? All pictures here only show western forces... --OspreyPL 12:27, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

That's probably due to the fact the Taliban don't operate a copyright-free service providing images of their forces for Western media to use Apache287 (talk) 15:35, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan as belligerent

There are many sources that state Pakistan support the Taliban militarily with arms, training etc. Eg.: https://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/afghan2/Afghan0701-02.htm

Should they be mentioned in the InfoBox?

82.24.178.172 (talk) 18:39, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan is already in the infobox.Manabimasu (talk) 20:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:War_in_Afghanistan_(2001–2021)&oldid=1040248196"