Talk:War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)/Archive 16

Updated collage lede image
I'm working on putting together an updated collage to put in the lede. Is this better than what we've currently got?

I would've liked to include a photo from the Taliban's POV (perhaps with the Taliban standing triumphant in front of captured AAF aircraft), but unfortunately I'm not sure I can find an appropriately licensed image and I was running out of room. Any ideas? Schierbecker (talk) 08:37, 12 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Schierbecker Appreciate the effort. A few comments:
 * Like the addition of the plane full of people
 * I think the current snow image should be kept. The common view of Afghanistan is that its this big dry desert. But its really quite a snowy place, and the seasons had a very important impact on the war. It could be cropped down however to tighten in on the main column of walking dudes and remove the rightmost one.
 * The current collage also has a Taliban picture already: the soldiers atop the humvee in Kabul, which should also be kept.
 * CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:23, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I think I can 86 the Marine photo and put the Taliban Humvee back in. It's hard to tell they are Taliban, so I'm still hoping to come across a better photo. The snow patrol photo is badly front focused. There are snow-capped peaks in the F-15E photo; is that enough? Hoping to keep to no more than eight photos. I think I could swap the Afghan Air Force photo with this one? Schierbecker (talk) 01:57, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Ooh I like that image a lot, a much better photo of some Afghan soldiers. I would be content with having the snowcapped peak image and no snow soldiers. CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:08, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

War is not over
The National Resistance Front of Afghanistan under Ahmad Massoud and President Amrullah Saleh continue the mujahideen resistance to the Taliban terrorists. Thomas

edit by me: the war was over 20 years ago. WTF is up with this totally bizarre interpretation of Iraq and Afghanistan to be wars that never end? It's crazy and unprecedented in history. Should we say that the 1st Crusade ended in defeat because 100 years later, some other Muslim armies destroyed the Crusder kingdoms that were set up there after the Christian victories? If, in 2100, Neo-Nazis take over Germany are we going to have to update the history books to state that World War 2 ended in a defeat for the Allies after a 150-year long war? This is so, so, so weird. The War in Afghanistan ended in victory for the US-led coalition in 2001 or 2002 when the Taleban was pushed out of its last stronghold in Afghanistan. Kabul was secure. The old government was destroyed. In Iraq the army was disbanded. Then the occupation of the country began. An ongoing occupation is not the same thing as a war. After WW2 the US occupied Japan... but I guarantee that if an American GI got killed in Tokyo in 1948, he would not be listed among the casualties of WW2. Nobody can explain this in any sensible way it's impossible. I know that it's the common narrative that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan went on basically forever until the last foreign soldier finally left but this makes NO sense. That's never been how we thought of or defined ANY previous war. Wikipedia should take the lead in correcting this baffling misconception, define the WAR in Afghanistan as taking place in 2001, and the Occupation of Afghanistan, as completely distinct and separate, as lasting from 2001-2021. And then... if there is any other skirmishing going on between Afghan or other forces in 2022.. that's something else entirely. 96.231.200.32 (talk) 08:03, 23 January 2022 (UTC)Me

American victory, not Taliban victory
To say that American lost is false, America accomplished their main objective, that is, kill Osama Bin Laden, not nation building. The war in Afghanistan was never about nation building. To say America lost the war in Afghanistan is a huge lie because America never really tried fighting seriously after accomplishing its objective. Its correct to say the war was an American victory since we killed Osama Bin Laden 107.77.203.124 (talk) 15:46, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The aim was to defeat the Taliban, which wasn't achieved. Had the goal been merely to kill bin Laden, the coalition would have left Afghanistan in 2011. Jim Michael (talk) 23:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * We did lose. Osama Bin Laden wasnt the reason otherwise we would have left in 2011.--2601:3C5:8200:97E0:8106:4FC3:34A2:C8D7 (talk) 14:46, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It wasn't the only reason. It was to defeat of the rest of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban too. We lost because Donald Trump and Joe Biden lost sight of this. -User:DanTD (talk) 15:47, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

The Taliban was roundly defeated, pushed out of Kabul, pushed out of most of Afghanistan, killed, detained, or dispersed. They were absolutely defeated. Then AFTER the war concluded, and the occupation began, an insurgency began, with other people taking up the Taliban banner. But this wasn't the same Taliban. Saying that this means the US didn't defeat the Taliban is like saying that the Union lost the American Civil War because there are still people in Alabama who fly General Lee's battle flag... people can go on adopting the name and banner of a defeated government forever, that doesn't make the defeated government not defeated.96.231.200.32 (talk) 08:06, 23 January 2022 (UTC)Ryan


 * Do you have a reliable source that backs up this claim? The book I'm using, and media sources at large, seem to believe that it was the one and same Taliban. In effect, even if the US won the battle to oust the Taliban in the early 2000's, ultimately they lost the war. CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 08:27, 23 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The problem here is probably the history books for the end of the war are not yet written (but are already in the making) but my guess is that they will basically say the same for the outcome as for the Soviet-Afghan War. When the insurgent side manages to not losing the war on the battlefield and keep a draw, this turns into a political defeat for the opposing state (or state coalition). The US did not lose any battle and thus did not lose the war in a military sense (as the Soviets did), but of course, the US (and the coalition) suffered a crashing political defeat (as the Soviets did). --Jo1971 (talk) 08:47, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2022
The lines in question is in section 10.4, specifically the very last two sentences of the "Aftermath" section. It reads as follows: "Afghanistan, ever since the Taliban seized control of the country, is collapsing into hunger, widespread unemployment, a complete fallout of the judicial system, an exodus of all qualified and educated people and total administrative chaos and all this is to be blamed on Pakistan. The Pakistanis since around 2004 were actively involved in fuelling the Islamist insurgency in Afghanistan especially with the help of the internationally forbidden Haqqani Network, according to Fabien Baussart, President of Center of Political and Foreign Affairs (CPFA).[636]"

This statement cites an unreliable source, and makes the extreme claim that the dire economic situation in Afghanistan can be wholly attributed to Pakistan. This is intuitively incorrect, since there are actually multiple factors contributing to the economic crisis. Duffsaid (talk) 23:30, 25 January 2022 (UTC)


 * ✔️ I undid that change because it was a copyright violation, & will warn the IP editor. Peaceray (talk) 00:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2022
just removed this, "Afghanistan, ever since the Taliban seized control of the country, is collapsing into hunger, widespread unemployment, a complete fallout of the judicial system, an exodus of all qualified and educated people and total administrative chaos and all this is to be blamed on Pakistan. The Pakistanis since around 2004 were actively involved in fuelling the Islamist insurgency in Afghanistan especially with the help of the internationally forbidden Haqqani Network, according to Fabien Baussart, President of Center of Political and Foreign Affairs (CPFA). " because it is a copyvio. I however believe it can be re-inserted if it is paraphrased, so please add this, "Afghanistan, ever since the Taliban seized control of the country, has collapsed into widespread unemployment, hunger, a failure of the judicial system, an exodus of all qualified and educated people and total administrative chaos and all this is to be blamed on Pakistan which was involved in fuelling the Islamist insurgency in Afghanistan especially with the help of the internationally forbidden Haqqani Network, since around 2004, according to Fabien Baussart, President of Center of Political and Foreign Affairs (CPFA)". 2405:204:53AA:5467:E9D6:110A:3DBA:ABE (talk) 08:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The, "according to Fabien Baussart, President of Center of Political and Foreign Affairs (CPFA)" can be skipped if you want to paraphrase it more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:53AA:5467:E9D6:110A:3DBA:ABE (talk) 08:35, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. This is still a copyvio, as you just reordered some of the phrases. "Internationally forbidden" doesn't really make sense, and those are strong allegations to make citing a single source with no byline. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , please add this then, "Afghanistan, ever since the Taliban seized control of the country, has collapsed into widespread unemployment, hunger, a failure of the judicial system, an exodus of all qualified and educated people and total administrative chaos, all of which can be blamed on Pakistan which was involved in fuelling the Islamist insurgency in Afghanistan, especially with the help of the terrorist Haqqani Network, since around 2004.-2409:4071:D08:3E23:1F1C:724B:89BE:62BD (talk) 15:14, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * If you still feel it is a copyvio, please paraphrase it in a way that it will be acceptable and add it yourself - you can probably do it much better than me!-2409:4071:D08:3E23:1F1C:724B:89BE:62BD (talk) 15:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Regardless of the COPYVIO issues, this is redundant content with an absurd POV slant being edit warred over by a single-purpose IP and should not be restored.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 15:25, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This is still far too much to be basing on a single article without a byline from a site that says ANI does not represent or warrant that the Site will be error-free, free of viruses or other harmful components, or that defects will be corrected. ANI does not represent or warrant that the information available on or through the website will be correct, accurate, timely or otherwise reliable and has no published editorial policy. ...all of which can be blamed on Pakistan is an enormous statement to be making in wikivoice based on a weak source. I suggest you provide more sources, and better sources, if you'd like to include something along these lines. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , This, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this and many more sources say that Pakistan supported the Taliban. Now please add a sentence saying that using as many sources as possible. Thanks!-2409:4071:E8F:841E:C2DD:5127:D753:3B5E (talk) 16:11, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It's already covered in detail in the article. Please stop re-opening the edit request, it is disruptive. You can reply to talk page comments without opening an edit request. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:27, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , it has not been covered in the article (the support Pakistan provided to the Taliban for seizing control of Afghanistan in 2021). None of the sources I have mentioned above have been used till now, so please use those sources and add that Pakistan helped the Taliban to seize control of Afghanistan in 2021.-2409:4071:2107:AB04:866B:C13E:CBDE:78B8 (talk) 16:48, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * If you are unable or unwilling to add the same, please at least change the, "edit semi-protected|War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)|answered tag to, "no"-116.75.91.24 (talk) 17:06, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Again, stop reopening the request. You've been informed that you need to establish consensus for this inclusion. Myself and another editor are currently against inclusion, so there is no consensus for inclusion at this time. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , Can you use the sources I have mentioned here (at the beginning of the request) to show that Pakistan helped the Taliban seize control of Afghanistan or at least copy some matter from the Pakistani involvement section of the 2021 Taliban offensive article into this article?-2409:4071:D84:27CD:D8BD:70C4:20D2:1522 (talk) 19:40, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , A tool to make Wikipedia create a citation is available here or more accurately, here (if you didn't know already)-2409:4071:D84:27CD:D8BD:70C4:20D2:1522 (talk) 20:08, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

"Afghan War (2001–current)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Afghan War (2001–current) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 25 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Anarchyte ( talk ) 13:14, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Help
In the infobox of the article, in the, "Territorial changes" section, it reads,, please change it to, -Y2edit? (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2022 (UTC) Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — &#123;{u&#124; Bsoyka }&#125;  talk 17:55, 12 March 2022 (UTC) I am

George HW Bush needs to be changed to George W Bush. W Bush was president in 2001. SkolNinja19 (talk) 02:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 03:14, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Why is it called "War in Afghanistan"?
Why is it called "War in Afghanistan" instead of "US-Afghan War", like others such as "Anglo-Afghan War" or "Soviet-Afghan War"? 27.147.226.208 (talk) 22:14, 10 October 2022 (UTC)


 * WP:COMMONNAME dictates that we generally name things how they are named in reliable sources. For some conflicts, they have no common name, so we simply give them a descriptive name. But the "War in Afghanistan" is the common name in sources, though we have of course appended our own descriptive (2001-2021). CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:44, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, can people also bear in mind please that the 2001 operations were an international venture, as were ongoiung security operations after the initial defeat of the Taliban. In short, it was not exclusively a US war, but a UN one. For example, in the UK we did not call it "the US-Afghan War" because it was a war in which our troops were heavily committed. Other nations also contributed. 2A00:23C7:3119:AD01:10CF:2BBE:CB90:C65D (talk) 21:22, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Splitting up the article
To get the ball rolling on the process, I boldly split off content regarding reactions and aftermath to Reactions and aftermath to the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021). This article needs to be split apart into summaries rather than bulk information that can be linked to other places. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:51, 10 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Agree. Wars are often long, and when very important, there is a lot of information available about it. People are discussing about splitting up an article for the Timeline of Russian Invasion of Ukraine, which has only been for the past 4 months, but splitting up a 10 year war is definitely necessary. Regards, Narutmaru . To contact me, visit my  Talk Page. 13:13, 18 April 2022 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Narutmaru (talk • contribs)
 * I agree. I think an article named Impact of the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) should be created. Move the contents in [[War_in_Afghanistan_(2001–2021)#Impact ]] to the new article. There is an article named Reactions and aftermath to the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021). Maybe merge the contents in that article to the new article. Cwater1 (talk) 00:49, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * good news, I created the Impact of the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) article and moved most of the contents there. XTheBedrockX (talk) 20:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Article too long to read/navigate
Re this note I suggest copy editing for brevity by conforming to Wikipedia standards by eg having just 3 paragraphs in the intro for example and not repeating information from elsewhere in the article or from linked articles where information from this article has already been moved to. Dakinijones (talk) 20:43, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 02 April 2022
America didnt lose the war in Afghanistan. America won the war with a high kill count and then they left. That’s not a defeat.2601:40:5:F2B:C126:59B1:A573:41F9 (talk) 23:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * replied thus above to this same question and so I quote him, -Y2edit? (talk) 23:14, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Please read this-Y2edit? (talk) 23:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Kill counts mean nothing in a war. The US lost the Vietnam War after causing many more losses than they sustained. Who wins a war is shown by who controls the territory fought over - in the case of both Vietnam and Afghanistan, that was not the USA.Ianbrettcooper (talk) 20:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Updating list of Comanders
Ayman Al Zawahiri, a commander on Afghanistan side in now deceased, so a death marker should be added next to his name as the others who are deceased as of July 31, 2022 Link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayman_al-Zawahiri 184.155.166.47 (talk) 22:45, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

The amount of Taliban killed
My suggestion is a relatively small change but one that I feel like its an important one. We don't really know the true amount of Taliban killed and the number stated killed in the summary makes it look like it is an exact figure when when it is just an estimation. In "Taliban insurgency", which uses the same number, it states with brackets that the number of insurgents killed is just an estimation and I feel like it is important that it is included here as well considering wikipedia is the page most regular people will access first when wanting to learn about the casualties of the war. Aleksandras Salenga (talk) 19:54, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Help!
Hi, sorry I accidentally deleted the infobox military conflict, please put it back. Parham wiki (talk) 15:33, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Edit request
I would suggest adding that Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan in the lede as it could be implied that he was killed in Afghanistan given the title of the article. This could be added just before or after "in May 2011". Willbb234 23:07, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:21, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 1 April 2023

 * 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. SNOW close. Proposed new name is unanimously opposed and problematic for a number of reasons. 25stargeneral (talk) 00:01, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) → NATO-Afghan war – I believe it should be renamed as such to be on par with it’s Soviet-Afghan war historical Twin, i see no reason to omit “NATO” from the title of this article while showing “Soviet” in the title of the other article or making any distinction between both. Stephan rostie (talk) 17:50, 1 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Strong oppose and WP:SNOWCLOSE per WP:COMMONNAME (as it's most widely known as War in Afghanistan), and WP:PRECISION (as many, many countries outside of NATO participated in the conflict). Also, the war wasn't against Afghanistan per se, instead it was against the Taliban. –  City Urbanism   🗩   🖉  18:17, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Looks likely to me that this will be a SNOW close. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 21:20, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose we don't title articles with names invented because of historical parallels. Walt Yoder (talk) 23:39, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose and speedy WP:SNOWCLOSE per WP:COMMONNAME etc. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Photos not representative of conflict
In the interest of removing bias, would it not be prudent to use photos of non-western forces in the opening description.

The way it’s portrayed as it stands, it presents the conflict as if catering to a western audience rather than an objective, facts based view of the conflict.

Surely a photo portraying the Taliban, one side of the war, wouldn’t be out of place when trying to represent a snap shot of the conflict? 81.145.194.74 (talk) 17:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)


 * There are several photos of Afghan troops, and one photo of the Taliban there already? I looked for more photos of the Taliban on commons, but unfortunately the Taliban are not very keen photographers, and their work is not in the public domain like the works of the United States government (and thus its military). But if anyone sees a good free image of some Taliban, that'd be a good addition. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 18:19, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The Afghan troops are again, on the US side of the conflict, so this impresses upon readers to frame everything from a western hegemonic perspective.
 * There are countless copyright free pictures of the Taliban. It just seems weird that the initial snapshot “reel” doesn’t present the conflict as objectively as it should.
 * Wikipedia shouldn’t be an extension of US (and it’s junior partners) soft power. 2.30.140.176 (talk) 16:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, if there are copyright free images of the Taliban, could you please link some that you think would be suitable? Because I looked on Commons for a while and didn't find much. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!</i>⚓ 17:44, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2023
Add the Danish to the Invaders section of Afghanistan Vinmendoza (talk) 08:56, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. AnnaMankad (talk) 09:06, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Acknowledging US defeat in Afghanistan
The US venture in Afghanistan and subsequent withdrawal should be recognised as a military defeat rather than a 'withdrawal'. The US entered Afghanistan with the goal of removing the Taliban from power and installing a government aligned to Western values. They subsequently fought the Taliban in a war of attrition for 20 years before leaving the country. They could not achieve that objective and subsequently were forced to negotiate a withdrawl as continued presence in Afghanistan was no longer practical after 20 years, thousands of lives and trillions of dollars.

It's important to note that wars have been one in different ways and simply because the Taliban defeated the US by draining their resources and will to fight over many years does not make any less of a victory for them. Nor does the presence of an agreement negate that as this would then negate virtually every other victory in modern history, including the Armenian capitulation in Nagorno Karabakh and the German one in the Treatey of Versailles.

Based on this, I think that the current framing of the American defeat as an optional withdrawal is a misinterpretation of the actual result of the war in which the US failed to achieve it's objectives and was defeated by the persistent guerilla assaults of the Taliban in a war of attrition. Subsequently, we should replace or coincide the term 'withdrawal' with the term 'defeat' in order to accurately represent the outcome of the war in favour of the Taliban and against the US and Coalition forces.

See below for reference:

'Defeat is a mission task requiring the friendly force commander to deprive the enemy force and its commander of the means and will to interfere to a significant degree with the actions of the friendly forces and attaining friendly force objectives'https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2020/04/13/defining_defeat_115200.html#:~:text=Defeat%20is%20a%20mission%20task,and%20attaining%20friendly%20force%20objectives. 2A02:6B6B:384C:0:28AF:C6EF:A7AA:6FEA (talk) 18:06, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Your source doesn't mention Afghanistan, and as applying your interpretation to the article would be a violation of WP:OR, specifically WP:SYNTH. OhNo itsJamie Talk 18:26, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Belligerents Aren't Obvious
Major Coalition participants should not be hidden under an "ISAF" toggle. Counties that made significant contributions like France should be visible at first glance. 118.208.236.209 (talk) 12:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) infobox gives wrong information.
1- The war continued until August 30 (as written below), it is better to add the third (last) stage, the 2021 air flight of Kabul. 2- Why is the second phase directed to Freedom Guard operation instead of the decisive support mission, while the Freedom Guard operation is written as part of the decisive support mission? So what about the rest of the involved countries that participated in the decisive support mission? 3- How does the Northern Alliance lead the invasion? Invasion led by United States! 4- Iran participated in the invasion (2001 uprising in Herat), not that it supported the invasion. 5- Afghan leaders did not manage the war, but US leaders did and should be in charge. 6- In Participants in Operation Enduring Freedom, there were countries that were not on the list, or Bahrain, which did not participate in Operation Enduring Freedom, but is on the list. Parham wiki (talk) 16:20, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The war ended on the 15th, when Ghani fled and the Taliban took full control of Kabul. While the US military presence at the airport continued until the 30th in order to complete the evacuation, the Taliban and the United States were actively cooperating in the evacuation from the 15th to the 30th, and there was no more fighting in that period. The US had permission from the Taliban to remain until the 31st to complete the evacuation. 25stargeneral (talk) 16:45, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I think User:Parham wiki raised a good point about the end date, and quite a few sources seem to put the end of the war at 30 August 2021. Could you provide some sources to back up your interpretation? I'm having trouble finding RS's that corroborate your interpretation, but here are a few that support 30 August 2021:
 * The U.S. Department of Defense considers service dates for the Afghanistan Campaign Medal up to Aug. 31, 2021. U.S. troops who participated in the evacuation in late August are considered to have participated in the Transition II phase of the conflict, and the military makes no distinction between pre-15 August and post-15 August service 1.
 * A 30 August 2022 statement from the DoD read: "Today, we mark one year since the end of the U.S. war in Afghanistan..." 2.
 * A 31 August 2022 statement from Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin read: 'This week, we recognize the end of our military mission in Afghanistan' 3.
 * This PBS Historical Timeline of Afghanistan reads 'August 30, 2021: The U.S. transports a final contingent of troops from Kabul Airport, officially ending America’s longest war.'
 * At the time of withdrawal, this AP article reported: 'The United States completed its withdrawal from Afghanistan late Monday, ending America’s longest war...'.
 * While this 7 October 2021 New York Times article says 'A ferocious summertime offensive had delivered victory to the Taliban on Aug. 15...' the article goes on to describe the 26 August 2021 Kabul airport attack as 'one of the deadliest attacks of the war'. (While this article doesn't explicitly say the war ended on 30 August 2021, the wording places the 26 August attack within the bounds of the war).
 * I have found several sources similar to the NYT article, claiming that the Taliban took over or achieved victory on 15 August 2021, but government and media sources in the United States seem to place the conflict's end at the end of the withdrawal. CoatGuy2 (talk) 00:21, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply, Also the Islamic State (one of the war fighters) launched a rocket attacks on Hamid Karzai International Airport in 30 August 2021 and was intercepted by the US defense.
 * https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/30/rockets-target-us-troops-as-afghanistan-withdrawal-in-final-stage.html
 * U.S. anti-missile defenses intercepted as many as five rockets fired at Kabul's airport early on Monday, a U.S. official said, as the United States rushed to complete its withdrawal from Afghanistan to end its longest war.'
 * https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/islamic-state-claims-responsibility-rocket-attack-kabul-airport-2021-08-30/ Parham wiki (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I also noticed this diff for the sources you added into the infobox in February. The sources you added are exclusively from before 30 August 2021. I am going to revert your edits to the template for now, because this is a case of WP:PRIMARYNEWS, because they were reporting on a breaking news situation and do not possess hindsight or all of the facts of how the conflict would end. CoatGuy2 (talk) 01:05, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2023
The Taliban total strength is either wrong or the casualty list is. There is simply no way that they retokk Afghanistan with 8000 soldiers by the figures you posted. Please double check sources. 174.250.209.138 (talk) 18:07, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:EDITREQUEST. You'll need something more specific than "I don't believe your sources." OhNo itsJamie  Talk 18:13, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

"911 War" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=911_War&redirect=no 911 War] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 19:34, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Merger while being too long already?
Why the aftermath article needs to be merged into this one while this one is considered too long as is? Seaparrot876 (talk) 16:05, 9 August 2023 (UTC)


 * the results are brief enough, there doesnt need to be a see aftermath section Ali36800p (talk) 16:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose merging Aftermath of the Afghanistan War (2001–2021) into War in Afghanistan (2001–2021). Firstly the content of the article is lacking, secondly Collapse of Afghan Army is irrelevant because the Afghan army collapsed in the war and not afterwards. Parham wiki (talk) 20:09, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Opppose - it is a well-sourced article and is part of our series (Category:Aftermath of wars) that covers so-called afermath of a major war. It is also a legit article per WP:SPINOUT as the main article is already of large size and there is no reason to merge it. We shouldn't be biased here. 45.44.62.232 (talk) 08:02, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Do What You gotta do !! I would Name it "The Twenty Year for Nothing"!!!! 50.206.203.163 (talk) 19:56, 9 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Adding too much to an article that already has the Very long template on it. Chicken4War (talk) 18:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. It's worth noting that editors have been trimming this article for years now. --Wow (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose, also per above. We really don't need a massive article, we have enough problems on our hands. <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype', 'Book Antiqua', Palatino, serif; color: #a9a9a9; text-shadow: black 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em;">𝙰𝙶𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚝𝚄𝚜𝚎𝚛𝚗𝚊𝚖𝚎𝙲𝚑𝚘𝚒𝚌𝚎  (ramble) 18:36, 3 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose, the afghanistan war article is way too large. I do agree that this article needs a little bit of work done on it 78.172.4.50 (talk) 07:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose, per above. The afghan war article is already 278k kilobytes, editors have been trying to shorten this and now you want to merge 21k more kilobytes to this? I say oppose. Overthrow-dictator (talk) 17:19, 12 October 2023 (UTC)