• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

The Taliban demands 5pm cell phone curfew for Afghans

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Taliban threat hits Afghan phones

OK, I posted this in an effort to raise awareness and for a little bit of comic relief.

1) The Army and NATO forces do not often use local cell phones for communication.. I guess the Taliban didn't get that memo.

2) This effectively hinders the Taliban's own IED efforts by preventing cell phones from being capable of remote detonation.

3) The idiots were apparently defeated in their attacks against four undefended cell towers..!? LAWL!

4) what the hell will a cell phone curfew do to hinder anyone besides the Afghan civilians themselves?!

Ridiculous...

 

Train

Lifer
Jun 22, 2000
13,784
43
91
www.bing.com
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Taliban threat hits Afghan phones

OK, I posted this in an effort to raise awareness and for a little bit of comic relief.

1) The Army and NATO forces do not often use local cell phones for communication.. I guess the Taliban didn't get that memo.
Yes, they know NATO doesn't use cell phones.
2) This effectively hinders the Taliban's own IED efforts by preventing cell phones from being capable of remote detonation.
True, but they would rather not get captured than set off another IED. Besides, if Afgnanistan is anything like Iraq, remote detonated IED's are way down do to widespread use of electronic countermeasures. Its more passive infrared or command detonated now.
3) The idiots were apparently defeated in their attacks against four undefended cell towers..!? LAWL!
I dont know the details of those attacks, but it is funny, perhaps they thought they were made of wood or something and upon arriving at a metal tower, realized they were outgunned
4) what the hell will a cell phone curfew do to hinder anyone besides the Afghan civilians themselves?!

Ridiculous...
A thread was posted on this maybe 2-3 weeks ago. The problem is the Taliban's less disciplined members are using cell phones to communicate. NATO listens in, gets intel, figures out who the bad guys are, when the attacks are planned for, etc etc. and plans thier attacks accordingly. Leaked intel via cell phones is the Taliban's biggest weakness right now. So to allow for thier night attacks to go off better, they are using a bit of scorched earth policy, kill off the network so NO ONE can use it.
 

PingSpike

Lifer
Feb 25, 2004
21,594
449
126
How were they repelled by the four surviving towers? Did the dude manning the tower remodulate the deflector dish to bombard the attackers with positively charged ions?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Train
True, but they would rather not get captured than set off another IED. Besides, if Afgnanistan is anything like Iraq, remote detonated IED's are way down do to widespread use of electronic countermeasures. Its more passive infrared or command detonated now.
Afghanistan, in terms of IED's, is nothing like Iraq. The most common types are still VB or cell phone detonated -- generally AT mines or low-powered cave-made plastique.

I dont know the details of those attacks, but it is funny, perhaps they thought they were made of wood or something and upon arriving at a metal tower, realized they were outgunned
I just wish I could see the towers that withstood their merciless attacks! LOL!

A thread was posted on this maybe 2-3 weeks ago. The problem is the Taliban's less disciplined members are using cell phones to communicate. NATO listens in, gets intel, figures out who the bad guys are, when the attacks are planned for, etc etc. and plans thier attacks accordingly. Leaked intel via cell phones is the Taliban's biggest weakness right now. So to allow for thier night attacks to go off better, they are using a bit of scorched earth policy, kill off the network so NO ONE can use it.
ahhh, OK, that would make some sense. I'll go search for it now... thanks!

My guess is that they are tired of the natives ratting them out... We hand out cell phones to the village leaders to call us whenever they spot the Taliban in the area. Turning the service off at night will simply allow the Taliban more freedom of movement. After all, the Taliban have no real way of figuring out which locals are making those calls, so the only solution would be cutting all of them off at once!

Originally posted by: PingSpike
How were they repelled by the four surviving towers? Did the dude manning the tower remodulate the deflector dish to bombard the attackers with positively charged ions?
LOL!
 

Train

Lifer
Jun 22, 2000
13,784
43
91
www.bing.com
Originally posted by: palehorse74
The most common type are still VB or cell phone detonated.
Surprising, remote are almost non-existent nowadays in Iraq, and VB is too anywhere outside of Baghdad. Could have just been the places I was, but it was 99.9% command wire or victim activated.

Don't they have ICE systems on all the vehicles over in Afghanistan?
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Taliban threat hits Afghan phones

OK, I posted this in an effort to raise awareness and for a little bit of comic relief.

1) The Army and NATO forces do not often use local cell phones for communication.. I guess the Taliban didn't get that memo.
Yes, they know NATO doesn't use cell phones.
2) This effectively hinders the Taliban's own IED efforts by preventing cell phones from being capable of remote detonation.
True, but they would rather not get captured than set off another IED. Besides, if Afgnanistan is anything like Iraq, remote detonated IED's are way down do to widespread use of electronic countermeasures. Its more passive infrared or command detonated now.
3) The idiots were apparently defeated in their attacks against four undefended cell towers..!? LAWL!
I dont know the details of those attacks, but it is funny, perhaps they thought they were made of wood or something and upon arriving at a metal tower, realized they were outgunned
4) what the hell will a cell phone curfew do to hinder anyone besides the Afghan civilians themselves?!

Ridiculous...
A thread was posted on this maybe 2-3 weeks ago. The problem is the Taliban's less disciplined members are using cell phones to communicate. NATO listens in, gets intel, figures out who the bad guys are, when the attacks are planned for, etc etc. and plans thier attacks accordingly. Leaked intel via cell phones is the Taliban's biggest weakness right now. So to allow for thier night attacks to go off better, they are using a bit of scorched earth policy, kill off the network so NO ONE can use it.
Ya, it's pretty surprising that someone who claims the role Palehorse does not to be aware of basic things such as that the issue isn't NATO using the cell phones, but rather targeting.

The US has long used cell phones for targeting enemies. For example, when top drug kingpin Pablo Escobar was killed by Colombian forces, they were led to him by the US telling them where he was based on tracking his cell phone calls to his family, from an overhead Beechcraft plane.

As for destroying only six towers, it's also possible they hadn't intended to "completely destroy" all of the towers, while they're trying to 'send a message' to the companies to turn them off. The humor about their 'not being able' to destroy the towers is fine, as long as it's recognized as humor and not some serious point on the Taliban.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: palehorse74
The most common type are still VB or cell phone detonated.
Surprising, remote are almost non-existent nowadays in Iraq, and VB is too anywhere outside of Baghdad. Could have just been the places I was, but it was 99.9% command wire or victim activated.

Don't they have ICE systems on all the vehicles over in Afghanistan?
I havent been back to Afghanistan since the end of '05; but when I was there, we still didn't have many ACORN systems, and the ECM route flyovers by the Navy's EA6B's were limited by range and geography. Each "convoy" was supposed to have at least one ACORN, but most of the work I did was not in hummers or convoys. ;)

A lot has probably changed in the Stan, so maybe they have them now... at least, I hope so. Perhaps JoS can answer that.. he was just there recently.
 

Martin

Lifer
Jan 15, 2000
29,178
1
81
I'm sure all the regular people affected by this are laughing too. In fact, I hear they're positively ecstatic that 7 years after being driven out of power, the Taliban are powerful enough (and security forces weak enough) to be able to demand and get networks to shut down when they want.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Craig234
Ya, it's pretty surprising that someone who claims the role Palehorse does not to be aware of basic things such as that the issue isn't NATO using the cell phones, but rather targeting.
Hey genius, go back and read the Talibans' claims in the article, and then read item #1 in the OP. I very clearly spelled out the fact that we don't use cell phones, and I even joked about the Taliban not getting that memo.

I'm also fairly confident that it's the local rats calling in Taliban locations, and not the tracking ("targetting"?), that has the Taliban most concerned.

gawd, you're such a fvcking tool...
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Martin
I'm sure all the regular people affected by this are laughing too. In fact, I hear they're positively ecstatic that 7 years after being driven out of power, the Taliban are powerful enough (and security forces weak enough) to be able to demand and get networks to shut down when they want.
Throughout most of Afghanistan - 90% of the geography -- the Taliban is a complete non-factor. These attacks and threats took place in Helmand, Ghazni, and Zabul -- three of the 34 provinces in Afghanistan. (Coincidentally, these were the three provinces I worked in from 04 to 05... DOH!)

So kids, if you're playing the game at home, you will quickly recognize that these are the same three provinces to always make the news.

Imagine that.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
30,245
3,783
126
Freedom of speech is the antithesis of the Taliban?s cancerous version of Islam. The people subjected to this Supremacist view are not permitted free thought and expression. The cell phone is thus a most diabolical opponent to them.

Originally posted by: palehorse74
So kids, if you're playing the game at home, you will quickly recognize that these are the same three provinces to always make the news.

Imagine that.
Do they also border Pakistan?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Freedom of speech is the antithesis of the Taliban?s cancerous version of Islam. The people subjected to this Supremacist view are not permitted free thought and expression. The cell phone is thus a most diabolical opponent to them.

Originally posted by: palehorse74
So kids, if you're playing the game at home, you will quickly recognize that these are the same three provinces to always make the news.

Imagine that.
Do they also border Pakistan?
yes.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
There has been so much ordinance dropped that they probably have an endless supply of explosives. You could take apart claymores or steal a sachel charge and probably just set it at the base and blow the tower down. Either that or fire rockets at it. They make that tape like soft putty that you can probably wrap around the base and just blow it up. You dont have to knock it over to destroy the equipment. If the tower is metal you could just start a good fire next to it or on it with gasoline and it would melt and fall over. Drill hole pour in diesel and gasoline and torch it. Just one anti-tank round would burn a hole through the metal. The LAW is designed to burn through armored plate and blow up inside of a tank or armored personnel carrier.

I thought the more sophisticated Taliban was using Satelite Phones. So this would not affect them.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: piasabird
There has been so much ordinance dropped that they probably have an endless supply of explosives. You could take apart claymores or steal a sachel charge and probably just set it at the base and blow the tower down. Either that or fire rockets at it. They make that tape like soft putty that you can probably wrap around the base and just blow it up. You dont have to knock it over to destroy the equipment. If the tower is metal you could just start a good fire next to it or on it with gasoline and it would melt and fall over. Drill hole pour in diesel and gasoline and torch it. Just one anti-tank round would burn a hole through the metal. The LAW is designed to burn through armored plate and blow up inside of a tank or armored personnel carrier.

I thought the more sophisticated Taliban was using Satelite Phones. So this would not affect them.
I really think this has more to do with the rats who keep reporting the Talibans' nighttime movements to NATO forces. The only way that the Taliban can shut down the reporting is to cut off ALL communication after 5pm.

Contrary to what Lemon Law has been trying to sell you here for years, most Afghans actually despise the Taliban; so more and more locals are ratting them out.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Craig234
Ya, it's pretty surprising that someone who claims the role Palehorse does not to be aware of basic things such as that the issue isn't NATO using the cell phones, but rather targeting.
Hey genius, go back and read the Talibans' claims in the article, and then read item #1 in the OP. I very clearly spelled out the fact that we don't use cell phones, and I even joked about the Taliban not getting that memo.

I'm also fairly confident that it's the local rats calling in Taliban locations, and not the tracking ("targetting"?), that has the Taliban most concerned.

gawd, you're such a fvcking tool...
So, what you said, you didn't mean, you meant it as a joke. Sorry, but you make it easy to underestimate you, you rarely fail to disappoint.

I was intentionally vague in the word targetting - the relevant point isn't the details, but the fact that they're concerned about the cell phones causing their locations to be exposed.

Whether that's through tracking the signals, or 'rats' calling in info, or some other mechanisn, it doesn't matter much.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Craig234
Ya, it's pretty surprising that someone who claims the role Palehorse does not to be aware of basic things such as that the issue isn't NATO using the cell phones, but rather targeting.
Hey genius, go back and read the Talibans' claims in the article, and then read item #1 in the OP. I very clearly spelled out the fact that we don't use cell phones, and I even joked about the Taliban not getting that memo.

I'm also fairly confident that it's the local rats calling in Taliban locations, and not the tracking ("targetting"?), that has the Taliban most concerned.

gawd, you're such a fvcking tool...
So, what you said, you didn't mean, you meant it as a joke. Sorry, but you make it easy to underestimate you, you rarely fail to disappoint.

I was intentionally vague in the word targetting - the relevant point isn't the details, but the fact that they're concerned about the cell phones causing their locations to be exposed.

Whether that's through tracking the signals, or 'rats' calling in info, or some other mechanisn, it doesn't matter much.
Well I, for one, find it encouraging that so many locals are willing to take the risk to rat on the Taliban's nighttime movements.

That said, wtf are you talking about with my saying things I don't mean!? This is what I wrote:
1) The Army and NATO forces do not often use local cell phones for communication.. I guess the Taliban didn't get that memo.
I meant exactly what I wrote, and you somehow read that as my being ignorant of our lack of cell phone usage... :confused:

weird.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS