Talk:United States invasion of Afghanistan/GA1

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Cerebellum in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ovinus (talk · contribs) 04:21, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

An impressive article to bring to GAN. I will probably make some hands-on tweaks (feel free to revert ones you disagree with). Do you intend on taking this to FAC? Ovinus (talk) 04:21, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank you :) I may take to FAC eventually, but not anytime soon. --Cerebellum (talk) 08:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
:D Sorry about this, but I'll need to be off Wikipedia for a bit—probably a week. I'll get back to you once off-wiki stuff settles. Ovinus (talk) 02:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
No worries! --Cerebellum (talk) 08:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Alright, back. Main focuses will be NPOV, appropriate context, and summary style. Ovinus (talk) 03:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

  • "became the first phase of a 20-year long war in the country" – I'd just be direct and say "became the first phase of the 20-year-long War in Afghanistan" Ovinus (talk) 03:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
      Done --Cerebellum (talk) 08:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • "eventually succeeded in overthrowing the Afghan government in 2021" – Probably should state that the overthrow occurred quickly/immediately after the withdrawal of US troops Ovinus (talk) 03:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Changed to In 2021, while international forces were withdrawing from the country, the Taliban succeeded in overthrowing the Afghan government and re-establishing their rule across Afghanistan.
  • "warlord-ism" – Is this a common word? If not I'd rephrase it; if so I'd remove the hyphen Ovinus (talk) 03:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Changed to "warlord rule". --Cerebellum (talk) 08:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • "Hazara factions" – This word hasn't been introduced Ovinus (talk) 03:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Added The Hazaras are a minority ethnic group adhering to Shia Islam and living in the mountains of central Afghanistan. They're actually quite fascinating, when I was in Logar province neither the Taliban nor the Afghan army would go into Hazara areas - they keep to themselves and run a tight ship. Should I make the sentence a footnote or leave it in the main text? --Cerebellum (talk) 08:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
    You were deployed in Afghanistan? Wow. Yeah, I like the extra information but I would put it in a footnote (probs at the end of the sentence, since it's close enough to Hazara). Ovinus (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Yes :) Changed to a footnote. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:22, 11 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • I made a change giving context to bin Laden's return from Sudan (first sentence in Al-Qaeda). Please tweak/revert if it isn't supported by the source, but I thought it would help a reader who forgot about bin Laden's flee from Afghanistan. Ovinus (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Great, thank you! --Cerebellum (talk) 09:22, 11 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • "One of bin Laden's strategic goals was to draw the US into a costly war in Afghanistan, so it could be defeated just as the Soviet Union had been" – To be clear, the cost of the war specifically would lead to defeat in Afghanistan?

Ovinus (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The source doesn't specify, it just says: "As a side effect of September 11, bin Laden hope to draw the United States into a long war in Afghanistan, where it would be defeated like the Soviet Union." --Cerebellum (talk) 09:22, 11 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Ovinus (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Added to civilians in Northern Alliance-controlled territory. I think it is unusual, it was a big initiative of Bush because Afghanistan was in a severe drought.

Other stuff

edit

Overall a pleasing and compelling article, even for someone who isn't into military conflicts. Ovinus (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

edit

One major aspect that I don't see covered here is the question as to whether the invasion of Afghanistan was legal according to the UN charter and international law. There are various sources that discuss it, for example:

  • Juan, Michelle Ann U. (2002–2003). "Testing the Legality of the Attack on Afghanistan". Ateneo Law Journal. 47: 499.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: date format (link)
  • Quigley, John (2002–2003). "The Afghanistan War and Self-Defense". Valparaiso University Law Review. 37: 541.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: date format (link)
  • Williamson, Myra (2013). Terrorism, War and International Law: The Legality of the Use of Force Against Afghanistan in 2001. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. ISBN 978-1-4094-9656-4.

(t · c) buidhe 04:05, 12 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Buidhe makes an excellent point, thanks; completely forgot about the non-military aspect. A discussion on international reactions and legality is important for completeness, especially for a fairly massive event like this one. And as I alluded to above, I'd also like a bit more info in Casualties; where was the death toll highest? Ovinus (talk) 04:47, 12 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thank you Buidhe for the comment and those sources. Ovinus, if you can give me the weekend to review the sources I will get the section added no later than Sunday. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:33, 12 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Take as much time as you need! Ovinus (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Ovinus: @Buidhe: I took a stab at a legality section, let me know what you think. Tomorrow I will try to find more detailed information on casualties and/or war crimes, I know there is at least one account of the Northern Alliance beheading Taliban prisoners. --Cerebellum (talk) 10:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
I think it's pretty good, although a tad short. Buidhe, do you know if the invasion's illegality is a majority view? You could hatnote this section to Opposition to the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) which is largely about this same topic (although not the best article out there), and actually provides other pertinent topics to put elsewhere in Aftermath: International reactions, the reaction of the US public, and of Afghanis. My feeling is that the military coverage is excellent and complete; we just need more context on non-military aspects of the aftermath. Ovinus (talk) 16:50, 14 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ok, done. Added a reactions section and expanded casualties. Most of the coverage of civilian casualties begins after the invasion, for example on December 23rd 65 tribal elders were killed in an airstrike while on their way to Karzai's inauguration, but the scope of this article ends on December 17th. Same with Afghan public opinion, there are anecdotal reports but I couldn't find any actual surveys before 2006. --Cerebellum (talk) 11:05, 15 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Looks pretty good, imo! I'll probably pass the review after a quick second pass of the article. Ovinus (talk) 20:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Alright, passing. Thank you for your excellent work on this important topic! :) Ovinus (talk) 22:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thank you so much! You made my day :) --Cerebellum (talk) 08:30, 18 May 2022 (UTC)Reply