What do you think?
Rate this book
Afghanistan: A Military History from Alexander the Great to the Fall of the Taliban
For over 2,500 years, the forbidding territory of Afghanistan has served as a vital crossroads not only for armies but also for clashes between civilizations. As the United States engages in armed conflict with the Afghan regime, an understanding of the military history of that blood-soaked land has become essential to every American. Alexander the Great conquered Afghanistan on his way to India. Later, because of its strategic location with the Silk Road passing through it, Afghanistan was invaded by Arabs, Mongols, and Tartars. Great Britain tried--and failed--to add Afghanistan to its Indian empire, while Russia tried to expand into the same embattled land. Afghanistan once again fought and defeated a secular government in the face of rising Islamic resistance. Now, America faces a new enemy on this land that has become, over the centuries, the graveyard of empires past.
1 pages, Audio CD
First published July 1, 2002
182 people are currently reading
2070 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 129 reviews
July 21, 2025
I really enjoyed this one. It was full of information and well documented. I did not feel blasted with obscure facts and felt the reading was smooth in my opinion. I learned a great deal and learned about Alexander the Great, the Huns, the Arabs, the Mongols, the British, and the Soviets in Afghanistan.
The Soviet deployment to Afghanistan was initially done to protect its investment (since it had been contributing with infrastructure and economic aid since 1919). The Soviets were invested in providing support to the 'Proletariat Brothers' to include roads, irrigation, economic, and other infrastructure endeavors. But quickly the unwanted outsiders were targeted and violence began to escalate, especially in the rural areas. The book goes into the hardcore details of the "migratory genocide", which is systematic depopulation of the countryside by means of destroying the rural infrastructure, pg. 255
These daily operations included carpet bombing valleys, napalming orchards, dropping mines in farmland to prevent cultivation, and helicopter attacks on sheep and goats. The civilian population was targeted and drove millions into refugee camps all over Afghanistan and neighboring countries.
Then the book gets into the civil war, rise of the Taliban, 9/11, and then Operation Enduring Freedom.
For more in-depth modern history reading, look to "Ghost Wars" by Stephen Coll or Ahmed Rashid "Jihad in Central Asia" and "Decent into Chaos". For the Soviet War look at "The Bear Went Over The Mountain" and "The Soviet-Afghan War" by Lester Grau.
I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the military history of Afghanistan. Thanks!
The Soviet deployment to Afghanistan was initially done to protect its investment (since it had been contributing with infrastructure and economic aid since 1919). The Soviets were invested in providing support to the 'Proletariat Brothers' to include roads, irrigation, economic, and other infrastructure endeavors. But quickly the unwanted outsiders were targeted and violence began to escalate, especially in the rural areas. The book goes into the hardcore details of the "migratory genocide", which is systematic depopulation of the countryside by means of destroying the rural infrastructure, pg. 255
These daily operations included carpet bombing valleys, napalming orchards, dropping mines in farmland to prevent cultivation, and helicopter attacks on sheep and goats. The civilian population was targeted and drove millions into refugee camps all over Afghanistan and neighboring countries.
Then the book gets into the civil war, rise of the Taliban, 9/11, and then Operation Enduring Freedom.
For more in-depth modern history reading, look to "Ghost Wars" by Stephen Coll or Ahmed Rashid "Jihad in Central Asia" and "Decent into Chaos". For the Soviet War look at "The Bear Went Over The Mountain" and "The Soviet-Afghan War" by Lester Grau.
I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the military history of Afghanistan. Thanks!
November 14, 2020
قراءة الكتاب كانت عملية مرهقة بالنسبة لي كمحبة لقراءة التاريخ ولكن غير متخصصة فيه ، ضعت بين اسم الملوك و الأمبرطوريات والبلاد ، استصعبت بعض الكلمات و معناها ، تهت بين تقدم الجيوش أكان بلاد الشمال أم الجنوب! ولكن برغم كل هذا أردت تقييم الكتاب بالنجوم الخمسة الكاملة بس المعضلة كانت في إختلافي مع الكاتب في ارائه وليس في فحوى الكتاب وأهمها ارائه المناهضة للحرب الأمريكية علي أفغانستان .
رافق القراءة الإستعانة بجوجل للبحث عن المعانى و خرائط و أحيانا بعض المناقشات فمثلاً توقفت عند هذه الجملة (كان العبيد في الإسلام يستخدمون كمحاربين، وفي عصور لاحقة وصلت طوائف منهم إلى السلطة كما حدث مع المماليك والانكشاريين) و وضعت في خطة القراءة القادمة إن شاء الله البحث في تاريخ الإنكشاريين في العصر العثماني
..
منذ فجرالتاريخ المدون كانت أفغانستان محور طموحات إمبريالية عديدة بدءًا من الإمبراطورية الفارسية العظمى التي كانت أول إمبراطورية في العالم تمد سطوتها عبر القارات؛ إلى الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية التي تمثل أعظم قوة في العصر
الحديث وما بينهما مطمعاً ل أمبرطوريات مختلفة.
upload photos online
الدلائل التي تشير إلى استيلاء قورش ملك الفرس على شمال أفغانستان أو باكتريا قديماً تكاد تكون منعدمة،ولكن البراهين علي الغزو المقدوني بيد الإسكندر الأكبر علي أفغانستان كثيرة
فبعد مقتل أبيه راح الأسكندر ينفذ خطته لكي يحارب الفرس, خاصةً أنهم كانوا اعداء لليونانين و يدخلون فى سياسيتهم وحاربوهم اكثر من مرة
الحضارة الهلينية (وهي مستمدة من كلمة هـِلين وهي الاسم العرقي الذي يطلقه اليونانيون على أنفسهم)وعمل الإسكندر علي نشرها في الأمبرطورية التي أنشأها
<هي للأقوى>
يقال إن الإسكندر همس بها على فراش الموت، عندما التف حوله قواده يسألونه عمن سيرث إمبراطوريته
ف بعد وفاة الإسكندر و مقتل كل عضو من أسرته علي يد الآخر ، تركت الإمبراطورية تحت سيطرة القادة المقدونيين، وبعد عشرين عاماً من السياسات الفاسدة والمعارك الممتدة تفتتت إلى ممالك متفرقة.
(1)وكان بطليموس أول المطالبين بحقه، وبصفته حاكًما لمصر تمكن من الاستقلال بها وجعل ملكها وراثيٍّا بشكل استمر إلى أن أتى عهد كليوباترا.
(2) وفي بابل تمكن جنرال يدعى سيلوكوس من السيطرة على الأراضي الوسطى والشرقية من الإمبراطورية الفارسية السابقة. ورغم أن مصر ومقدونيا كانتا تعتبران الجائزة الكبرى التي يمكن اقتطاعها من إمبراطورية الإسكندر، فإن سيلوكوس استولى على الجزء الأكبر وهو مليون ونصف مليون ميل مربع في المساحة، وثلاثون مليونًا من السكان، في مقابل ستة أو سبعة ملايين من السكان في مصر وفي شبه جزيرة البلقان.
(3) فكان كاسندر يحكم مقدونيا واليونان
(4)وليسيماخوس يحكم ثرايس
(5)وأنتيجونوس و ولده ديميتريوس اللذان يطمعان في إعادة توحيد الإمبراطورية
نرجع ل سيلوكوس الذي سيطر علي مملكة فارس ومن ضمنها أفغانستان ففي عام ٣٠٥ ق.م ظهرت قوة أخرى جديدة في شبه القارة الهندية قادها شاندرجوبتا موريا، وزحفت الجيوش الهندية لتعبر سلسلة جبال سليمان وتهزم سيلوكوس في أراكوزيا. ومن الغريب أن كلا الجانبين بعد ذلك وصلا إلى اتفاق ودي، تبسط من خلاله الإمبراطورية الموريانية الهندية سيادتها على جنوب أفغانستان فيما قبل قندهار، وهو الذي يعادل في أهميته بالنسبة للإغريق إسكندرية أراكوزيا. وفي المقابل تسلم
سيلوكوس خمسمائة فيل يمكن أن تساعده في معاركه في الغرب.
وكان من ضمن حكم الموريان ، أسوكا واحد من أغرب الشخصيات فى التاريخ ، قام بحصار مرعب نصبه حول مدينة كالينجا في الهند قتل فيه جيشه مائة ألف إنسان وشرد مائة وخمسين ألفا آخرين ، وقع أسوكاً فريسة هزة نفسية عنيفة، فقد استولت عليه حالة من القلق النفسي من جراء المذابح التي تسبب فيها فاعتنق مذهب البوذية.
ولأنه كان ذا شخصية تتسم بالقوة والحيوية، فقد مضى ينشر فلسفته الداعية إلى احترام جميع مظاهر الحياة بنفس القوة التي كان يدعو بها إلى معاركه الحربية
photo hosting sites
ثم آتي الغزو البارثياني و أصاب جسد الإمبراطورية الفارسية القديمة ، وهكذا ولدت مملكة الإغريق الباكتريانية وهي دولة مميزة عجيبة استمرت في أفغانستان مدة ثلاثة قرون في عزلة تامة عن بقية العالم الهلينستي.حتى تولى أنتيوخوس حكم السيلوكيد وكان شابٍّا شجاًعا فاكتسح إمبراطورية البارثيان الناشئة، ثم التقي أنتيوخوس بيوثيديمس - خليفة أحد ملوك فارس و هاجم البارثيانيين في كذا موقعة من قبل- ، وأمكن من خلال هذا اللقاء التوصل إلى تسوية نزعت فتيل الحرب بين الباكتريان الإغريق بقوة فرسانهم ، ،وعلى أن يمارس كل منهما ضغًطا على البارثيانيين إذا ما احتاج الطرف الآخر إلى ذلك.ولكن بعد عدة معارك آتي النصر للبارثيانيين و عاد البارثيانيون إلى الشرق إلى أفغانستان. وكما يقول كارو: كانت معركة كارهاي واحدة من المعارك الفاصلة في العالم، وقد انتصر فيها رجال عاش أحفادهم بعد ذلك على الحدود الشمالية الغربية.
حاولت قبائل السيثيان (الهندية) غزو الأرضي لكن بني أعمامهم من البارثيان، الذين كانوا قد أصبحوا قوة لا يستهان بها، تصدوا لهم بحزم.ولكن بعد عدة محاولات عبروا قندهار التي تقع في جنوب أفغانستان حتى وصلوا إلى الهند. أما من تبقى من السيثيان فقد عبروا نهر الأوكسس متجهين صوب شمال أفغانستان، مكتسحين في طريقهم المملكة الباكتريانية الإغريقية.
لا تشير المسكوكات القديمة إلى تلك المعارك الضارية التي خاضها الإغريق ضد البدو الرحل من السيثيانيين، الذين لم يعد هدفهم من القتال مجرد الإغارة والسلب بل كانوا يستميتون في الحصول على النصر ، وحصل وتحقق النصر فالقطع النقدية التي عرفت بعد ذلك كانت تحمل صور الملوك السيثيانيين
ولفظت المملكة الهيلينية في الشرق أنفاسها الأخيرة...
وبعد سيطرة السيثيانيين لقرون، طردوا من المناطق بفعل قوة ضخمة اجتاحت سهول آسيا الوسطى(وهي قبائل الكوشان البدوية الهندية) وفي القرن الثاني قبل الميلاد، اختفى السيثيانيون من ملعب الأحداث وبقي عرقهم تحت مسمى (البشتون) وهي أكبر طائفة في أفغانستان
وبعد قبائل الكوشان استعادت الفرس قوتها تحت قيادة أرداشير وهو أحد أحفاد ساسان -أحد قادة الفرس القدماء- وكان التغير الأكبر الذي حدث في المنطقة الذي من الممكن أن يكون قد لقي ترحيبًا لدى الأهالي هو أن أفغانستان بعد قرون من الحكم اليوناني(الهيليني)، والسيثياني(يشمل كل الجنس الآري الهندي) والكوشاني قد عادت مرة ثانية إلى أحضان الفرس.
وبعدها آتي أقسي غزو علي يد الهون البيض -هجين من شعوب وسط آسيا مع عناصر كبيرة متداخلة من الهنود الآريانيين- لكنهم أكثر شراسة وعنفا، فقد استولوا على باكتريا ثم قضوا على الفرس
يصفهم المؤرخ اليوناني أميانوس مارسيلينوس: يقوم هؤلاء الهون بإحداث جروح بالغة في خدود أطفالهم فور ولادتهم،بحيث لا ينمو الشعر بعد ذلك في أجزاء معينة من وجوههم وتحل محله ندوب مجعدة قبيحة،لقد كانوا يهدفون من هذا إلى إثارة الخوف والفزع في نفوس الأعداء بأكبر قدر ممكن.
لم يسبق في تاريخ أفغانستان أن استطاع جيش غاز أن يخضعها معتمًدا فقط على قوته العسكرية، فلم يكن هناك سبيل إلى هذه الغاية إلا بتجنيد بعض أمراء الحرب أو الزعماء المحليين لتنفيذ مخطط المحتل. وكما سبق أن رأينا فإن بعض القبائل في أفغانستان لم تقع أبًدا في قبضة الغزاة ،وإن كانت قد ��ظهر ولاء لسلطة معينة ولكنها في مقابل هذا الولاء تنال قدًرا كبًيرا من الحرية
وبعدها آتي الفتح الإسلامى لبلاد فارس عام 637م ، وفي أواخر القرن السابع الميلادي توغلنا في أفغانستان
تمتعت المنطقة بفترة سلام ونهضة علمية. وعلى الجانب الثقافي أفرز التزاوج الذي حدث بين الحضارة الإسلامية والفنون الفارسية أعماًلا عظيمة. وانتشرت المساجد والقصور الفخمة في مدن هرات، وبلخ، وبخارى،وسمرقند، وبلغت فنون الشعر، وصناعة الفخار ونحت البرونز درجة عالية من التميزوالإتقان.
..
أفغانستان بصفتها المحطةالأولى في آسيا الوسطى ومركز الثروات في حضارات العالم القديم ،سوف يقدر لها أن تكون ساحة القتال لجميع هذه المعارك العنيفة
* تدميرها عند دخول المغول علي يد جنكينز خان
* وقوفها ضد الاحتلال الإنجليزي بعد إحتلاله للهند
* أهميتها في الحرب الباردة بين السوفيت و أمريكا
* غزو السوفيت لها
* الجماعات والفرق المتصارعة . فقد استشرى الفساد نتيجة لرواسب الحقبة الشيوعية التي عاشتها أفغانستان أثناء الغزو السوفيتى
* حكم طالبان
* سقوطها في القبضة الأمريكية بعد أحداث 11 سبتمبر
رافق القراءة الإستعانة بجوجل للبحث عن المعانى و خرائط و أحيانا بعض المناقشات فمثلاً توقفت عند هذه الجملة (كان العبيد في الإسلام يستخدمون كمحاربين، وفي عصور لاحقة وصلت طوائف منهم إلى السلطة كما حدث مع المماليك والانكشاريين) و وضعت في خطة القراءة القادمة إن شاء الله البحث في تاريخ الإنكشاريين في العصر العثماني
..
منذ فجرالتاريخ المدون كانت أفغانستان محور طموحات إمبريالية عديدة بدءًا من الإمبراطورية الفارسية العظمى التي كانت أول إمبراطورية في العالم تمد سطوتها عبر القارات؛ إلى الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية التي تمثل أعظم قوة في العصر
الحديث وما بينهما مطمعاً ل أمبرطوريات مختلفة.
upload photos online
الدلائل التي تشير إلى استيلاء قورش ملك الفرس على شمال أفغانستان أو باكتريا قديماً تكاد تكون منعدمة،ولكن البراهين علي الغزو المقدوني بيد الإسكندر الأكبر علي أفغانستان كثيرة
فبعد مقتل أبيه راح الأسكندر ينفذ خطته لكي يحارب الفرس, خاصةً أنهم كانوا اعداء لليونانين و يدخلون فى سياسيتهم وحاربوهم اكثر من مرة
الحضارة الهلينية (وهي مستمدة من كلمة هـِلين وهي الاسم العرقي الذي يطلقه اليونانيون على أنفسهم)وعمل الإسكندر علي نشرها في الأمبرطورية التي أنشأها
<هي للأقوى>
يقال إن الإسكندر همس بها على فراش الموت، عندما التف حوله قواده يسألونه عمن سيرث إمبراطوريته
ف بعد وفاة الإسكندر و مقتل كل عضو من أسرته علي يد الآخر ، تركت الإمبراطورية تحت سيطرة القادة المقدونيين، وبعد عشرين عاماً من السياسات الفاسدة والمعارك الممتدة تفتتت إلى ممالك متفرقة.
(1)وكان بطليموس أول المطالبين بحقه، وبصفته حاكًما لمصر تمكن من الاستقلال بها وجعل ملكها وراثيٍّا بشكل استمر إلى أن أتى عهد كليوباترا.
(2) وفي بابل تمكن جنرال يدعى سيلوكوس من السيطرة على الأراضي الوسطى والشرقية من الإمبراطورية الفارسية السابقة. ورغم أن مصر ومقدونيا كانتا تعتبران الجائزة الكبرى التي يمكن اقتطاعها من إمبراطورية الإسكندر، فإن سيلوكوس استولى على الجزء الأكبر وهو مليون ونصف مليون ميل مربع في المساحة، وثلاثون مليونًا من السكان، في مقابل ستة أو سبعة ملايين من السكان في مصر وفي شبه جزيرة البلقان.
(3) فكان كاسندر يحكم مقدونيا واليونان
(4)وليسيماخوس يحكم ثرايس
(5)وأنتيجونوس و ولده ديميتريوس اللذان يطمعان في إعادة توحيد الإمبراطورية
نرجع ل سيلوكوس الذي سيطر علي مملكة فارس ومن ضمنها أفغانستان ففي عام ٣٠٥ ق.م ظهرت قوة أخرى جديدة في شبه القارة الهندية قادها شاندرجوبتا موريا، وزحفت الجيوش الهندية لتعبر سلسلة جبال سليمان وتهزم سيلوكوس في أراكوزيا. ومن الغريب أن كلا الجانبين بعد ذلك وصلا إلى اتفاق ودي، تبسط من خلاله الإمبراطورية الموريانية الهندية سيادتها على جنوب أفغانستان فيما قبل قندهار، وهو الذي يعادل في أهميته بالنسبة للإغريق إسكندرية أراكوزيا. وفي المقابل تسلم
سيلوكوس خمسمائة فيل يمكن أن تساعده في معاركه في الغرب.
وكان من ضمن حكم الموريان ، أسوكا واحد من أغرب الشخصيات فى التاريخ ، قام بحصار مرعب نصبه حول مدينة كالينجا في الهند قتل فيه جيشه مائة ألف إنسان وشرد مائة وخمسين ألفا آخرين ، وقع أسوكاً فريسة هزة نفسية عنيفة، فقد استولت عليه حالة من القلق النفسي من جراء المذابح التي تسبب فيها فاعتنق مذهب البوذية.
ولأنه كان ذا شخصية تتسم بالقوة والحيوية، فقد مضى ينشر فلسفته الداعية إلى احترام جميع مظاهر الحياة بنفس القوة التي كان يدعو بها إلى معاركه الحربية
photo hosting sites
ثم آتي الغزو البارثياني و أصاب جسد الإمبراطورية الفارسية القديمة ، وهكذا ولدت مملكة الإغريق الباكتريانية وهي دولة مميزة عجيبة استمرت في أفغانستان مدة ثلاثة قرون في عزلة تامة عن بقية العالم الهلينستي.حتى تولى أنتيوخوس حكم السيلوكيد وكان شابٍّا شجاًعا فاكتسح إمبراطورية البارثيان الناشئة، ثم التقي أنتيوخوس بيوثيديمس - خليفة أحد ملوك فارس و هاجم البارثيانيين في كذا موقعة من قبل- ، وأمكن من خلال هذا اللقاء التوصل إلى تسوية نزعت فتيل الحرب بين الباكتريان الإغريق بقوة فرسانهم ، ،وعلى أن يمارس كل منهما ضغًطا على البارثيانيين إذا ما احتاج الطرف الآخر إلى ذلك.ولكن بعد عدة معارك آتي النصر للبارثيانيين و عاد البارثيانيون إلى الشرق إلى أفغانستان. وكما يقول كارو: كانت معركة كارهاي واحدة من المعارك الفاصلة في العالم، وقد انتصر فيها رجال عاش أحفادهم بعد ذلك على الحدود الشمالية الغربية.
حاولت قبائل السيثيان (الهندية) غزو الأرضي لكن بني أعمامهم من البارثيان، الذين كانوا قد أصبحوا قوة لا يستهان بها، تصدوا لهم بحزم.ولكن بعد عدة محاولات عبروا قندهار التي تقع في جنوب أفغانستان حتى وصلوا إلى الهند. أما من تبقى من السيثيان فقد عبروا نهر الأوكسس متجهين صوب شمال أفغانستان، مكتسحين في طريقهم المملكة الباكتريانية الإغريقية.
لا تشير المسكوكات القديمة إلى تلك المعارك الضارية التي خاضها الإغريق ضد البدو الرحل من السيثيانيين، الذين لم يعد هدفهم من القتال مجرد الإغارة والسلب بل كانوا يستميتون في الحصول على النصر ، وحصل وتحقق النصر فالقطع النقدية التي عرفت بعد ذلك كانت تحمل صور الملوك السيثيانيين
ولفظت المملكة الهيلينية في الشرق أنفاسها الأخيرة...
وبعد سيطرة السيثيانيين لقرون، طردوا من المناطق بفعل قوة ضخمة اجتاحت سهول آسيا الوسطى(وهي قبائل الكوشان البدوية الهندية) وفي القرن الثاني قبل الميلاد، اختفى السيثيانيون من ملعب الأحداث وبقي عرقهم تحت مسمى (البشتون) وهي أكبر طائفة في أفغانستان
وبعد قبائل الكوشان استعادت الفرس قوتها تحت قيادة أرداشير وهو أحد أحفاد ساسان -أحد قادة الفرس القدماء- وكان التغير الأكبر الذي حدث في المنطقة الذي من الممكن أن يكون قد لقي ترحيبًا لدى الأهالي هو أن أفغانستان بعد قرون من الحكم اليوناني(الهيليني)، والسيثياني(يشمل كل الجنس الآري الهندي) والكوشاني قد عادت مرة ثانية إلى أحضان الفرس.
وبعدها آتي أقسي غزو علي يد الهون البيض -هجين من شعوب وسط آسيا مع عناصر كبيرة متداخلة من الهنود الآريانيين- لكنهم أكثر شراسة وعنفا، فقد استولوا على باكتريا ثم قضوا على الفرس
يصفهم المؤرخ اليوناني أميانوس مارسيلينوس: يقوم هؤلاء الهون بإحداث جروح بالغة في خدود أطفالهم فور ولادتهم،بحيث لا ينمو الشعر بعد ذلك في أجزاء معينة من وجوههم وتحل محله ندوب مجعدة قبيحة،لقد كانوا يهدفون من هذا إلى إثارة الخوف والفزع في نفوس الأعداء بأكبر قدر ممكن.
لم يسبق في تاريخ أفغانستان أن استطاع جيش غاز أن يخضعها معتمًدا فقط على قوته العسكرية، فلم يكن هناك سبيل إلى هذه الغاية إلا بتجنيد بعض أمراء الحرب أو الزعماء المحليين لتنفيذ مخطط المحتل. وكما سبق أن رأينا فإن بعض القبائل في أفغانستان لم تقع أبًدا في قبضة الغزاة ،وإن كانت قد ��ظهر ولاء لسلطة معينة ولكنها في مقابل هذا الولاء تنال قدًرا كبًيرا من الحرية
وبعدها آتي الفتح الإسلامى لبلاد فارس عام 637م ، وفي أواخر القرن السابع الميلادي توغلنا في أفغانستان
تمتعت المنطقة بفترة سلام ونهضة علمية. وعلى الجانب الثقافي أفرز التزاوج الذي حدث بين الحضارة الإسلامية والفنون الفارسية أعماًلا عظيمة. وانتشرت المساجد والقصور الفخمة في مدن هرات، وبلخ، وبخارى،وسمرقند، وبلغت فنون الشعر، وصناعة الفخار ونحت البرونز درجة عالية من التميزوالإتقان.
..
أفغانستان بصفتها المحطةالأولى في آسيا الوسطى ومركز الثروات في حضارات العالم القديم ،سوف يقدر لها أن تكون ساحة القتال لجميع هذه المعارك العنيفة
* تدميرها عند دخول المغول علي يد جنكينز خان
* وقوفها ضد الاحتلال الإنجليزي بعد إحتلاله للهند
* أهميتها في الحرب الباردة بين السوفيت و أمريكا
* غزو السوفيت لها
* الجماعات والفرق المتصارعة . فقد استشرى الفساد نتيجة لرواسب الحقبة الشيوعية التي عاشتها أفغانستان أثناء الغزو السوفيتى
* حكم طالبان
* سقوطها في القبضة الأمريكية بعد أحداث 11 سبتمبر
November 13, 2020
لا أنصح بقراءته يطيل الشرح في مواضيع جانبية ليس لها أي فائدة تذكر في تاريخ الأفغان كأصل الإسكندر المقدوني وبطولاته وماذا قال لجنوده وسماته شعرتُ أنني أقرأ الكتاب الخطأ
December 8, 2015
انا مدينة لهذا الكتاب بالكثير علي كم المعلومات التي به. بداية من الإسكندر مرورا بالمغول,الذين جعلوني اتألم من هول الفظائع التي أرتكبوها. الإ ان هذا لا يمنع من أنه كانت توجد بعض المعلومات المضحكة مثل , أن هولاكو كان له اخ يدعي مانجو الي جانب أن المغول أحتلوا الروس لمدة 200 عام!! ولكن ما ان لبث المغول يدخلون فى الدين الإسلامي و ايضا بسبب تأثرهم بالحضارات الأخري مثل الفرس حتي تحولوا من هذا الشعب البربري كان يحرق و يغرق البلاد التي يغزوها الي شعبا أكثر تحضرا فمثلا بابور شيد تاج محل
ثم بعد ذلك تعرض الأفغان للإحتلال البريطاني و الذي كان ضمن اللعبة الكبري أو بمعني أصح كانت بريطانيا تريد تكوين إمبراطوريتها الخاصة وأنضم إليها الروس ولإن ألمانيا جاءت متأخرة فقررت غزو أوروبا
كانت بريطانيا محتلة الهند في ذلك الوقت فرأت أنه لا ضير من توسيع إمبراطوريها الي أفغانستان. فقد كانت بريطانيا تصف الأفغان بالأطفال الصغار الذين من الممكن ترويضهم بسهوله. ولكن لان أفغانستان ذات طبيعة قبلية التي تتوحد تحت الإستعمار و تنحي خلافاتها جانبا فقد هزمتها شر هزيمة ,فما لبثت أن إحتلتها تانيا فهزمت و مرة ثالثة فهزمت
أي ان بريطانيا هزمت ثلاث مرات علي يد الأفغان
بعد ذلك بدأ يتكون الحزب الشيوعي في أفغانستان و الذي كان من خلال السوفيت و لكنه لم يلق ترحيبا كبيرا. فقرر السوفيت غزو أفغانستان من أجل حماية الحزب. في ذلك الوقت بدأت تظهر حركة جديدة للدفاع عن البلاد أطلقت علي نفسها أسم "المجاهدون" و كان زعيمها أحمد شاة مسعود الذي صورته علي غلاف الكتاب ,الملقب بأسد بنجشير
وقد ساهم المجاهدون في إجلاء السوفيت و الدفاع عن البلاد دفاعا مستميتا , بعد أن قام السوفيت بأبشع المجازر في الريف الأفغاني مستغلين عدم أهتمام وسائل الإعلام بذلك
بعد أن غادر السوفيت البلاد بطريقة حفظت لهم كرامتهم, بقيت مخابراتهم الي جانب المخابرات السعودية و الامريكية و الباكستانية!!
بدأ المجاهدون الصراع علي السلطة الي جانب أنهم بداو في زراعة الأفيون ليدير لهم الأرباح
في عام 1996 ظهرت جماعة أطلقت علي نفسها إسم "طالبان" وهي جماعة تنتمي الي الاصولين الاسلامين وزعيمها "الملا عمر" فأصبحت المرأة لا قيمة لها و منع التليفزيون و الموسيقي و التصوير و إطلاق الطائرات الورقية. وظهر الصراع بين المجاهدون و طالبان علي السلطة. ثم بعد ذلك أنشأ بن لادن تنظيم القاعدة في السودان لاعلان الجهاد العالمي لنصرة الإسلام
و الفرق بين طالبان والقاعدة ان الأخيرة كانت لها تمويلات كبيرة كما ان بن لادن له خطط تتسم بالمكر الشديد و طرقا غير إستسنائية
وفي عام 2001 قام صحفيين جزائريين يحملون بطاقات صحفية بلجيكية بإجراء حوار مع مسعود و كان الكاميرا بها قنبلة أودت بحياته, وأتضح بعد ذلك أن هذان الصحفيان من تنظيم القاعدة
فرحت طالبان من التخلص من هذا الخصم العنيد "مسعود" لأن بموته أنتهت حركة المجاهدون
بدأ بن لادن في تنفيذ احداث 11 سبتمبر التي أدت الي أنهيار البرجين بل أدت الي تغيير العلم أجمع
أتاحت تلك الأحداث أن تصبح أفغانستان محتلة من الولايات المتحدة من أجل القضاء علي طالبان و بالفعل تم ذلك, فكانت الطائرات الامريكية تغزو السماء بينما الافغان يتولون المعارك البرية
الي هنا الكتاب أكثر من رائع الي أن الكاتب في اواخر صفحات الكتب الأ وهي الخاتمة و التي اعتبرها سقطة بجميع المقاييس برر الغزو الأمريكي انه ليس غزوا بل إن الولايات المتحدة لا تسعي سوي لتنمية إقتصاد أفغانستان و نشر الديمقراطية و هي حجه كل مستعمر
فالأفغان ليسوا بحاجه للامريكان او غيرهم و تاريخهم يشهد بذلك
الأفغان بحاجه الي أن يستنشقوا الحرية التي حرموا منها طويلا ليس أكثر و ذلك سيتحقق بجلاء الامريكان
مايحزني هو مشاهدة الأطفال الأفغانيين وهم يموتون من البرد القارس و لاأحد يساعدهم. إهمال المرأة و كأنها نكرة لا وجود لها.
الي جانب ان المريكان قاموا بعمل مذبحة في الشهر الماضى بقندهار و قتلوا اناس عزل في بيوتهم و هم نأمون من نساء و أطفال وأمهات امام أبنائهم. فأين تلك الديمقراطية؟؟
ثم بعد ذلك تعرض الأفغان للإحتلال البريطاني و الذي كان ضمن اللعبة الكبري أو بمعني أصح كانت بريطانيا تريد تكوين إمبراطوريتها الخاصة وأنضم إليها الروس ولإن ألمانيا جاءت متأخرة فقررت غزو أوروبا
كانت بريطانيا محتلة الهند في ذلك الوقت فرأت أنه لا ضير من توسيع إمبراطوريها الي أفغانستان. فقد كانت بريطانيا تصف الأفغان بالأطفال الصغار الذين من الممكن ترويضهم بسهوله. ولكن لان أفغانستان ذات طبيعة قبلية التي تتوحد تحت الإستعمار و تنحي خلافاتها جانبا فقد هزمتها شر هزيمة ,فما لبثت أن إحتلتها تانيا فهزمت و مرة ثالثة فهزمت
أي ان بريطانيا هزمت ثلاث مرات علي يد الأفغان
بعد ذلك بدأ يتكون الحزب الشيوعي في أفغانستان و الذي كان من خلال السوفيت و لكنه لم يلق ترحيبا كبيرا. فقرر السوفيت غزو أفغانستان من أجل حماية الحزب. في ذلك الوقت بدأت تظهر حركة جديدة للدفاع عن البلاد أطلقت علي نفسها أسم "المجاهدون" و كان زعيمها أحمد شاة مسعود الذي صورته علي غلاف الكتاب ,الملقب بأسد بنجشير
وقد ساهم المجاهدون في إجلاء السوفيت و الدفاع عن البلاد دفاعا مستميتا , بعد أن قام السوفيت بأبشع المجازر في الريف الأفغاني مستغلين عدم أهتمام وسائل الإعلام بذلك
بعد أن غادر السوفيت البلاد بطريقة حفظت لهم كرامتهم, بقيت مخابراتهم الي جانب المخابرات السعودية و الامريكية و الباكستانية!!
بدأ المجاهدون الصراع علي السلطة الي جانب أنهم بداو في زراعة الأفيون ليدير لهم الأرباح
في عام 1996 ظهرت جماعة أطلقت علي نفسها إسم "طالبان" وهي جماعة تنتمي الي الاصولين الاسلامين وزعيمها "الملا عمر" فأصبحت المرأة لا قيمة لها و منع التليفزيون و الموسيقي و التصوير و إطلاق الطائرات الورقية. وظهر الصراع بين المجاهدون و طالبان علي السلطة. ثم بعد ذلك أنشأ بن لادن تنظيم القاعدة في السودان لاعلان الجهاد العالمي لنصرة الإسلام
و الفرق بين طالبان والقاعدة ان الأخيرة كانت لها تمويلات كبيرة كما ان بن لادن له خطط تتسم بالمكر الشديد و طرقا غير إستسنائية
وفي عام 2001 قام صحفيين جزائريين يحملون بطاقات صحفية بلجيكية بإجراء حوار مع مسعود و كان الكاميرا بها قنبلة أودت بحياته, وأتضح بعد ذلك أن هذان الصحفيان من تنظيم القاعدة
فرحت طالبان من التخلص من هذا الخصم العنيد "مسعود" لأن بموته أنتهت حركة المجاهدون
بدأ بن لادن في تنفيذ احداث 11 سبتمبر التي أدت الي أنهيار البرجين بل أدت الي تغيير العلم أجمع
أتاحت تلك الأحداث أن تصبح أفغانستان محتلة من الولايات المتحدة من أجل القضاء علي طالبان و بالفعل تم ذلك, فكانت الطائرات الامريكية تغزو السماء بينما الافغان يتولون المعارك البرية
الي هنا الكتاب أكثر من رائع الي أن الكاتب في اواخر صفحات الكتب الأ وهي الخاتمة و التي اعتبرها سقطة بجميع المقاييس برر الغزو الأمريكي انه ليس غزوا بل إن الولايات المتحدة لا تسعي سوي لتنمية إقتصاد أفغانستان و نشر الديمقراطية و هي حجه كل مستعمر
فالأفغان ليسوا بحاجه للامريكان او غيرهم و تاريخهم يشهد بذلك
الأفغان بحاجه الي أن يستنشقوا الحرية التي حرموا منها طويلا ليس أكثر و ذلك سيتحقق بجلاء الامريكان
مايحزني هو مشاهدة الأطفال الأفغانيين وهم يموتون من البرد القارس و لاأحد يساعدهم. إهمال المرأة و كأنها نكرة لا وجود لها.
الي جانب ان المريكان قاموا بعمل مذبحة في الشهر الماضى بقندهار و قتلوا اناس عزل في بيوتهم و هم نأمون من نساء و أطفال وأمهات امام أبنائهم. فأين تلك الديمقراطية؟؟
March 14, 2012
Interesting.
Tanner is clearly interested in some periods more than others. Up until discussing US involvement in the region, the book felt rushed and became filled with dozens of anti-war arguments I had already heard before, filled with quotes like some British officer saying "We've been grotesquely clumsy -- we've said we'll be different to the Americans who were bombing and strafing villages, then behaved exactly like them."
Where the author falls flat, in my opinion, is when he begins to pontificate on how the United States should have pursued its intervention in that nation. In this instance he betrays a minimal level of understanding ("where were the light parts of the 1st Infantry Division?" being a question he asks, apparently unaware that the current answer is that such don't exist, for instance).
The chapter on the Taliban is lacking.
Some portions don't make any sense, such as this sentence on page 110:
"...Tamerlane's warriors had ridden through Afghanistan covered with chain mail or plate armor, with elaborately crafted (fearsome) helmets..."
What was the point of putting "fearsome" in parentheses, and in that order?
On page 234 he says the US embassy in Pakistan was in Rawalpindi. Wrong. Rawalpindi isn't even the capital.
On page 274 he says that Pakistani dictator Zia ul-Haq and ISI chief Akhtar Rahman were assassinated. True, their plane crashed, but there's no evidence they were assassinated.
It also says that with Hamid Gul in charge of ISI, the CIA could now finally control the arms flow to mujahideen commanders. Actuallly, the CIA had been running its unilateral program for a while, secret from ISI. Is Tanner implying that the CIA assassinated Akhtar and Haq so that they could control the arms flow? That's a little far-fetched.
He then randomly devotes a paragraph to the Gulf War, saying that Hekmatyar rooted for Saddam Hussein, but fails to connect this in any way to Afghanistan. It's true that the CIA delivered weapons it captured from Saddam to the muj in Afghanistan to fight the communist government, but does Tannner mention that? No.
The book does redeem itself a bit in looking at the future of Afghanistan, with the author proposing a rather novel notion of modelling the Afghan government on that of Switzerland. The author makes a decent case for the idea, even if it might sound a bit odd.
He attributes the "Black Hawk Down" incident to Bush 41 and says it cost him the election. WRONG.
He races through the story of the Taliban with no context.
Given that this was published in 2009, he could have taken advantage of newly published works such as:
Weapon of Choice: U.S. Army Special Operations Forces in Afghanistan
Tora Bora Revisited
In the Graveyard of Empires: America's War in Afghanistan
First In: An Insider's Account of How the CIA Spearheaded the War on Terror in Afghanistan
Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Kill Bin Laden: A Delta Force Commander's Account of the Hunt for the World's Most Wanted Man
Killer Elite: The Inside Story of America's Most Secret Special Operations Team
The Only Thing Worth Dying For: How Eleven Green Berets Forged a New Afghanistan
Descent into Chaos: The United States & the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan & Central Asia
Enduring the Freedom: A Rogue Historian in Afghanistan
Air Power Against Terror: America's Conduct of Operation Enduring Freedom
A Different Kind of War: The United States Army in Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, October 2001 - September 2005
War and Decision: Inside the Pentagon at the Dawn of the War on Terrorism
American Soldier
Operation Enduring Freedom: October 2001-March 2002
Descent into Chaos: The United States & the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan & Central Asia
Transforming U.S. Intelligence
But he doesn't. He just considers his old, outdated version good enough and adds only a few paragraphs on the MANY years since the book was originally published. Was it really worth a second edition?
Check this out, but don't expect much; it underwhelms and disappoints.
Tanner is clearly interested in some periods more than others. Up until discussing US involvement in the region, the book felt rushed and became filled with dozens of anti-war arguments I had already heard before, filled with quotes like some British officer saying "We've been grotesquely clumsy -- we've said we'll be different to the Americans who were bombing and strafing villages, then behaved exactly like them."
Where the author falls flat, in my opinion, is when he begins to pontificate on how the United States should have pursued its intervention in that nation. In this instance he betrays a minimal level of understanding ("where were the light parts of the 1st Infantry Division?" being a question he asks, apparently unaware that the current answer is that such don't exist, for instance).
The chapter on the Taliban is lacking.
Some portions don't make any sense, such as this sentence on page 110:
"...Tamerlane's warriors had ridden through Afghanistan covered with chain mail or plate armor, with elaborately crafted (fearsome) helmets..."
What was the point of putting "fearsome" in parentheses, and in that order?
On page 234 he says the US embassy in Pakistan was in Rawalpindi. Wrong. Rawalpindi isn't even the capital.
On page 274 he says that Pakistani dictator Zia ul-Haq and ISI chief Akhtar Rahman were assassinated. True, their plane crashed, but there's no evidence they were assassinated.
It also says that with Hamid Gul in charge of ISI, the CIA could now finally control the arms flow to mujahideen commanders. Actuallly, the CIA had been running its unilateral program for a while, secret from ISI. Is Tanner implying that the CIA assassinated Akhtar and Haq so that they could control the arms flow? That's a little far-fetched.
He then randomly devotes a paragraph to the Gulf War, saying that Hekmatyar rooted for Saddam Hussein, but fails to connect this in any way to Afghanistan. It's true that the CIA delivered weapons it captured from Saddam to the muj in Afghanistan to fight the communist government, but does Tannner mention that? No.
The book does redeem itself a bit in looking at the future of Afghanistan, with the author proposing a rather novel notion of modelling the Afghan government on that of Switzerland. The author makes a decent case for the idea, even if it might sound a bit odd.
He attributes the "Black Hawk Down" incident to Bush 41 and says it cost him the election. WRONG.
He races through the story of the Taliban with no context.
Given that this was published in 2009, he could have taken advantage of newly published works such as:
Weapon of Choice: U.S. Army Special Operations Forces in Afghanistan
Tora Bora Revisited
In the Graveyard of Empires: America's War in Afghanistan
First In: An Insider's Account of How the CIA Spearheaded the War on Terror in Afghanistan
Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Kill Bin Laden: A Delta Force Commander's Account of the Hunt for the World's Most Wanted Man
Killer Elite: The Inside Story of America's Most Secret Special Operations Team
The Only Thing Worth Dying For: How Eleven Green Berets Forged a New Afghanistan
Descent into Chaos: The United States & the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan & Central Asia
Enduring the Freedom: A Rogue Historian in Afghanistan
Air Power Against Terror: America's Conduct of Operation Enduring Freedom
A Different Kind of War: The United States Army in Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, October 2001 - September 2005
War and Decision: Inside the Pentagon at the Dawn of the War on Terrorism
American Soldier
Operation Enduring Freedom: October 2001-March 2002
Descent into Chaos: The United States & the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan & Central Asia
Transforming U.S. Intelligence
But he doesn't. He just considers his old, outdated version good enough and adds only a few paragraphs on the MANY years since the book was originally published. Was it really worth a second edition?
Check this out, but don't expect much; it underwhelms and disappoints.
September 28, 2015
كتاب تاريخي يتحدث عن تاريخ أفغانستان العسكري وعن طبيعة هذا البلد القاسية وماتحتويه من قبائل وأعراق مختلفه..هذا البلد عانى عقود من الحروب والغزو الاجنبي وحدثت بة مجازر عظمية..وعدم قدر المحتل سيطرة على البلد ..العجيب في هذا الشعب أنه عندما يتم غزوه من قوى اجنبيه يتحدوا لمقاتلته وعندما يتم طرد المحتل يعودوا لنزاعاتهم الداخليه..وهذا ماحدث فعلا بعد خروج السوفيت ودخول المجاهدين في حرب أهلية..أستفدت من الكتاب معلومات كثيرة مثيرة عن تاريخ هذا البلد الغامض لدي..أزلت نجمة الكاتب صور الامريكيون باأنهم المنقذين للافغان وتغاضى عن كل جرائم الامريكيون وصورها بأنها مجرد أخطاء
...............
كتاب يستحق القراءه لمن مهتم بتاريخ هذا البلد
...............
كتاب يستحق القراءه لمن مهتم بتاريخ هذا البلد
December 18, 2019
This was an OK book. It is as the title describes; a chronological look at the history of military conflict in Afghanistan.
While it was a very detailed account of such, I found the writing to be overly dry and arduous. I noticed my attention wandering many times while reading. "Afghanistan: A Military History from Alexander the Great to the War against the Taliban" is written in the style of a school textbook, instead of an engaging, interesting account with a cohesive theme.
3 stars.
While it was a very detailed account of such, I found the writing to be overly dry and arduous. I noticed my attention wandering many times while reading. "Afghanistan: A Military History from Alexander the Great to the War against the Taliban" is written in the style of a school textbook, instead of an engaging, interesting account with a cohesive theme.
3 stars.
January 31, 2012
THE definitive guide to the military history of Afghanistan..the blow by blow account of all the struggles which have taken place in this stony and sterile land, very well researched and something which I would recommend as I am (historically ) speaking myself a Afghan and have lived there for most of my life.
October 10, 2009
Bought it for reference while serving in Afghanistan. Couldn't put it down, very educational.
July 5, 2009
I thought the book was very good overall. The sections which talked about Alexander and the British were exciting reading, but I felt that the parts about the US in Afghanistan were rushed and over-simplified.
For a really good, in-depth analysis of Operation Anaconda and the events in the Shah-i-Kot valley, read "Not a Good Day to Die" by Sean Naylor. It covers in detail the background behind why the US did things the way it did and details the confusion of US reliance on airborne troops and light weapons and how politics at the nation-state level and battle field command seldom mix. In this book, I thought the sections on the US may have been written, or at least edited, by Michael Moore.
I don't know Stephen Tanner's political leanings, but it seemed to me that up until this point in the book (talking about the US) his work was based solely on reporting facts, without a judgment on the authors part. Once he began discussing US involvement in Afghanistan the book seemed to become just another anti-war piece of propaganda, filled with quotes like this one on page 334 by Captain Les Doherty of the Scots Guards: "We've been grotesquely clumsy -- we've said we'll be different to the Americans who were bombing and strafing villages, then behaved exactly like them."
The end of the book is jam packed with page after page of emotion tugging stories of atrocities or knuckle-headed mistakes by US troops and leaders. I really enjoyed the book up to this point, but I was sorely disappointed with the last bit. I still rate the book highly for the majority of the book, but I would hope that the next book Mr. Tanner writes is written just as impartially as the first part of this one.
For a really good, in-depth analysis of Operation Anaconda and the events in the Shah-i-Kot valley, read "Not a Good Day to Die" by Sean Naylor. It covers in detail the background behind why the US did things the way it did and details the confusion of US reliance on airborne troops and light weapons and how politics at the nation-state level and battle field command seldom mix. In this book, I thought the sections on the US may have been written, or at least edited, by Michael Moore.
I don't know Stephen Tanner's political leanings, but it seemed to me that up until this point in the book (talking about the US) his work was based solely on reporting facts, without a judgment on the authors part. Once he began discussing US involvement in Afghanistan the book seemed to become just another anti-war piece of propaganda, filled with quotes like this one on page 334 by Captain Les Doherty of the Scots Guards: "We've been grotesquely clumsy -- we've said we'll be different to the Americans who were bombing and strafing villages, then behaved exactly like them."
The end of the book is jam packed with page after page of emotion tugging stories of atrocities or knuckle-headed mistakes by US troops and leaders. I really enjoyed the book up to this point, but I was sorely disappointed with the last bit. I still rate the book highly for the majority of the book, but I would hope that the next book Mr. Tanner writes is written just as impartially as the first part of this one.
August 29, 2011
Not sure who came up with the title of this book, because if it was intended to describe the content of the book, then it should say 'tidbits of military history'. The author covers three periods in any detail: Alexanders conquest and subsequent Successor period, late 18th century, i.e. when British Empire played a high stakes game with Russia and finally the post-World War 2 period, with focus on Soviet invasion and developments after Soviet withdrawal. Naturally the last part covers the post-9/11 events. There are several issues with this book, but it also has some strong points. My main problem is the huge gap in history of the country that is simply missing. Also, sections about Alexander/Successor period and British envolvement in Afghanistan have been covered better and in greater detail by other writers, so I would almost be willing to consider them as fillers leading to the real strength of the book, which is analysis of modern history of Afghanistan. This last part is where the strength of the book is hidden, as it gives clear, albeit far too short overview of events starting with Soviet invasion and ending on the unconclusive multi-national military presence in today's Afghanistan.
Also, last couple of pages, where Tanner presents his final analysis of the Afghan quandrum and a potential solution is very insightfull and rather suprising in its logic. This couple of pages should become mandatory reading for any politician trying to solve the Taliban problem.
Also, last couple of pages, where Tanner presents his final analysis of the Afghan quandrum and a potential solution is very insightfull and rather suprising in its logic. This couple of pages should become mandatory reading for any politician trying to solve the Taliban problem.
January 4, 2021
Afghanistan is often regarded as the graveyard of empires and the author generally does a good job bearing out the historical reality behind that often touted phrase. Tanner begins his history using Greek literary sources rather than archaeology with his chronology first beginning during the Persian Empire's influence in the area. The first two chapters pack quite a bit and discuss Alexander's march into the region, the Greco-Bactrian kingdom, Seleucids, Mauryans, Kushans, Sacae and Hepthalites, followed by Turkic peoples such as the Samanids, Ghaznavids and Ghorids. This is followed by the Mongols after which a chapter more properly dedicated to the nationalist beginnings of Afghanistan and the Durrani empire and its role throughout the Biritish Raj follow eventually leading to chapters on the Soviets and the Afghan Civil War before a concluding chapter on the American mission in Afghanistan that had been underway at the time of the authors writing in 2002.
The sheer breadth of the history of the region that is now Afghanistan is evident but it's clear that the author focused on particular periods more than others. Some periods were glossed over while others had been given due attention. The chapters on Alexander's campaigns in the region, the Mongol campaigns and the First Anglo-Afghan War and the soviet involvement and invasion and subsequent Civil War were the stronger chapters in the book and had a more narrative quality due to their focus. Other chapters packed in a dizzying chronology of events that instilled more a recognition of the historical activity of the region compared to the more narratively focused chapters. The last chapter on the American invasion seemed hastily written which perhaps it was given that the book was published while boots were still landing on the ground.
Another strength of the book was the emphasis on military history as a subject matter. Discussion of movements, regiments, hardware, tactics and discussion of theories of military innovation and their effects were rife throughout the book. A particularly interesting section for instance discusses the role that gunpowder and rifles played in shifting the power balance from steppes nomadic warriors to settled peoples with the author arguing that this particularly allowed the Pashtuns to rise in ascendancy.
The final chapter was probably the weakest chapter and at times, the author juxtaposed events occurring in Afghanistan with those occurring in Israel seemingly implying a connection without outright stating so. It isn't until the afterword that he explicitly is clear of his view of the conflict thru a clash of civilization lens, where he concludes with an afterword brimming with optimism that seems quaint with the benefit of 2021 hindsight. Still, as a brief historical overview of Afghan political history, the book overall did a good job.
The sheer breadth of the history of the region that is now Afghanistan is evident but it's clear that the author focused on particular periods more than others. Some periods were glossed over while others had been given due attention. The chapters on Alexander's campaigns in the region, the Mongol campaigns and the First Anglo-Afghan War and the soviet involvement and invasion and subsequent Civil War were the stronger chapters in the book and had a more narrative quality due to their focus. Other chapters packed in a dizzying chronology of events that instilled more a recognition of the historical activity of the region compared to the more narratively focused chapters. The last chapter on the American invasion seemed hastily written which perhaps it was given that the book was published while boots were still landing on the ground.
Another strength of the book was the emphasis on military history as a subject matter. Discussion of movements, regiments, hardware, tactics and discussion of theories of military innovation and their effects were rife throughout the book. A particularly interesting section for instance discusses the role that gunpowder and rifles played in shifting the power balance from steppes nomadic warriors to settled peoples with the author arguing that this particularly allowed the Pashtuns to rise in ascendancy.
The final chapter was probably the weakest chapter and at times, the author juxtaposed events occurring in Afghanistan with those occurring in Israel seemingly implying a connection without outright stating so. It isn't until the afterword that he explicitly is clear of his view of the conflict thru a clash of civilization lens, where he concludes with an afterword brimming with optimism that seems quaint with the benefit of 2021 hindsight. Still, as a brief historical overview of Afghan political history, the book overall did a good job.
October 15, 2021
While some parts of this were a bit dry, the author did a pretty good job of keeping it interesting for the most part. It would be cool to see an updated version to include the U.S. exit from Afghanistan.
January 17, 2020
Great, straightforward overview that does well in drawing parallels between British, Soviet, and American military campaigns.
August 10, 2010
This is a very comprehensive history of the region between Iran and India from ancient times up to the invasion by the U.S. in 2002.
Historically the area has been invaded and partially conquered many times, beginning with Alexander the Great.
The lesson of history has been that Afghanistan is very easy to enter because they have never had an effective central national or regional government that would immediately repel attempted attacks.
And the next lesson is that Afghanistan is very difficult to hold, once it has been invaded, becuase the verious native tribes are perhaps the most fearsome fighters in the world, once they unite to repel the foreign invaders.
The third lesson is that worst part for the invader is when they finally attempt to leave because the tribes are also perhaps the most brutal and barbaric people on earth. They will offer peace to the retreating foe and then slaughter without mercy.
Witness the execution style murder of 10 innocent aid workers this past week.
They are basically a corrupt culture that somehow froze in moral developemnt around a thousand years ago.
In the end the author raises as a question whether Afghanistan can actually become a nation.
Historically the area has been invaded and partially conquered many times, beginning with Alexander the Great.
The lesson of history has been that Afghanistan is very easy to enter because they have never had an effective central national or regional government that would immediately repel attempted attacks.
And the next lesson is that Afghanistan is very difficult to hold, once it has been invaded, becuase the verious native tribes are perhaps the most fearsome fighters in the world, once they unite to repel the foreign invaders.
The third lesson is that worst part for the invader is when they finally attempt to leave because the tribes are also perhaps the most brutal and barbaric people on earth. They will offer peace to the retreating foe and then slaughter without mercy.
Witness the execution style murder of 10 innocent aid workers this past week.
They are basically a corrupt culture that somehow froze in moral developemnt around a thousand years ago.
In the end the author raises as a question whether Afghanistan can actually become a nation.
August 13, 2014
It was nice to have find a source of detailed history focusing on Afghanistan and have a picture painted of what shaped the environment. For me being able to have a clear context to understand past and present wars and conquests in this part of the world was a tremendous help. It basically provided a road map of the current tribes existing nowadays. It helped me understand the people, various groups, and families who continue fighting blood-feuds over grudges held from past generations. I expect to read this book again to refresh my memory on specific details. My reading experience was both interesting and informative.
May 9, 2010
In the authors view, Afghanistan is not really a country, but a collection of tribes that really want to be independent and allowed to fight each other as they wish. The borders were drawn by the British to keep Russia away from India and split the largest tribe in two different countries. The fighting strength is the people of the country not the people of the cities. A difficult place to get out of once you stick your head into the honey jar.
March 7, 2013
After reading Kite Runner, Splendor of a Thousand Suns, and Three Cups of Tea, my interest in the history of the area was piqued. This excellent overview of 2500 years of invasion and resistance has proved to be a very readable discussion of military actions in Afghanistan from Alexander to the Taliban -- an interesting, detailed overview. Good quote: The democratic genie needs to be let out of the bottle gradually, lest its first fumes overwhelm all those nearby.
October 1, 2015
غزير بحضارات ومعلومات طالما بحثت عنها..
April 28, 2021
This book is a general survey about exactly what it says in the subtitle, although not exactly how I expected it to be told, as it tended to focus on the bigger pictures, rather than Afghanistan itself.
Pre-19th century, Tanner describes wars that mostly took place outside of Afghanistan in great detail, and included them only because at some point in during the war, part of the fight would happen in Afghanistan. This mainly included the perpetual Greek-Persian conflicts and the Mongol invasions of China and central Asia. It was almost more of a story of Afghanistan being a bystander in everyone else's wars. Afghanistan was treated as just another battlefront, rather than the focus of the study, which seems contrary to the title of this book. For most of it, I was willing to accept that Tanner had limited resources from which to draw information, since Afghanistan doesn't have a strong culture of literacy or academia, but I was frustrated by the lack of acknowledgement of the fault and what seemed to be an unconscious bias towards traditional Western alliances; it always felt like Tanner was rooting for the Greeks over Persia or any other Asian civilization.
In the 19th century and later, Tanner clearly had a lot more primary and secondary resources to draw from with the invasions by the English, Soviets, and Americans. Again, Tanner always seemed to display an unconscious bias towards Western powers, and to a lesser extent, the Soviet Union over Afghanistan. He did make some interesting comparisons between Afghanistan and Switzerland that I'd never heard before.
I was torn between giving this book three or four stars for most of it; that unconscious bias really bothered me, and I was expecting a more Afghanistan focused study, rather than something more general to Central Asia. But Tanner clearly did do a lot of research and by focusing on the bigger picture, he did put the country of Afghanistan into context, even if not its human elements.
Having been written in 2002, this book desperately needs an update covering from the capture of Osama bin Laden to the rise of ISIS.
Then came the Afterward, where Tanner took off his mask and started explicitly stating his opinions. Ho boy, did they back up my every fear making the unconsciousness of his bias now dubious. Tanner argued for stronger military intervention, argued against using drones and other UAV's, and other war hawk philosophies. Which in itself wasn't a deal-breaker, but the final offensive straw was that Tanner failed to provide solid arguments for his impassioned rants, turning an opportunity for quality debate into a right-wing shit show, undermining his credibility for the whole book.
Pre-19th century, Tanner describes wars that mostly took place outside of Afghanistan in great detail, and included them only because at some point in during the war, part of the fight would happen in Afghanistan. This mainly included the perpetual Greek-Persian conflicts and the Mongol invasions of China and central Asia. It was almost more of a story of Afghanistan being a bystander in everyone else's wars. Afghanistan was treated as just another battlefront, rather than the focus of the study, which seems contrary to the title of this book. For most of it, I was willing to accept that Tanner had limited resources from which to draw information, since Afghanistan doesn't have a strong culture of literacy or academia, but I was frustrated by the lack of acknowledgement of the fault and what seemed to be an unconscious bias towards traditional Western alliances; it always felt like Tanner was rooting for the Greeks over Persia or any other Asian civilization.
In the 19th century and later, Tanner clearly had a lot more primary and secondary resources to draw from with the invasions by the English, Soviets, and Americans. Again, Tanner always seemed to display an unconscious bias towards Western powers, and to a lesser extent, the Soviet Union over Afghanistan. He did make some interesting comparisons between Afghanistan and Switzerland that I'd never heard before.
I was torn between giving this book three or four stars for most of it; that unconscious bias really bothered me, and I was expecting a more Afghanistan focused study, rather than something more general to Central Asia. But Tanner clearly did do a lot of research and by focusing on the bigger picture, he did put the country of Afghanistan into context, even if not its human elements.
Having been written in 2002, this book desperately needs an update covering from the capture of Osama bin Laden to the rise of ISIS.
Then came the Afterward, where Tanner took off his mask and started explicitly stating his opinions. Ho boy, did they back up my every fear making the unconsciousness of his bias now dubious. Tanner argued for stronger military intervention, argued against using drones and other UAV's, and other war hawk philosophies. Which in itself wasn't a deal-breaker, but the final offensive straw was that Tanner failed to provide solid arguments for his impassioned rants, turning an opportunity for quality debate into a right-wing shit show, undermining his credibility for the whole book.
December 10, 2024
#NonfictionGeek
#Bookreview
𝐀𝐟𝐠𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧 by 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐫
(A Military History from Alexander the Great to the War Against the Taliban)
This book must be read before invading the land of Afghanistan. I would say the author meticulously outlines the military history of Afghanistan from ancient Greeks to modern-day Afghanistan.
Alexander the Great was the first Western power to enter Afghanistan around 330 BC. Then The Scythian Empire and the Bactria Empire ruled this rugged land. The modern-day consists mainly of Western Afghanistan. Alexander invasions was till Jaxrates River. But after founding cities after his name he could not hold the garrisons because horse riders from steppe start raiding static positions.
After Alexander came Kushan Empire, the Muraya's Empire, the Mongols, and Tamerlane. Everyone ramshackle the rugged country Urban centres but real strength lies their Countryside and FootHills of Eastern Afghanistan where Ghilzai tribe scattered across Durand line. Invading Afghanistan is easy but holding on to it is Herculean task keeping view alienated people living in rugged mountains from centuries Which outlined in subsequent chapters of Anglo-Afghan Wars and Massacre of 1st British military expedition on their Retreat to British India.
After covering Inter Afghanistan feuds for power, come Soviet invasion and then last covered the USA invasion of Afghanistan. How Soviet and USA euphoria of rapid victory starts to fade away in coming years.
It is an excellent read as per Historical perspective.
#Recommended!
#Thanks
#Bookreview
𝐀𝐟𝐠𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧 by 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐫
(A Military History from Alexander the Great to the War Against the Taliban)
This book must be read before invading the land of Afghanistan. I would say the author meticulously outlines the military history of Afghanistan from ancient Greeks to modern-day Afghanistan.
Alexander the Great was the first Western power to enter Afghanistan around 330 BC. Then The Scythian Empire and the Bactria Empire ruled this rugged land. The modern-day consists mainly of Western Afghanistan. Alexander invasions was till Jaxrates River. But after founding cities after his name he could not hold the garrisons because horse riders from steppe start raiding static positions.
After Alexander came Kushan Empire, the Muraya's Empire, the Mongols, and Tamerlane. Everyone ramshackle the rugged country Urban centres but real strength lies their Countryside and FootHills of Eastern Afghanistan where Ghilzai tribe scattered across Durand line. Invading Afghanistan is easy but holding on to it is Herculean task keeping view alienated people living in rugged mountains from centuries Which outlined in subsequent chapters of Anglo-Afghan Wars and Massacre of 1st British military expedition on their Retreat to British India.
After covering Inter Afghanistan feuds for power, come Soviet invasion and then last covered the USA invasion of Afghanistan. How Soviet and USA euphoria of rapid victory starts to fade away in coming years.
It is an excellent read as per Historical perspective.
#Recommended!
#Thanks
May 18, 2020
My rule is to read 3 chapters of a book before deciding if it is really worth my time, but I fell short of that threshold for this book. I am uncertain as to what qualifies the author as a "military historian" beyond an armchair interest in military history, but it seems clear to me that he is not an expert in the subject, and I would bet that he has never visited Afghanistan.
The writing is, for me, too uncritical, giving too much weight to the spectacular / speculative details of individual battles. For example, in Tanner's telling, Darius III, the "Great King" of Persia, was the first Persian to retreat from battle when confronted by the "military genius" of Alexander the Great, despite assembling the largest army in the history of man. Tanner concedes the original death tolls, listed in the tens of thousands among the Persians and a few hundred among the Greeks, are absurd, but is also adamant that we "must accept" the existence of Amazons (a race of huge, warlike females) due to some obscure findings of recent archeological digs.
I happily anticipate removing this book from my shelf and adding it to the Little Free Library down the street.
The writing is, for me, too uncritical, giving too much weight to the spectacular / speculative details of individual battles. For example, in Tanner's telling, Darius III, the "Great King" of Persia, was the first Persian to retreat from battle when confronted by the "military genius" of Alexander the Great, despite assembling the largest army in the history of man. Tanner concedes the original death tolls, listed in the tens of thousands among the Persians and a few hundred among the Greeks, are absurd, but is also adamant that we "must accept" the existence of Amazons (a race of huge, warlike females) due to some obscure findings of recent archeological digs.
I happily anticipate removing this book from my shelf and adding it to the Little Free Library down the street.
January 18, 2022
As a big history buff this was a great analysis of the peoples and wars in what today is known as Afghanistan. The crossroads of the east and the west come together in the Hindu Kush, a harsh landscape that has shaped the peoples there as much as if not more so than the Empire games played in the plains below to the east and west of it. From Alexander the Great in the 350 BC, the Persians, Parthian’s, mongols, the Islamic caliphates, Timur, the English in the 1800’s to the Soviet occupation, empire after empire has fallen to the coalition of tribes United more by cultural and ethnic ties than to any nation in the modern sense.
You’d think with 2000 years of military failure by Empire after Empire the United States would have learned a thing or two before going whole hog for the last 20 years. While this was written just after the 9/11 attacks and lacks the updates on of the “War on Terror”
As the US conflict in Afghanistan has “ended” this was a great read on the many reasons why the venture was doomed to fail in the first place. Anyone who wants to learn more about it can gain many insights from this military analysis.
You’d think with 2000 years of military failure by Empire after Empire the United States would have learned a thing or two before going whole hog for the last 20 years. While this was written just after the 9/11 attacks and lacks the updates on of the “War on Terror”
As the US conflict in Afghanistan has “ended” this was a great read on the many reasons why the venture was doomed to fail in the first place. Anyone who wants to learn more about it can gain many insights from this military analysis.
September 12, 2021
As with lots of other people I was impelled by recent events in Afghanistan to want to learn more and so I looked for a couple of easy accessible histories, which would inform my understanding of how recent events came about. This work by Tanner has proven to be be an excellent thought provoking and highly informative book. It reads well and provides a detailed and knowledgeable narrative of the history of the place we now call Afghanistan. A highly recommended work suitable for everyone who needs a little light shone on a stunning example what happens when nations seek to use their power to subjugate others for their own selfish/political or supposed moral reasons. The USA's latest incursions in the region were impelled by the events of 9/11, the consequences for the people of the region has been horrendous and only the latest in a continuum of invasions by foreign powers for a variety of reasons non of which were for the betterment of the people of the region. Very happy I read this.
January 31, 2020
Audio.
Did the narrator hardly suppressed a yawn now nad then or was it just me imagining it?
OK, so I decided to read a history of Afghanistan. What I didn't expect was to get a 2CD overview of Alexander the Great campaign, including the history of ancient Greece and Persia. How is it related to Afghanistan? Well, for sure, Alexander must have gone there. Fought, possibly. Somebody wrote a few irrelevant notes on the backwardness of local barbarians. OK, but 2 CDs? A fifth of the book spent on something very distantly related to Afghanistan?
I was so bored I skipped to the Soviet invasion and the later American invasion and I realized I must be living in a very different alternative reality than the author of the book. In his alt-reality, the Americans managed to conquer the land and defeat Taliban. In 2020, this claim seems as far-fetched as the presumed death of Dr. Livingstone.
Did the narrator hardly suppressed a yawn now nad then or was it just me imagining it?
OK, so I decided to read a history of Afghanistan. What I didn't expect was to get a 2CD overview of Alexander the Great campaign, including the history of ancient Greece and Persia. How is it related to Afghanistan? Well, for sure, Alexander must have gone there. Fought, possibly. Somebody wrote a few irrelevant notes on the backwardness of local barbarians. OK, but 2 CDs? A fifth of the book spent on something very distantly related to Afghanistan?
I was so bored I skipped to the Soviet invasion and the later American invasion and I realized I must be living in a very different alternative reality than the author of the book. In his alt-reality, the Americans managed to conquer the land and defeat Taliban. In 2020, this claim seems as far-fetched as the presumed death of Dr. Livingstone.
December 20, 2020
A decent book. Tanner goes into good detail with ancient and medieval history. One gets the feeling though that he has written the history in anticipation of the American section. He goes into much, much more detail with the two American chapters but it still somehow seems rushed.
Tanner also perpetuates the myth that the Stinger missiles turned the tide of the war. They were introduced in 1986 but Gorbachev had in fact already decided to withdraw as early as 1985.
In general the Soviet perspectives in the work have clearly been taken at a tactical level rather than from a strategic/geopolitical level. Given his use of Lester Grau's work (very good by the way) this is not surprising. For a deeper look at the thoughts of Soviet leadership and that of the Afghan communist party I would suggest reading "Afghantsy" by Rodric Braithwaite instead.
Overall, not bad as an overview but definitely limited.
Tanner also perpetuates the myth that the Stinger missiles turned the tide of the war. They were introduced in 1986 but Gorbachev had in fact already decided to withdraw as early as 1985.
In general the Soviet perspectives in the work have clearly been taken at a tactical level rather than from a strategic/geopolitical level. Given his use of Lester Grau's work (very good by the way) this is not surprising. For a deeper look at the thoughts of Soviet leadership and that of the Afghan communist party I would suggest reading "Afghantsy" by Rodric Braithwaite instead.
Overall, not bad as an overview but definitely limited.
February 21, 2022
I got what I needed from this book which was a summary of recorded military history. There’s not much on the culture of the tribes. And women’s status and rights being what they are in this area of the world, I can count on one hand the number of women mentioned in passing. While I wish I had more on these subjects, I did appreciate how the author provided context to events Afghanistan by orienting the reader to other moments in history.
Because I didn’t need the name of every commander and tribal chief over multiple millennia, there were some passages I skipped, but I have just as many highlighted sections where I came away with an astounding sense of how many times people bungled warfare in this country. Simply. Stunning. And I suppose - now that the US has left Afghanistan to the Taliban - the next chapter will be more history repeating itself.
Because I didn’t need the name of every commander and tribal chief over multiple millennia, there were some passages I skipped, but I have just as many highlighted sections where I came away with an astounding sense of how many times people bungled warfare in this country. Simply. Stunning. And I suppose - now that the US has left Afghanistan to the Taliban - the next chapter will be more history repeating itself.
September 30, 2020
This book takes the reader from ancient history to current events in one long exhausting sweep. For a reader unfamiliar with the country, it is difficult to take onboard so much detail, especially without a good set of maps. I learned a lot that I didn't know, particularly about Alexander the Great, the hubris of the British, and Pashtunistan. As I turned the pages, I became deeply weary of the endless cycle of bloodshed, the constant ambushes, battles, and retreats, the numbers of killed and wounded. Weariness is perhaps exactly the right takeaway for a book about Afghanistan, although I did wonder how reliable the figures are.
January 29, 2023
Great history on Afghanistan
This is very thorough historical account of the military events involving Afghanistan leading up to the Taliban. It provide excellent context as to why so many wars in Afghanistan have failed to result in lasting change. The main point of the book is that wars in this country are not about politics or economics, but about a culture. The people of Afghanistan are very resistant to people coming outside of their country, and trying to engage cultural change. In addition, the fact that Afghanistan lacks a lot of the infrastructure of other countries (for example, defined roads and mountainous terrain) makes military actions difficult.
This is very thorough historical account of the military events involving Afghanistan leading up to the Taliban. It provide excellent context as to why so many wars in Afghanistan have failed to result in lasting change. The main point of the book is that wars in this country are not about politics or economics, but about a culture. The people of Afghanistan are very resistant to people coming outside of their country, and trying to engage cultural change. In addition, the fact that Afghanistan lacks a lot of the infrastructure of other countries (for example, defined roads and mountainous terrain) makes military actions difficult.
September 6, 2021
This well researched and very readable book is certainly topical at this moment. The failures of understanding and of action during the early Russian and US military campaigns have been sadly repeated leading to the failure of the most recent efforts and the tragic exit.
Stephen Tanner's recounting of the early history featuring Alexander the Great and the hordes of other invaders makes a great ripping yarn as he chronicles Afghanistan's role as a key center of the world changing gradually to a remote and little known place.
Stephen Tanner's recounting of the early history featuring Alexander the Great and the hordes of other invaders makes a great ripping yarn as he chronicles Afghanistan's role as a key center of the world changing gradually to a remote and little known place.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 129 reviews