Interaction with article 'Withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan (2020–2021)'[edit]

I've notified editors of Withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan (2020–2021) in regards to this page. My thinking is that this operation will eventually merit it's own article even if the current details and depth are limited as of this date. Especially because that page is specific to military operations (troops) while this is in regards to the civilian evacuation which now has it's own operation designation as of July 2021. _ morde t .. 04:54, 13 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lede[edit]

Lede says "Operation Allies Refuge is an ongoing United States military operation to airlift selected at-risk Afghan civilians, particularly translators, U.S. embassy employees, and other prospective Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) applicants, from Afghanistan." Later on, in "Number of individuals", the article mention U.S. citizens. From this source, does Operation Allies Refuge include U.S. citizens, U.S. permananent residents? If so, change lede to "Operation Allies Refuge is an ongoing United States military operation to airlift selected U.S Citizens, U.S. permanent residents,at-risk Afghan civilians, particularly translators, U.S. embassy employees, and other prospective Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) applicants, from Afghanistan."? Manabimasu (talk) 00:36, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AllProposed merge of Operation Pitting with Operation ies Refuge[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To not merge as the topics are distinct, independently notable and the text is long enough to support separate articles. Klbrain (talk) 17:25, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should be one article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:05, 21 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible, but couldn't be at either title.. 2021 Western evacuation from Afghanistan? Could include all NATO and other evac efforts; see https://www.facebook.com/keksifarm.hayday/posts/2953165958287297. Buckshot06 (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why should it be the same article when they’re two completely different operations carried out by two different countries? TheArmchairSoldier (talk) 16:24, 21 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

General, all-country update from Kabul dated Sunday Aug 22

Source:https://www.facebook.com/keksifarm.hayday/posts/2954658698138023. Let's get the data copied into a talk page so it's not forgotten/lost again.

- 400-500 AIA and NDS commandos are still there holding the perimeter of the Kabul IAP. What happened with up to 50,000 other personnel of the two agencies, nor if anybody in the Washington DC might ever come to the idea to try saving them – is unknown.

- Austrian Chancellor Kurz proudly announced he’s against taking in ‘any more’ Afghans… Instead, Austrian government is going to pay one of neighbouring states to take in the refugees…

- After growing pressure at home, the Australian PM ordered the RAAF into action. - 1 C-17A flight evacuated 26 on/around 17 August, another 76 were evacuated by a RAF (British) transport on Thursday, 19 August.

- Is permitting aircraft carrying evacuees to stop and refuel – and that’s it (I’m always flashed by the much-praised ‘Islamic solidarity’)

- 2 C-130s and 1 A.400M (from Luxemburg) are involved; couldn’t find additional details right now.

- 2 C-17As involved since Thursday, 19 August.

- 2 C-130Js are used to evacuate Danes and eligible Afghans to Islamabad, from there they’re flown to Denmakr by airliners chartered from Sweden, including SAS A.320NEOs registered as SE-ROG and SE-DYC, plus the DAT MD-83 OY-RUE. An SF detachment is involved, but I’m not sure if it’s still at Kabul IAP.

- Spain has two teams deployed at Kabul IAP: a squadron of EZAPAC (SF troops) and one from GEO (SWAT asset). They run several externals into Kabul over the last days – until stopped by US commanders, like everybody else. - Contrary to its troops, the government was a mess in regards of Afghanistan, initially, but now official Spain announced it is providing two additional military bases as transit stations for Afghan evacuees: Moron (de la Frontera) AB, near Seville, and Naval Air Station Rota, near Cadiz.

- Top cover provided by F/A-18E/Fs from USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76) - After holding back everybody else for days, Vasely and Donahue have granted permission for an US external: yesterday, at least 96 Afghans were evacuated by CH-47 helicopters to Kabul IAP. - 2,500 US nationals were evacuated over the last six days, and then 3,800 over the last 24 hours. It remains unclear how many US citizens are still in the country, but plan is now to fly 5,000 Afghan nationals to the UAE, on temporary basis (for 10 days), of course.

Ah yes, and right on Haqqani’s heels, and in addition to the Taliban releasing thousands of the TTP from Afghan jails, another lovely piece of news is that the ‘Islamic State of Khorasan’ (IS-K or ISIS-K) – the Afghan branch of the Daesh – is active again: supposedly, it’s planning a terror attack on the Kabul IAP. Surely enough, the IS-K was smashed by the ‘non-fighting’ Afghan Army and the USA, back in 2019, and is it at war with the Taliban.." (Tom Cooper Facebook page)

Why is this here?Yaakovaryeh (talk) 05:16, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Did you not read the discussion above? (1) Discussion over merging US, UK evac articles (2) discussion over necessity of adding other countries' efforts into a wider article on whole evacuation (3) necessity of *data* for said wider article (4) location of excellent source, though not up to WP:RS, by multiple published journalist/author Tom Cooper on Facebook (2 posts) (5) necessity of not losing the information so that it can be verified and added in time (6) data copied over to a talk page. Buckshot06 (talk) 05:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Conflation of "Operation Allies Refuge" with general evacuation[edit]

Operation Allies Refuge was originally "to support the relocation (flights) of interested and eligible Afghan nationals and their immediate families who supported the U.S. Government and applied for a Special Immigrant Visa (SIV)."[1][2][3] However, since the Fall of Kabul, focus has shifted and the page has essentially become an article about the general US evacuation. The question is, has "Operation Allies Refuge" officially changed and expanded to include the general evacuation?

According to my Google search, the vast majority of the time "Operation Allies Refuge" is used to refer to the original operation to relocate Afghan nationals, and rarely used to refer to, or when discussing, the general evacuation. However, I did find several times where it does seem to be used to refer to general evacuation:

"Operation Allies Refuge is facilitating the quick, safe evacuation of U.S. citizens, Special Immigrant Visa applicants and other at-risk Afghans from Afghanistan."[4][5]

"A U.S. Air Force C-17 Globemaster III, assigned to the 816th Expeditionary Airlift Squadron, flies to Hamid Karzai International Airport (HKIA), Afghanistan, in support of Operation Allies Refuge, Aug. 17, 2021. The Department of Defense is committed to supporting the U.S. State Department in the departure of U.S. and allied civilian personnel from Afghanistan, and to evacuate Afghan allies safely."[6]

"U.S. Soldiers, assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division, arrive to provide security in support of Operation Allies Refuge at Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul" - Caption of image from Aug. 20 2021[7][8]

This usage from the State Department Spokesperson may be indicative one way or the other, but not sure:

"...we have dramatically increased capacity over recent days. And this, of course, is capacity that is on top of Operation Allies Refuge, which we launched in the middle of last month to begin the airlift operation for a segment of the SIV population... mid-last month announced the launch of Operation Allies Refuge, and this was the effort to bring – actually bring to this country SIV applicants who had completed a certain stage of the security vetting process. That effort is now very much still underway, although in a different form..."[9]

If creating a new article, it should probably be a general article on the Kabul Airport evacuations of all countries, or perhaps better yet, reactions to the fall of Kabul (which I've been considering anyway given how long the Fall of Kabul article is getting).Yaakovaryeh (talk) 02:44, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No. A post on Twitter in the last few days indicated that the new, second, post-SIV operation was unnamed at the time. I may be able to find that again, but (a) would only prove a negative at the time; and (b) editors are being snippy about using Twitter as a reference. Secondly, Reactions to the 2021 Fall of Kabul has already been created, and has been nominated for deletion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reactions to the 2021 Fall of Kabul). Buckshot06 (talk) 04:27, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Of course a random post on Twitter is not a reliable source. Was is based on anything?Yaakovaryeh (talk) 05:15, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think you fully understand. Journalists write stories, yes; but they also post on Twitter just like everyone else, and data comes out that way before they submit the stories to editors (who may or may not approve them for publishing). See for example Clarissa Ward, a CNN correspondent who tweeted from beside the runway three days ago "Soldiers by the runway at Kabul airport tell me that there are 10,000 people here processed and ready to go… but nowhere to fly them to because Qatar is refusing to accept more Afghans because they’ve reached capacity. “It’s abysmal… someone needs to step up.” [1]. Al Jazeera today indirectly confirmed the problems with backups in places like Qatar [2], as well as the Washington Post. So yes, very much so they can be "based on something." WP needs to at some point reevaluate its reliable sources rulings based upon the identity of some people posting on Twitter, who are the sources of the newspaper articles we accept as reliable sources (!!) Buckshot06 (talk) 05:26, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References[edit]

  1. ^ "Operation Allies Refuge". U.S. Embassy in Afghanistan. 17 July 2021.
  2. ^ "FACT SHEET: Department of Defense Support in the Continental United States to Operation Al". U.S. Northern Command.
  3. ^ "Task Force Eagle hosts Afghan special immigrants at Fort Lee". www.army.mil.
  4. ^ "EUCOM Afghan Evacuation Operations". Ramstein Air Base.
  5. ^ "US Army Europe and Africa supports Operation Allies Refuge". U.S. Army Europe and Africa.
  6. ^ "U.S. Air Force Supports Operation Allies Refuge". www.centcom.mil.
  7. ^ "U.S. recruits commercial airlines to help move Afghanistan evacuees". Reuters. 23 August 2021.
  8. ^ "U.S., Germany Advise Against Travel to Kabul Airport Amid Evacuation Chaos". Reuters.
  9. ^ "Department Press Briefing - August 20, 2021". United States Department of State.

There needs to be a dedicated article of the entire Kabul airport chaos[edit]

At the moment this information is in 2021 Taliban offensive but it's no longer part of the "offensive" stage since Taliban are in control for a week. Also the airlifts and the fleeing refugees to the airport, along with international peacekeepers, covers more than just the US. There needs to be an article dealing with this incident as a whole. --Weaveravel (talk) 15:21, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You will see I have suggested 2021 Western evacuation from Afghanistan above and have copied in some relevant reports. Buckshot06 (talk) 20:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the article 2021 evacuation of Afghanistan is what you're looking for. 19:25, 26 August 2021 (UTC)