That's for if you're in the store right now and having trouble finding a way out.

@Mitch Thanks! I could't find an example for significantly long periods but I think it's all right to be used for Christmas for example.

"I had forgotten it was so hard to get out of that place"

That's for if you were telling a story about your difficulty leaving the store last week. It's "that place" because you're not there any more.

@reith Yeah, Christmas is not an event.

A Christmas service in a church might be called an event or a Christmas meal, but only if something special occurred at them.

@Mitch Oh, so the whole celebration is not an event but individual occurrences (gatherings etc.) that have special purpose are.

@Mitch I don't know whether the invasion was a good idea.

@Mitch I would say, a day-long battles, yes. But not a year of university.

@reith Hmm... yes mostly. but to be clear, or at least less muddy, one will more naturally call these individual parts by something more specific. I.e. one would not naturally call a Christmas dinner an event. If the dinner were punlic (open to anybody) and a celebrity were there, and there were advertisements around the city for a month, then -maybe- you'd call this Christmas dinner an event. But in the large majority of cases, it's just a special holiday meal and not an event at all.

See... dictionaries are not even very good at hinting at the meaning.

@Cerberus OK... but would, let's say, D-Day be an event but the Battle of the Bulge not be one?

I don't think length of time is entirely it. but maybe it is?

I agree that length of time is certainly not the only factor.

There can be multi-day events, can there not?

Things that are not points on a time continuum can be events, but the longer they are the less likely.

Agreed.

Is Mardi Gras an event?

Christmas is -not- an event.

Maybe if you really mean Christmas Eve?

I would say it depends on context...

The dancing down the streets is an event. But the ecclesiastical holy day of the day before Ash Wednesday is not.

@S.M.T Is it likely to happen, at this juncture?

@Cerberus Does something happen on Christmas eve? If so, then that something happening might be an event but Christmas eve itself is not an event.

It might be just a dinner. But you could say, "we saw each other only twice last year, on Christmas Eve and on my birthday. Both events featured clowns", I think?

Technically, it is not Christmas Eve that's the event, but the dinner party; however, it would be a fairly normal metonymy.

Titanic crushed my trust in engineering.

Another rather normal kind of metonymy.

With assonance to boot.

@Cerberus They have amrullah saleh who’s a spy

Ahmad massed went to royal military academy and even defense minster is there.

But they don’t have enough weapons + it can cause a lot of bloodshed even for the civilians if fight happens.

Yeah, but everywhere outside the valley has been conquered by the Taliban already, hasn't it?

I think they need some time.

The valley knows they need foreign support if they want to resist the Taliban.

@Cerberus But , the valley hasn’t been captured for 5 days since taliban has come in power

Thank you both! Things are much clearer now. My understanding is, to call something an event, it's better to have a high significance related to the time that might be implicit in the speech context. Thinking this way many things can be considered an event. A divorce might be recounted as an event if the narrator is writing his autobiography but not if someone it talking about last month finalization of his divorce.

Maybe in some context we can even call a four-year study period as an event but it's probably quite far from everyday usage.

@S.M.T Right, but 5 days is not a long time.

@Cerberus Yes. Thats why I think they will need to capture the territory in mazar e sharif which will give them an air base or at least near to some other country border so that they can get ammo , personnel’s can come easily

@Cerberus I think they will attack in some time( the taliban) till the time they are being good to the world

@reith Maybe, but I think it will be very unlikely for a divorce to be named an event, also because of its nature.

and the people go away after that .

@reith This would seem almost impossible.

@S.M.T But how can they?

Defending an extremely defensible valley is different from conquering territory outside it against an overwhelming force.

@Cerberus With right strategy , even when Ahmad shah massoud fought , they had very less of everything.

Just a few grenades , tanks

In those days, large parts of the north remained unconquered by the Taliban.

@Cerberus in a context that one talks about all the things that he's done in his life, wouldn't it feel appropriate to call a divorce as an event?

The valley was on the border of non-Taliban territory.

But all is different now.

The north has been conquered by the Taliban, if we are to believe the news.

The Tadjik and other warlords have allied with the Taliban.

I know. You are right too.

Perhaps they will rebel. If so, they'd better do it now...

It’s just a belief I want to have because it gives hope

I hope with you.

I hope everything goes well too.

Maybe some foreign power will help the valley, using an air corridor. That could help them survive.

But my hope is slim.

@Cerberus Thank you. It breaks my heart from daily news.

Yeah, it's tragic.

@Cerberus Unlikely too because of the artillery taliban has now.

Ah, right.

Air missiles , rockets , US army equipment.

And what not

All those American weapons they captured.

And even helicopters.

@Cerberus One could say "In the event of a divorce..." but frankly even though it's the same word, it's not saying that the the divorce is an event. @reith It's a different meaning there (even if nearby).

Agreed.

Biden had no real plan for what would happen when the Americans lefty Afghanistan.

They did not take responsibility.

@Cerberus I think what he did was really not right

They even let their advanced weapons be captured. Such a tragedy.

@Cerberus ammunition and rockets and jeeps and stuff can be used, But helicopters..those need trained people to operate.

I believe they are already flying them.

Biden said earlier that his troops are already in many other parts of country to counter terrorism

The Taliban are not so very backwards.

Now , when they see that direct change. Why go away ?

@Cerberus They speak English now,

Yeah, I don't get it either.

@S.M.T Exactly. They have press people and diplomats.

@Mitch I think they will find how to operate it.

@Cerberus The veterans are so sad. A UK officer said that “ People who have not fought the war themselves have no idea what it feels like “.

@Cerberus I think blaming Biden, while appropriate in some 'leadership'/emotional sense, is not where the thing to correct is. It's the planning by the armed forces that needed to be corrected. THe failure was in implementation details, not the order 'let's get out'

Dutch veterans express the same dentiment.

> The Afghan air force operated a total of 211 aircraft, with about 167 planes and helicopters available for use as of June 30

That was just amazing. It’s true , army officers are not robots

@S.M.T They are literally 'students'

@Mitch I know. I feel bad for them too.

but I still think of them as not the most civilized

@Mitch their friends used to know how to pilot a plane, remember 9/11. btw, it isn't hard to point a gun at someone who knows how to take it off.

@Mitch He is one of the major parties who made the big mistake together. But the fact that the Taliban acquired so many advanced weapons? I think most of the blame for that falls on him and his advisors (outside the actual army, who wanted to stay).

@Mitch Hmm K.

The thing is . They failed

@Mitch Getting out is also a failure, in my opinion, and Biden could have stopped it. So I blame him for that at least partially.

If they had probably attacked just before the taliban reached Afghanistan or just captured one province . They would have won with a completely very less bloddshed

He didn't care what happened to the country after he refused to take responsibility for the American invasion.

@Mitch Don’t you think a country should have known already that when taliban are near their border.

I mean , every country is sure of that right.

@S.M.T I don't think the Americans could have won against the Taliban, as in defeated them. But they were good at keeping them at bay indefinitely.

@Cerberus I think if they had started to attack the taliban just beofre they reached Afghanistan , they could have had just finished them with missiles , air support.

@Cerberus So the Americans were a peacekeeping force

needed permanently

@Mitch If you see , the US army officers knew that afghan forces wouldn’t be able to handle taliban .

I’m not talking about Biden. But the officers.

> Unlike a fighter jet built for speed and maneuverability in a dogfight, the A-29 is optimized for counterinsurgency missions where an aircraft needs to fly slow and low to strike targets on the ground. The aircraft can be flown by relatively inexperienced pilots and operated in austere environments.

Who spoke just on news,

@S.M.T Reached Afghanistan? You mean from Pakistan?

@S.M.T I kinda think that the Afghan forces, while not necessarily complicit, were not unhappy to let the Taliban take over. That's my internal explanation of why the take over happened so rapidly.

@Mitch Yes. They had made themselves into that. But, as Cowper said, they could have set up a UN peace-keeping force, as there are many around the world, if they no longer wanted to bear full responsibility. In fact, that is what they did with NATO a decade ago (until most other NATO countries decided to leave Afghanistan).

@Mitch One thing I read, which is very clever of the Taliban, is that they executed all enemy soldiers who surrendered.

So fighting would result in certain death, and flight was the only option.

@Cerberus If NATO was leaving then shouldn't the US also?

As perceived by the Afghani soldiers.

I know that is simplistic but still

@Mitch Because America was solely responsible for the invasion.

@Cerberus I don't get it

@Cerberus True. Their mess, they should clean it up.

You can't invade a country, then leave it in a worse situation and simply have no plan.

Hmm.

why did they even stay in Afghanistan?

If you really see , I was watching news and they lakes about sth like ghost soldiers(Soldiers whose name isn’t on the list of officers )

You do check it.

@Mitch That's what they say themselves. Afghan military hasn't been dedicated to protect their country, they were mostly the poor people who find army a good opportunity to help their family in the dire economy. Of course they prefer to be alive rather than to fight when they wouldn't get supported by foreigners as before.

They say , total defense force is like 182K including police

it’s really sad as to what is happening is there.

An it's not just military, neither of Afghan president has really condemned Taliban. They used to refer them to Brothers or a group

@reith And they often received no pay or very very little, because the corruption ate up all the money the Americans tried to distribute. And of course they knew no more money would ever come, now that the Americans had left.

right

Guys , what is it about in news that the northern alliance flag was hoisted in some province recently ? @Cerberus @reith

Did they attack an area or in panjshir only ?

It was clear to everyone, including the American generals, that the Afghan army had absolutely no future once the Americans had left. Biden must have known this too, despite his personal advisors.

And it appears to be an misunderstanding in western media about Afghan troops. It probably didn't outnumber Taliban and they were less than 50K actual fighters.

@S.M.T I have no idea.

K

It is Iraq all over again.

Apparently, the invaders learned nothing.

Here is on bike the flag of northern alliance .

Perhaps they will be forced to return eventually, just as in Iraq.

@Cerberus Hmm.

@S.M.T I'm not really aware about events and it seems neither Afghans are. I just sometimes see their tweets in twitter and since we talk the same language I'd follow some news but there isn't much news about war itself.

Well, there is nothing we can do about it now.

@reith ok.

Except hope for the best.

sigh

@Cerberus Yes . We can’t

I pray that the things turn out to be well for just everyone.

Also , Ahmad shah masood used to speak French. How did he have such a connection ?

I suppose if you're a Taliban then things are looking up.

@Mitch Just appear but i hope it does for future too.

It is possible that the Taliban régime will collapse in 5 to 10 years.

But that will mean even more chaos and poverty for the Afghan people.

@Cerberus Why?

Because the government is more or less collapsing.

@Cerberus I think the Pakistan taliban , al-Qaeda & so so many more will all join each other.

@Cerberus They’ve got neighbors to take care of them.

And it will be very difficult to replace it, with far less money than before (currently, huge amounts of foreign aid are given to the government each year).

@Cerberus K. It can.

@S.M.T Join, in what sense?

@Cerberus Yes. Many left already.

@Cerberus Same ideology I think

@S.M.T I'm not sure anyone really wants to give the Taliban lots of money, not even Pakistan.

@Cerberus K.

Are you?

@Cerberus I’m just a teenager. Don’t earn till now. Also , wouldn’t .

I think the Pakistani Taliban are already closely connected to the Afghani Taliban? Not sure.

@Cerberus I think yes. We’ll see what happens in the coming time.

As to Al Qaida, I think maybe the Taliban will try to keep those at a distance.

K. See you later. Gotta go.

Bye.

Because the Americans will probably attack if they let Al Qaida do its thing in Afghanistan, which may very well result in terrorist attacks in America.

Bye!

@Mitch @reith I had a really nice chat. Thanks . Also , @Cerberus

@S.M.T Bye!

@Cerberus It's like Russian play where actors walk on stage with the same costume as everybody else and the names are long and indistinguishable and you're never sure who is doing what or why and someone says there's a knife missing from the display case and then the show is over and you're talking about it on your way back home and you realize... oh, that was just a break for intermission

A little bit!

But that applies to any political system...

and then you come back to the theater and somebody is dead but you don't know who because everybody is in the same costume and the names are long and indistinguishable and you're never sure who is doing what or why and now the gun is missing from the display case.

That's why we have articles about these subjects rather than plays.

@Cerberus I don't think they'd collapse because of lack of money. In fact the poorer better for them. It seems they want their terrorism (Sharia) just in their own border and no other nation would give a damn. (There are some Uyghur hardliners there but even China doesn't care about them! Their profit is higher and Taliban do care about other's profit this time)

They do have to run a country.

It requires lots of organisation, and money.

As to Sharia, I wouldn't say it is the same as terrorism.

Though terrorism can be based on it.

"Pavel? Who is Pavel? He's the guy in the ... of that's the other Pavel. He's the one engaged to Alexa Feodorovna ilyanovichisky." "The daughter of Fyodor?" "Oh yes, but the adopted daughter. Her true father is Pavel".

@reith I've heard that Tucker Carson is having an interview with the Taliban about how the US Republican party will be learning from their tactics.

ha ha

ha haa hahah

laughs crying

just cries a lot

Sounds like fun.

@Cerberus No. If you want to run a country, a good economy, good infrastructures, yes, you do need money. Those barefoot Islamists don't seek those. Just see their fighters. Some of them can hardly talk.

@Mitch Actually I don't think they have any tactic. They are just patient. And they know how to subsist. They are like unicellular organisms, simple but hard to kill.

@reith That is true, but they will need to have some organisation. Or they are really not ruling a country, but are just present there in some places.

Anyway, not supporting the idea that the US should've remained in Afghanistan, I can't understand how much Biden and the US intelligent services were ignorant about one country they had occupied for 20 years.

@Cerberus they had some organizations to get control of the country. They'd rule the country as they used to do before the US attacked (I think they had at-least 80% of the country under their control then)

@reith We asked the same question when they ignorantly left Iraq in chaos.

Neither their invasions nor their retreats had realistic plans and assessments of the actual situation.

@reith Yes, I wonder to what extent that will be possible, after the country has been ruled for twenty years by the current government structures.

things are so different here. of course you need good relationships/knowledge/legitimacy to run and develop a country, but an ideologist group doesn't care about future/thrive/development of country! Their archetype of governing is (a possibly faulty understanding) of a reign in 1400 years ago. The future for them is past, and their expectance of life is nothing.

Kind of.

But the country still needs to be ruled in some way.

When people starve, that is not good for the Taliban régime.

Maybe they can pull off a low-economy rule, but for how long?

They depend upon countless alliances with local leaders.

Those are not set in stone.

It affects, for sure. Sometimes for good and sometimes for worse. I just can't see they'll have gone by 5 or 10 years because they don't know how to run a country as a western country. To me, inefficiency, corruption, illegitimacy don't cause a regime change by itself.

True.

But many régimes collapse.

Heyy. So long conversation

It’s an interesting topic too I agree

@reith I think so yes + I hope world leaders also help when needed.

I have seen Russia , China supporting them. Maybe they’ll get money from them.

TV DOZHD has been the largest independent TV channel in Russia, although it has operated only through the Internet.

Maybe also through some rare cable channels, but I'm not sure.

Now it will most likely die down.

I wonder how many media in Russia will remain un-punished by Septemter 18.

Yesterday, a Duma deputy who is responsible for information/communications said that "Russians will get along well without Google. We have Yandex".

This is probably done to check the public reaction.

I wonder what that would do with the government's popularity, closing off the Russian Internet.

Not to mention the economy.

Oh, it works well in Belarus. People go on living.

The Soviet Union existed for 70 years until it fell. An authoritarian regime can get along pretty well.

Napoleon III in France also ruled for about 20 years.

Also stifling the press.

Yes.

But Russians are used to the Internet now.

Putin has an approval rating of 50 to 60% even when a study is performed by an "oppositional" demographic foundation.

So what, the Internet. If you speak to a Putin supporter like RegDwight, no amount of pointing at the facts will make him change his mind. You can provide facts, photos, records, interviews, statistics till the cows come home.

My close friend who lives near New York found her Russian friends living in the USA calling Ukrainians "fascists" right after Putin invaded Ukraine.

So the Internet does not help. They were living in the USA.

And still they supported Putin and the invasion.

@CowperKettle That's ridiculous. He does not support Putin.

@CowperKettle Closing off the Internet, however..

People will not like that.

Not to mention Russian companies.

@Cerberus He supports the invasion of Ukraine, calling it "Ukrainian civl war"

Thus he fully supports Putin.

It's like calling Hitler's anschluss of Austria and Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia normal.

12 thousand people have died in this ongoing war.

The areas occupied by Russia refuse to permit the International Red Cross to visit the concentration camps where pro-Ukrainian citizens are held.

Despite multiple pleas.

And RegDwight willingly chooses to be blind. Like people who supported Hitler willingly chose.

They did that despite the radio and newspapers, he does that despite the Internet.

People never change.

The human mind was not developed during the evolution to reflect the reality with precision.

@CowperKettle He does not.

I think you grossly misinterpret him.

@Cerberus well, I mean, the history with Taliban is sorta forgotten, and the rhetoric is "this group is now getting to power and it's a shame they're bigots".

Instead, compare that to, say, the Iranian president. To provide context on what sort of person Raisi is, you bring up some history. He did this in 1980, did that in 1990.

@Mitch it has always been, but you never know with these folks in our government. I mean, when they shake hands with the commies obviously their alliances are with whoever says "America bad" rather than whoever agrees with their ideology, which is unique-ish anyway.

Russia has a much dirtier history than America with our country, it's just that America's bullying is still in recent memory.

So I think you see where I'm coming from. I was biting my fingernails on whether the news channels will change their rhetoric to say we've been at war with Eurasia all along.

Still kinda do.

@Mitch Pakistan mainly actually.

When I'm browsing social media, Indian news is all about how Taliban will set back Afghanistan a century, and when I'm looking at Parkistani news, "Taliban beheaded IS leader".

@CowperKettle Reg doesn't say anything positive about Putin. As far as I've seen he just doesn't buy into the occasional media barrage against Russia when the US is negotiating something with them and needs the public opinion against them. Like that other time the US government was saying Russians put bounties on US soldiers and nothing came of it

@CowperKettle For more local knowledge... at one point I think before the first chorus but not as part of any lyrics she yells out 'soooo eeeee!' which is what pig farmers yell to call their pigs home. and 'sui' (pronounced the same as @Cerberus knows) is Latin for 'pigs'. No the farmers are not classically trained, it's just been passed down over the ages.

-also-

'sui' is often used -very- pejoratively to refer to police officers in the US, because the cops are often referred to as 'pigs' (but that's all over the US)

There you go, I think I've fulfilled my 'but actually' quota for the day.

@Mitch Um, actually, that term is sui generis when referring to law enforcement.

Yup, there's a show about that.

@M.A.R. But who is "you"?

The Taliban are executing journalists now.

It's in the papers.

The Taliban didn't win in Afghanistan, the defense contractors did

@M.A.R. What did Russia do?

@Mitch Sui would be dative singular.

Nominative plural sues.

But are you saying pig farmers today use a phrase inherited from Latin?

Where?

Where? Only in America.

Interesting tradition.

@Cerberus cripes - all those years of Latin study a total waste.

by years I mean a few weeks

@Cerberus mass hysteria

speaking tongues

handling snakes

pig calling

@Cerberus so sūs is 3rd declension? what a mess. same with bōs?

@Mitch Yes, both words are of the third.

@Cerberus a responsible journalist?

@Cerberus be a geographical neighbor.

Responsible journalists are describing the Taliban's terrible deeds accurately enough?

@M.A.R. How is that dirty?

@Cerberus Before America, it was the English and the Russians colonizing, occupying, murdering, all that imperial crap in Iran

I have some ideas about Britain, but I have no idea what Russia did.

@Cerberus sure, but I mean, you read the news articles, and the picture you get is not of a terrorist organization that is slightly less aggressive than IS

@Cerberus Well, we need to be more specific then. In the 1900s, the English had influence over south of Iran, and the Russian over north.

@M.A.R. Who is "you"?

I don't see how anyone would not get that picture.

Is this about readers of Persian newspapers?

Before that, Russia was always poking at our northern borders, and captured some territory and killed a lot of Iranians during the Qajars.

Ah, OK.

I mean, sure, I'm not holding any grudges against Russia of course, but you'd think they'd be more worthy of being a national enemy

So did Russia do many bad things in the 20th century?

@Cerberus An impartial reader? Again, I'm commenting on why there's such a sparse rehash of history. Everyone is fixating on the current decisions and new alignments.

@Cerberus they mostly disappeared after 1918

"There is", "everyone": I do not see this.

But they were the main colonialist for a couple of centuries before that.

Did they commit horrible acts?

@Cerberus fair enough, our impressions are different. Not like I have seen much news anyway.

@Cerberus which colonial power didn't?

But is there any specific national trauma with regard to the Russians?

@M.A.R. Then what do you base your impression on?

I mean, there is a feeling that other countries will need to work with the Taliban.

But I don't see them suddenly being considered moderate in any way.

Only compared with IS.

Well Iranian borders included at least today's Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Turkmenistan not two hundred years ago and the Russians occupied them

And sure enough, only in history books do we get really mad at Russians for occupying stuff.

But the current regime in the past decade has always tried to paint a better picture of the Russians. Probably mostly have failed.

Ah, so they 'stole' territory from Persia.

'At least Putin is not America' is the idea. And I don't see why Putin can't be worse for our country if we'd changed sides

@Cerberus well, America instead 'only' attempted an unsuccessful coup in 1979, and pulled a successful one in 1953, which replaced Mosaddegh's legitimate regime with Shah

But the media is also careful not to paint a very good picture of Mosaddegh because he had had a falling out with the clergymen in his final months.

There's apparently some evidence that said clergy probably even abetted the initial stages of the coup

@M.A.R. Makes sense.

@M.A.R. Hmm what coup did America try in 1979?

Against the revolution?

And of course, if the current regime wasn't hell bent on hating America we wouldn't have gotten so many sanctions

@M.A.R. Yeah, I think Putin can certainly be worse.

@M.A.R. One problem is that the evil rhetoric is somewhat mutual...

@Cerberus not sure how big their role was, but at the very least Shah's last remaining supporters had gathered a ton of weapons in some warehouse to attempt a takeback or a coup.

The details are hazy, but America did know of this coup-to-be, don't remember how much they were helping

But Basijis found out about them soon enough

Hmm.

If they knew in advance, then I am surprised they were unable to help the Shah prevent it.

Oh, never mind.

The Americans knew of this counter-coup, not of the original coup by Khomeiny.

@Cerberus I guess I just find it a bit funny, the overall picture. Our people really really want us to be Saudi Arabia (though they think we would instead become Germany if we smiled at America's general direction), the regime could have pulled this off were it not for their stubborn 'moral' stance against America, while we shake hands with thugs and dictators

@Cerberus mhm. They underestimated him. Well, history repeating itself huh? Brown bearded savages 2, America zero.

@M.A.R. Become Saudi Arabia?? That should be the worst outcome for everyone?

@M.A.R. Heh exactly.

At least the second war in Iraq seems to have kept IS at bay.

Thought we don't know whether they will return.

@Cerberus I'm saying most of Iranians (think 70/30 maybe) want Iran to have favorable relations with the US.

And the 30 is old and dying off

Oh, you mean only with respect to relations towards America.

Right.

@M.A.R. Even those in the Revolutionary Guard?

@Cerberus well, we would become a second Saudi Arabia if that were the case, don't you think? Maybe with less beheading and journalist chopping.

@Cerberus you can't know, but yeah. Everyone's gone 'soft'.

For all I hear everyone with two fiddy has a green card.

@M.A.R. Less beheading, less other barbarity, less extreme orthodoxy, more freedom, less feudalism, much less ugliness.

Etc.

@M.A.R. That's interesting.

@M.A.R. What's fiddy?

And what card?

@Cerberus their sons are ruining Tehran asphalt burning Porsche and Mustang tires. Such people are at best only superficially disinterested in America.

@Cerberus if internet memes are to be believed, money.

@Cerberus permanent US resident card

@M.A.R. One never knows...

@M.A.R. I see.

@Robusto Their role is indeed interesting. One also wonders whether contractors care less about actually achieving the end goal of the occupation, so they only do what they do half-heartedly, only for the money.

You can't gauge the veracity of these rumors of course, but if they're so prevalent that state TV allows for mockumentaries being made about them (though obviously not naming any names), I can't help but think there's a hint of truth to them.

Though the self-indulgent lifestyle of our hardened Islamic warriors is freely shared by them on social media, so Porsches and Lamborghinis aren't rumors.

Nude spa days . . .

I'll believe it.

Such things always happen with any ruling class.

Including even communist Russia's.

@Cerberus They only care about money.

Yeah.