Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Operation Freedom's Sentinel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Swatjester in topic Result in info box

listing of other nations in info box?

[edit]

Hi all; based on everything read over the last couple of years about the Operation Freedom's Sentinel, the operation only concerns the deployment of American forces to Afghanistan (USFOR-A)-both in training, advising and supporting the Afghan government and ANDSF, as well as counter-terrorism missions-as part NATO's overall Resolute Support Mission. Other nations are deployed to Afghanistan under the their own operations e.g. Operation Toral (Britain), Operation Highroad (Australia) etc. as part of RSM, and at this time, there doesn't seem to be any sources that say their part of OFS. So shouldn't these nations be removed from the listing in the info box? I'm guessing the listing of these nations was based on Wikipedia's article about Operation Enduring Freedom? during the course of 13 years that operation lasted, coalition forces episodically were under US command e.g. Polish SOF was under US command, as was the majority of British SOF during the 2001 invasion, in addition to their own operations. I'm not ruling out that some of the other nation's contingents have personnel under OFS command, but at this point there doesn't seem to be any references or information out there that supports this, so it could be misleading and confusing to the reader when differentiating between RSM and OFS and therefore should be removed, until at least more precise information becomes available. Of course if anyone has any information that justifies their inclusion in the infobox, link it. Thanks.  Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackwidow97 (talkcontribs) 15:34, 13 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Result in info box

[edit]

A few editors are determined to have the words "Taliban victory" in the infobox result. I'm not sure what this adds if the very next words are "Islamic Republic falls to the Taliban." A few other editors have inserted "al-Qaeda/ISIS defeated." While NATO participants might like to believe that, there's no mention of it in the May US defense department report. 73.71.251.64 (talk) 20:10, 20 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

In what universe does The Islamic Republic falling to the Taliban translate into an American victory? 209.105.138.218 (talk) 20:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Should be put as Taliban victory in infobox as thats literally what happened KGxHeretic (talk) 15:06, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
But it wasn't a Taliban Victory in Operation Freedom's Sentinel, which was continuing the U.S. effort to train, advise and assist Afghan security forces as well as conduct counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan. That is not the same thing as the War in Afghanistan, generally. And we go by what reliable sources say, not by what individual editors think is "literally what happened." The current result field in the column already explains in much more appropriate detail what happened. SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 16:00, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
The infobox already says "Fall of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan to the Taliban" and "Evacuation of US citizens and at-risk Afghans from Kabul", those are the direct result of a Taliban victory. It might as well be put in the infobox, saying otherwise is mere cope and pedantics. KGxHeretic (talk) 16:33, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
That's not how our reliable sourcing, verifiability, or infobox policies and guidelines work, and I'll ask you to be civil and assume good faith of other editors. The simple fact is, there are no reliable source results that say Operation Freedom's Sentinel resulted in a Taliban victory. There wouldn't be, because Operation Freedom's Sentinel wasn't a combat operation against the Taliban, it was a capacity building operation with the Afghan government. You're literally coming onto the wrong article, and saying something objectively wrong, and then accusing other editors of "cope and pedantics" for pointing out *your error.* Nah. Miss me with that. SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 18:55, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply