Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Almost certainly calculated; from a military perspective, the scope of activity in Kunduz last night would have required extensive planning and control over a lot of moving pieces.
Do we think this is actually an attempt to "take" it though...? I'm skeptical because it just feels weaksauce compared to previous attempts and they haven't made as much out of it publicly. So, do we think this could be something else...?
I struggle to endorse this 
Give up withdrawal deal for momentary control over Kunduz? Something they have much higher chance of retention after US withdrawal?
I don't think so.
Instead...https://twitter.com/MujMash/status/1262700882795388928?s=19 …
Possibly ANDSF troops might have been remobilised from such cities to rural TB strongholds relying on TB undertaking not to attack such centres.
So this was an attempt to force govt to redeploy to protect major cities.
Interesting Q tho, will TB consider throwing away 
Definitely not like previous attempts:https://twitter.com/and_huh_what/status/1262723854385975296?s=20 …
It's interesting to think about what the TB 'threshold' calculation is here. Hate myself for the jargon, but it's interesting to think of an insurgent "grey zone" and the reasons to stay in it. Wonder what they calculate as max havoc before US responds. Bet they are low.
Double points, not just for the jargon but the only proper spelling of "grey."
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
