Amazing read.
(IMO there is a small mistake. They write "I could see the fire on my left hand side" but the fire from the tagged window is on "the right" from inside...)
Bed that saved me from the Taliban
41–50 of 148 posts
Re: Bed that saved me from the Taliban
#42I think a good tactic might have been to deploy the bedsheet rope in order to make it look as if he had climbed down to the floor below.
Reading it, I actually had the same idea. But still, the possible would exist that there's someone in the room who didn't dare climb down in the end.
Yes. But then it seems like a mistake to have put the mattress against the door since that strongly suggests that someone is in the room.
Re: Bed that saved me from the Taliban
#43Incredible, to be hiding under one of two beds in his hotel room, and having the other bed being searched and shot at by the Taliban. > Don't concentrate only on work, stressful and bad things in your life. Concentrate instead on creating good moments and being around good people, because life is so beautiful.
I wonder why they shot at the tidy bed but not the unkempt one. The narrator seems to imply he knew hiding under the unkempt one was the better option. Why is that ? Also, what's with "holding the bed with my toes and fists" ? I don't picture that really well.
> I wonder why they shot at the tidy bed but not the unkempt one. The narrator seems to imply he knew hiding under the unkempt one was the better option. Why is that ?
I wondered this as well. He did say he has had significant training, but honestly, I think this was just pure luck.
Re: Bed that saved me from the Taliban
#44A good read. To people from better off part of the world, luxury hotels in third-world countries are, almost as a rule, a magnet for trouble: petty crimes, robberies, encounters with mafia, and, as was in that case, an armed assault.
This isn't true at all. Luxury hotels, most especially managed or chain brands are some of the safest places in third-world countries. The odds of buglary, petty crimes and those vices you listed happening is close to zero. This is the reason why they are attractive to expats and high-end clients. They have the best security and are usually located in prime areas making them less susceptible to some of those claims y…
Yeah, you have two choices -- either a high-end international-clientele hotel which also has security, or something relatively anonymous. The other two quadrants (high profile international hotel with no security, or a low-profile guesthouse with a lot of western guests and lots of local information about it) are how to get killed most efficiently.
Big hard property means you'll probably be safe from petty crime, but you might be collateral damage during a large terrorist attack. However, most places can repel the smaller attacks.
Smaller/anonymous property means you won't be collateral damage from anyone else, but it will be a whole lot easier for someone to learn "rich American/European is staying in this guesthouse" and then do a trivial attack. You have to be consistent with this, using local vehicles, probably not going out much, etc.
Depends on the situation which is better (the external situation as well as who you are as a target). A big factor is that K&R/institutional policies/etc. do not permit the low profile approach. If you're living in a low profile place but then taking a big armored truck to/from meetings with the government at hardened sites, you're probably going to have a bad time, too.
I'd personally feel weird being in Afghanistan or Iraq without a weapon (and possibly security detail) today, despite it being "safer" than when I was there, and having illegal weapons being itself an actual risk now. I solve this by just not going.
Most of the third world isn't actual-warzone and you're not as likely to face a huge terrorist attack on the biggest target. The Kenyan mall/etc. attacks are outliers. I'd generally go for the hardened strategy myself, as I don't want to have to go through the trouble of blending in, especially on a longer basis.
(In a high threat environment I'd probably go for my own secured compound somewhere, just so I wouldn't be collateral damage, but that requires you be able to hold/secure the compound, which puts a pretty high minimum scale to be economic. I lived in a villa in Baghdad with Kurdish security, and then in Afghanistan I stayed at a guest house with a 2:1 rifle to guest ratio, but yeah.)
Re: Bed that saved me from the Taliban
#45Wow that was very well written. In an intense situation where after the fact people want to write dramatically, this was the opposite in a great way. We all still feel attached and with a great sense of what happened, the pace it was written, and the events that stood out to him and were told. It's so nice to have something like that rather than an over the top description. Granted, I'm not sure if he wrote that himself or was helped / ghostwritten as is the extremely annoying case in tons of articles, but either way, well done.
Re: Bed that saved me from the Taliban
#46"Parts of the hotel were able to re-open two months after the attack" — what? Curious, what would be the logical explanation for that? I mean, for starters nobody would want to work there, and nobody would want to _stay_ there. Right?
The hotel still needs to make money, so getting it open as quickly as possible even after a horrific incident is important for the bottom line of the company that runs it.
Fix all the damage, put up a plaque or other memorial to the victims, and then move forward.
This may seem harsh, but economic interests don't permanently go away when disasters happen.
Re: Bed that saved me from the Taliban
#47"Parts of the hotel were able to re-open two months after the attack" — what? Curious, what would be the logical explanation for that? I mean, for starters nobody would want to work there, and nobody would want to _stay_ there. Right?
There's an old story (that I can't find right now) about a bank employee that falls for a scam that costs the company hundreds of thousands. He goes to his boss and says "I guess you will be expecting my resignation", to which the boss replies "Resign? I just spent thousands of dollars training you!".
I would apply the same line of thought here: I don't think this hotel is any more insecure that any other. In fact, I would expect it to have more security than the others from now on.
I understand the emotional point - it's pretty much the same point that Chris Rock made about renaming the new Twin Towers the "Never going in there tower". But I can totally see the hotel making a comeback - if Charlie Hebdo is still in business, I don't see why the hotel can't follow the same steps.
Re: Bed that saved me from the Taliban
#48"Parts of the hotel were able to re-open two months after the attack" — what? Curious, what would be the logical explanation for that? I mean, for starters nobody would want to work there, and nobody would want to _stay_ there. Right?
In hot conflict areas some hotels are usually used to house people who are still having to go about their business. Such as airline pilots, journalists, ngo people etc... usually the fact that the hotel is being used for such purpose is common knowledge and there is some sort of extra military protection given. Of course this can also backfire as depending on the multiple interests of the factions involved in the conflict it can be in their interest to attack, ignore, or defend such buildings...in the case of this hotel in particular it had already been attacked in 2011 before this attack described in the article (which happened in 2018). You can read more about it here:
Re: Bed that saved me from the Taliban
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reading it, I actually had the same idea. But still, the possible would exist that there's someone in the room who didn't dare climb down in the end.
Yes. But then it seems like a mistake to have put the mattress against the door since that strongly suggests that someone is in the room.
Or could be perceived as a diversion to allow the person enough time to get down their makeshift rope.
Re: Bed that saved me from the Taliban
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder why they shot at the tidy bed but not the unkempt one. The narrator seems to imply he knew hiding under the unkempt one was the better option. Why is that ? Also, what's with "holding the bed with my toes and fists" ? I don't picture that really well.
> I wonder why they shot at the tidy bed but not the unkempt one. The narrator seems to imply he knew hiding under the unkempt one was the better option. Why is that ? I wondered this as well. He did say he has had significant training, but honestly, I think this was just pure luck.
When breaking places the intact things are broken first. Breaking an already broken vase just isn’t the same.
Just my hunch at least. Untidy bed is already ”broken”.