Afghanistan

[Norman Verona]

When it was announced that our and US troops would be pulling out of Afghanistan I commented that is would be waste of our and the other countries dead as the Taliban would be back in control within 5 years.

 

That was about 2 years ago.

 

 

This morning our MPs have concluded the same.

 

Am I clever or are they stupid?

 

Well I'm not clever.

[ajpearson]

It wont be a complete waste at the end of the day Norman, we have done some really really good things out there, and we will continue to.

Don't forget its not a withdrawal, just a change to a non-combatant role.

10 years after we went into Iraq, and several since we have pulled out, and yes they have had their troubles but nowhere near as bad as before

[Norman Verona]

AJ, sorry, I'm aware that Sadam was an evil dictator who murdered anyone in his way but I don't think it was our job to remove him.

 

I wonder if we'd got involved if there wasn't oil involved.

 

There are many dictators around the world we don't attack for "regime change"

[iain m]

Two recent, but separate BBC interviews with government oficials stick in my mind, the first was in Bagdad when the reporter was told that life in the city was better under Sadam as Quote "  we had satisfactory employment levels and you were quite save if you did as you were told". The second was a reporter in Afganistan asking, after the withdrawl of troops how many months or years before the Taliban returned in force, he was told " within hours or weeks ".  The county has always had a patchwork of regions run by many violent groups/tribes where everthing is resolved by killing the opposition regardless of race or creed. If we had wished to make a real difference to world poverty and starvation for a people who would be eternally grateful we should have dropped in on Zimbabwe, once the  "breadbasket of Africa" now replaced by starvation by one mans greed. what the devil was he doing in Rome recently when he is under a travel ban?????  

[Norman Verona]

Iain, That was the country I was thinking of when I posted by thoughts.

 

Some estimates of those killed in Iraq are 100,000 dead. I suppose in some that's liberation. It's not mine.

 

Changing tack slightly, why are we in Afghanistan (or Iraq before that). These countries have never been a threat to us and weren't friends of Al Qaeda.

 

Could it be that the US says jump and we say "how high"

[ajpearson]

Norm,

I never said it was OUR job to go in and remove him, I am just saying that the country has not returned to such a bad state after we pulled out.

[Norman Verona]

AJ, sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you said it.

 

But if the observers who claim that 100,000 have died are correct then I fail to see how that justifies our actions.

[SootySport]

We have been involved in Iraq and Afghanistan because the US and the UK say those original governments were a threat to the 'Wests' way of life.  Personally I can't see that they ever had any evil intentions towards us and even if they did had no means of upsetting our superb capitalist system.     The US always have to have an enemy so they can be seen to be the doing the right thing and US citizens can thank the president for saving their souls.     Seems N. Korean government are now doing the same, saving N. Koreans from the world outside.

 

Yes, the Taliban will be back in control of the Afghan people shortly after the so called Liberators leave, at the moment they are just biding their time.

[ajpearson]

But the question is, what percentage of those were

a) Completely innocent bystanders ?

b) Would have been killed by the regime regardless of the involvement ?

c) Killed after attacking US / UK ?

d) Killed by insurgent activities ?

e) Where legitimate Civilian casualites of war ?

[SootySport]

The majority of deaths in all cases were by insurgents using IED's/

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

Twice as many British military personnel have died in Afghanistan as died in the Falklands. At least the latter was nominally our business - I struggle to see why we are fighting in Afghanistan - a war as futile as Vietnam was - when it doesn't threaten our interests.  

[Norman Verona]

AJ, Saddam wasn't killing people by the 100,000. I agree he was an tyrant but, apart from the marsh arabs he left the others alone.

 

The US public would never have sanctioned military action for "regime change" They were told he had "weapons of mass destruction" and was a threat to the US. 

 

It seems to me that the most dangerous regime with weapons of mass destruction is the USA.

 

I was totally surprised by the US actions this week where various events were cancelled in order not to antagonise the situation in Korea. Maybe Obama is learning. Bush (Jnr) would have been flying bombers over the border by now.

[s2rrr]

Unfortunately I made the same prediction as they were going in, we will or the West will never win, The Russions failed, we failed. Just leave them to there own devices. Then the neigbhours will have the problem as they are all hiding there anyway.

 

Bob

[Norman Verona]

The ruling factor in Afghanistan is the poppy fields which are turned into heroin.

 

I suppose the way to stop the Taliban is to give the farmers a different crop or type of business that gives them a living wage.

[ajpearson]

Or just pay them a higher price for the opium to turn it into Morphine, for which there is a current world shortage