That's it, nuke the lot of 'em and be done with it

[Engineer1]

The moment the Americans said lets go fight in Afghanistan the government should have looked at the history books about what happened during the previous attempts to rule Afghanistan. We tried while we had the British Empire in the 19th Century, it didn't work, the Russians tried at about the same time, the Russians tried again in the 1980's that didn't work either so what makes anyone think it will work this time? pakistan is only just functioning as a democratic country, it still has large areas under tribal rule. What is the actual purpose of the West fighting in Afghanistan? to impose Democracy? well do they want Democracy or does central government have no power anyway?

[Disco_Dale]

Nappa said:

Not so much imposing it on them, but offering them a chance to not live under a ruthless regime and offering them a chance to have a say in the running of their country. The fact that the elections didn't have a great turn out, was more to do with the fear still felt by local Afghani's.

The security and safety of the population is the responsibility of the occupying power. If the politicians playing wargames had provided sufficient resources from the beginning then *maybe* it could have worked.
I'm not convinced though.

Would all the people on here who moan about the state of the UK support an invading foreign army who said "We're going to fix all that for you!"
Somehow I doubt it. Especially if they didn't fix it after 8 years of bloodshed.

[Asterix]

Nappa said:

...and not let the Taliban return to set-up training camps, and cultivate and export Opium.

Edited by Nappa on Wednesday 4th November 11:52

I thought the Taliban was actively trying to wipe out the Opium trade as they saw it as immoral but the local warlords fought back as it was their main source of income?

[Tiggsy]

Tony*T3 said:

Tony Blair's eldest son should 'man up', join the sharp end of the armed forces, and get out there.

I think if EU President elects boy was in the firing line we'd be out of there tout-sweet.


Sad day.

Why should he? If he's old enough to join up he should be old enough to be allowed to make his own choices. ANYONE joining the army in the next few years (possibly next 40 years) does so on the basis that they WILL go out there. In 2009 you don't join the army to get free holidays and learn how to ski.....you join to be taught to kill other people/stop other people killing you (obviously, that was always the case but now it should be pretty high on the list of considerations for any young solider-to-be)

If Tony believes in the War he should be happy if his son did join up, the same way (i assume) someone who doesn't agree with the war would be pretty sad if their son decided to go out there...but its the kids choice.

[Fittster]

The great game never seems to go well.

[heebeegeetee]

Asterix said:

My view has been, for a long time, to build a 50ft wall round Afghanistan and simply let those inside get on with it. Sorry, you've had the chances thrown at you by the bucket load and it has simply been thrown back in our faces.

Eh?

What chances have they had, and given by whom? We are a twice bankrupt nation where nothing works properly and have a st version of democracy. What are we going to do for anybody, other than make things worse?

I'm afraid your post reveals more than you'll ever know.

How would you feel about the muslim nations invading us, killing a lot of people, attempting to turn our political system into one based on an imaginary friend and a book, for our own good, and when they fail they build a 50ft wall around us?

[MikeCR]

heebeegeetee said:

Asterix said:

My view has been, for a long time, to build a 50ft wall round Afghanistan and simply let those inside get on with it. Sorry, you've had the chances thrown at you by the bucket load and it has simply been thrown back in our faces.

Eh?

What chances have they had, and given by whom? We are a twice bankrupt nation where nothing works properly and have a st version of democracy. What are we going to do for anybody, other than make things worse?

I'm afraid your post reveals more than you'll ever know.

How would you feel about the muslim nations invading us, killing a lot of people, attempting to turn our political system into one based on an imaginary friend and a book, for our own good, and when they fail they build a 50ft wall around us?

2 sides to every story.... but on the other hand I do know some good brickies

[Soovy]

heebeegeetee said:

How would you feel about the muslim nations invading us, killing a lot of people, attempting to turn our political system into one based on an imaginary friend and a book, for our own good.........

That's EXACTLY what's happened!!


1. Mass immigration
2. 7/7 anyone?
3. They're demadning Sharia Law


FFS!

Edited by Soovy on Wednesday 4th November 12:31

[heebeegeetee]

Soovy said:

heebeegeetee said:

How would you feel about the muslim nations invading us, killing a lot of people, attempting to turn our political system into one based on an imaginary friend and a book, for our own good.........

That's EXACTLY what's happened!!


1. Mass immigration
2. 7/7 anyone?
3. They're demadning Sharia Law


FFS!

Well, happening maybe, not happened. I dunno about mass immigration.

But these are problems our leaders have besought upon us, the leaders we voted for.

In our crazy rush to go bankrupt twice over we had/have to import a heck of a lot of cheap foreign workers, and we may come to regret this.

[Eric Mc]

Soovy said:

heebeegeetee said:

How would you feel about the muslim nations invading us, killing a lot of people, attempting to turn our political system into one based on an imaginary friend and a book, for our own good.........

That's EXACTLY what's happened!!


1. Mass immigration
2. 7/7 anyone?
3. They're demadning Sharia Law


FFS!

Edited by Soovy on Wednesday 4th November 12:31

Do you think they will succeed?

[SmoothCriminal]

The thing about these people is they don't have western values they don't want democracy just let them live how they want, why winkey and the rest of the western leaders want some middle eastern/asian utopia is beyond me fk em let them live as they want.

[deeps]

funkyrobot said:

I did wonder how long it would take for a 'turncoat' to appear and do something like this.

Very very sad indeed.

From what I understand he wasn't a turncoat, he was an Afghan in his own country?

[clanger]

Soovy said:

heebeegeetee said:

How would you feel about the muslim nations invading us, killing a lot of people, attempting to turn our political system into one based on an imaginary friend and a book, for our own good.........

That's EXACTLY what's happened!!


1. Mass immigration
2. 7/7 anyone?
3. They're demadning Sharia Law


FFS!

Edited by Soovy on Wednesday 4th November 12:31

Sage words indeed

[southendpier]

Ok, when the Soviets left the country it was in a world of shyte. Taliban eventually get ahold. This wasn't very good for the West.

Serious issue - we bring 'our boys' back home and a Afghani/AlQaeda/Taliban funded cell blows up a tube train in 2012 on the eve of the Olympics for example?

[Fittster]

southendpier said:

Ok, when the Soviets left the country it was in a world of shyte. Taliban eventually get ahold. This wasn't very good for the West.

Serious issue - we bring 'our boys' back home and a Afghani/AlQaeda/Taliban funded cell blows up a tube train in 2012 on the eve of the Olympics for example?

Last time the bombers were from Brum, I'm not sure killing Afghans will actually make us safer in 2012.

[deeps]

Nappa said:

deeps said:

funkyrobot said:

I did wonder how long it would take for a 'turncoat' to appear and do something like this.

Very very sad indeed.

From what I understand he wasn't a turncoat, he was an Afghan in his own country?

He was an Afghani, fighting alongside the British in Afghanistan, who then shot and killed 5 British soldiers who thought he was a friendly.

Yes I know, surely that's to be expected though? It doesn't make him a turncoat, I mean he was fighting his war and unfortunately for us, succeeded.

[deeps]

Fittster said:

southendpier said:

Ok, when the Soviets left the country it was in a world of shyte. Taliban eventually get ahold. This wasn't very good for the West.

Serious issue - we bring 'our boys' back home and a Afghani/AlQaeda/Taliban funded cell blows up a tube train in 2012 on the eve of the Olympics for example?

Last time the bombers were from Brum, I'm not sure killing Afghans will actually make us safer in 2012.

That's right, British born and bred Muslims they were. Educated too as far as I recall?

Then there was the incident at Glasgow(?) airport, where two British born muslims tried to firebomb the entrance. One was a doctor I believe.

There's many more sleeping cells in this country, what's happened in Afghanistan/Iraq only fuels their desires.

[AshVX220]

Lets be honest, the UK wasn't even a target until we blindly followed the US into action.

The US is a target because;
a) it's un-questioning support of Isreal
b) it's direct action against Iraq during the first Gulf War, which as we all know was more about oil, than the rights of Kuwait.

This is a very difficult question politicians face, if they pull out now, all those that died, died for nothing. Or they stay on for another 10 years and pull out, having allowed even more to die for nothing.

You cannot force a 3-400 year old democratic system on a 5000 year old society. They have show that corrption is far too high for it to work properly.

The sooner our government admits that we are a target BECAUSE of our presence there the better. As for pulling out? Who knows what would be best, for me we should pull out now.

We can't pull out and say that we'll stay out unless we find ourselves targetted again, because then someone wil target us. Like Isreal and Palestine, there are far too many people that have way too much to lose if peace breaks out in these paces to ever let it happen.

I'm with alot of others on this thread, pull out now and let them get on with killing each other, we tried, they din't want to know. If the majority out there want peace, then they can fight for it themselves, like countless other countries in history have had to do.

[Balmoral Green]

On previous occassions though, it hasn't always been political, there have been serious fallings out/personality clashes and the red mist has resulted in gunfire. Has this been ruled out, and infiltration definitely ruled in, in this instance?

[Langweilig]

This is from the ARmy Rumour SErvice.

Re: 5 British Troops killed in Afghan 4/11/09
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 7:59 am

"I guarantee that the excrement is going to hit the rotary cooling device on this one. There will be definite ramifications. Can we just translate "Taleban dressed as ANP/Afghan soldiers" as "a bunch of traitorous scum who successfully infiltrated our lines and distilled what everyone already thought into one single, calamitous, inevitable, murderous incident"? This won't be the last. RIP lads."