Afghanistan. was it worth it?
Discussion
It appears the Taliban are over running the country again
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58135148
Was it worth the deaths of hundreds of British troops, thousands of American troops and tens of thousands of Afghan civilians, to say nothing of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on war and relief?
I know, that throughout history nobody has managed to tame Afghanistan but I really fail to see what the deaths of many achieved, and what will we be faced with once they regain control?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-58135148
Was it worth the deaths of hundreds of British troops, thousands of American troops and tens of thousands of Afghan civilians, to say nothing of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on war and relief?
I know, that throughout history nobody has managed to tame Afghanistan but I really fail to see what the deaths of many achieved, and what will we be faced with once they regain control?
bristolracer said:
Was it worth the deaths of hundreds of British troops, thousands of American troops and tens of thousands of Afghan civilians, to say nothing of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on war and relief?
20 years of occupation, lots of deaths, billions of Pounds of taxpayers cash, and within 6 months of leaving the same people who were in charge 21 years ago are back in charge again. How can you make any argument at all it was worth it? If your son, friend or dad had died there fighting you'd be furious with the Government.
I have a good friend who was a Marine for years and he maintains to this day that the Afghans are the hardest people he has ever met, their mountain warfare is second to none and that we should be allied with them and learning from them rather than getting involved in unwinnable wars again and again.
“Victory” was possible - it was catastrophic political misjudgments that doomed the intervention.
There is and was a plentiful knowledge base among analysts, academics, and country experts about how to build a critical mass that would have stabilised the country into a tolerable equilibrium - and all at vastly lower cost than what we ended paying for failure.
But no, the snake oil salesman and ‘special advisors’ talking out of their arses held sway, because their promises were ‘bigger’.
There is and was a plentiful knowledge base among analysts, academics, and country experts about how to build a critical mass that would have stabilised the country into a tolerable equilibrium - and all at vastly lower cost than what we ended paying for failure.
But no, the snake oil salesman and ‘special advisors’ talking out of their arses held sway, because their promises were ‘bigger’.
No
It cost c500 British solider lives, and 10 times that number are now living with serious injuries.
It also transferred £22b of British tax payer money to weapon manufactures, international consultants and Afghan war loads.
It could also be argued it made the UK a less safe place.
In future I’d suggest it would be cheaper (in lives and money) to just hand over billions of pounds and not bother with the fighting bit (risking Uk solider lives).
It cost c500 British solider lives, and 10 times that number are now living with serious injuries.
It also transferred £22b of British tax payer money to weapon manufactures, international consultants and Afghan war loads.
It could also be argued it made the UK a less safe place.
In future I’d suggest it would be cheaper (in lives and money) to just hand over billions of pounds and not bother with the fighting bit (risking Uk solider lives).
Wilmslowboy said:
No
It cost c500 British solider lives, and 10 times that number are now living with serious injuries.
It also transferred £22b of British tax payer money to weapon manufactures, international consultants and Afghan war loads.
It could also be argued it made the UK a less safe place.
In future I’d suggest it would be cheaper (in lives and money) to just hand over billions of pounds and not bother with the fighting bit (risking Uk solider lives).
Definitely. Contributed a reasonable bit to the European migrant crisis and reduced stability in Europe too, not to mention the millions it displaced from Afghanistan into it's immediate neighbours.It cost c500 British solider lives, and 10 times that number are now living with serious injuries.
It also transferred £22b of British tax payer money to weapon manufactures, international consultants and Afghan war loads.
It could also be argued it made the UK a less safe place.
In future I’d suggest it would be cheaper (in lives and money) to just hand over billions of pounds and not bother with the fighting bit (risking Uk solider lives).
In the basis of we’re back to square one, no.
However the Taliban are as evil as the Nazis but guerrilla wars are near impossible to win. Firstly , the enemy is not obvious, ( no uniforms etc), and blend in with the ( supposedly ) friendly population you’re there to help. Also it is a big country (3x U.K.), so it’s almost impossible to control the whole country with an invading force.
Secondly after a lot less than 20 years, the ( friendly) locals start to resent being occupied by a foreign force regardless of their motives.
Thirdly , supposed allies , yes you Pakistan, take shed loads of aid in exchange for pretending to be on our side while helping their Taliban friends.
However the Taliban are as evil as the Nazis but guerrilla wars are near impossible to win. Firstly , the enemy is not obvious, ( no uniforms etc), and blend in with the ( supposedly ) friendly population you’re there to help. Also it is a big country (3x U.K.), so it’s almost impossible to control the whole country with an invading force.
Secondly after a lot less than 20 years, the ( friendly) locals start to resent being occupied by a foreign force regardless of their motives.
Thirdly , supposed allies , yes you Pakistan, take shed loads of aid in exchange for pretending to be on our side while helping their Taliban friends.
Utter waste of time, blood and treasure. No goal set and none that could be achieved militarily or otherwise.
Should have just bombed anyone who was hiding out there after causing problems then left the rest of it to fester like it has for centuries.
The locals obviously want it to be a certain way and all the kit and training they were left with has made sod all difference - literally days to go back to the old ways.
I just feel sorry for those that wasted their efforts and lives on the place, and those left wondering if the sacrifice of family, friends or comrades was worth it or justifiable. I think everyone always knew it was all pointless but that doesn't really help.
Should have just bombed anyone who was hiding out there after causing problems then left the rest of it to fester like it has for centuries.
The locals obviously want it to be a certain way and all the kit and training they were left with has made sod all difference - literally days to go back to the old ways.
I just feel sorry for those that wasted their efforts and lives on the place, and those left wondering if the sacrifice of family, friends or comrades was worth it or justifiable. I think everyone always knew it was all pointless but that doesn't really help.
AW111 said:
Saudi nationals attacked the WTC.
So the US & its allies invaded Iraq and Afghanistan.
Even Australia joined in like a good little lapdog.
Well if we'd been aiming to actually achieve something it would have been ISI HQ and a few sites around Riyadh that would have been the starting point. Instead we diverted in every other direction. So the US & its allies invaded Iraq and Afghanistan.
Even Australia joined in like a good little lapdog.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff