bluemonday Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 selfless imposition of 'democracy'. There's half the problem. Imposing 'our' standards, however desirable ( see Mollogs post 12 on first page re womens rights) conflicts with hundreds of years of custom and practice. It's either totally 'democracy' or Taliban time. Surely there's a possible pragmatic approach there somewhere? Some middle ground? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alibaba Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 What is quite astonishing is the amount of the population who have no idea why UK troops are in Afghanistan, and even with seemingly blanket coverage, they still remain in the dark. Does anyone know why they're there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 18, 2009 Author Share Posted August 18, 2009 Given the way things are panning out it would some form government being set-up where there will be elections. But the standards we are imposing are simply that elections mean that the government is legitimate. For some reason, if you have elections it means the government is acceptable. But what really gets my goat are the idiots who genuinely think that the soldiers in Afghanistan are on some humanitarian crusade. I read today in the Manchester Metro in the Letters section about some guy who wasn't happy about the situation with women's rights and the new law that will be introduced regarding sexual relations between married couples. This guy genuinely thought that this stood against what the war was about. Erm...no. The war was never about bringing liberalism, western cultural values, and human rights to Afghanistan. It was simply about killing Al Qaeda and then removing the Taliban. Now it is about regional stability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KMC Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/...-few-years.html Part of this article will explain the increase in violence during the last few weeks. Afghanistan's second-ever presidential election is this Thursday. American marines have fanned out across the country’s volatile southern regions to increase security. But American efforts may not be enough—the Taliban have vowed to cut off the ink-stained fingers of any Afghans who vote With the election two days away, Taliban attacks rocked Kabul today. The presidential palace and Ministry of Defense were under “indirect fire” from mortars or rockets, but no casualties were reported immediately. A suicide bomb on the road heading east to Jalalabad that targeted ISAF forces killed at least seven civilians and wounded at least 52. Two Afghan members of the United Nations were killed in the blast along with one NATO service member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terse Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 The danger is that the constant repetition of bad news/casualties will dull our senses eventually - just as it did in N.Ireland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 18, 2009 Author Share Posted August 18, 2009 I cannot believe that Ray Odierno whose efforts in Iraq during the first two years were the anthesis of 'heart and minds' strategy and COIN strategy (considering the disgusting things the 4th ID did to the local populace) has ended up in a role in Iraq where he represents the American forces. What a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 An issue is that the US/UK etc must restrict the possible Taliban control of certain areas of the world. These groups have already pushed into areas often considered "friendly" ie Pakistan (a nuclear nation). If this was left un-restricted it could have much greater ramifications. IMO by fighting the Taliban in Afgan they are restricting the influence in Packistan. Its still a conflict that needs extra manpower, air support, equipment etc, The stratergy needs to look more at gaining control/order before pushing the more "Hearts & Minds" issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollag Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 We as a country had no problem backing and arming the Taleban, except when they allowed training camps for Bin Laden to operate. So we went to eradicate the Taleban and Bin Laden, seem we have failed in these aims. We promised to bring freedom and democracy to the Afghans, failed again. Karazai will go the same way as Nadji Bullah Like Iraq, we will scuttle away leaving the country to the warlord/ militias and claim a spin victory and mourn our wasted dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 We as a country had no problem backing and arming the Taleban, except when they allowed training camps for Bin Laden to operate.So we went to eradicate the Taleban and Bin Laden, seem we have failed in these aims. We promised to bring freedom and democracy to the Afghans, failed again. Karazai will go the same way as Nadji Bullah Like Iraq, we will scuttle away leaving the country to the warlord/ militias and claim a spin victory and mourn our wasted dead. IMO, we will never be able to leave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollag Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I dearly hope we have the strength to admit our failings and get our guys out of there, we were only ever a sop for Dudbya, much it botheres him now on the golf course, and Tony? to busy lining his pockets and pretending to have influence in the middle east, they are now gone---time we were as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Agreed 100% There's no doubting the courage of the armed services. The courage of the spineless political fuckwits to do the correct thing is however a totally different issue. If their neck was on the line daily, they might see things differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Agreed 100% There's no doubting the courage of the armed services. The courage of the spineless political fuckwits to do the correct thing is however a totally different issue. If their neck was on the line daily, they might see things differently. I agree , The men on the ground deserve much more suppoer, recognition and just plain old help. But I feel the damage has been done, the more extreme Muslim's have a far greater reach/power base now in Pakistan, due i suppose to their percieved "wests war against Muslims" , but also their social problems etc. If these extremists are allowed to gain a greater foothold, what could happen next?? Pakistan is a nuclear capable nation. ** noted, damn I am sound very pesamistic today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lao Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 selfless imposition of 'democracy'. Surely there's a possible pragmatic approach there somewhere? Some middle ground? there was a middle ground, but the armed forces shelled it last week! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 My view is we pull out and let the fuckers kill each other off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 19, 2009 Author Share Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) Just John - Its still a conflict that needs extra manpower, air support, equipment etc, The stratergy needs to look more at gaining control/order before pushing the more "Hearts & Minds" issues. If it does need extra manpower and equipment then count the British out. Effective counter-insurgency strategies require very large amounts of manpower and finance. Britain and Europe for that matter simply doesn't have the resources and willpower. This is why Britain and the US are desperate to make sure that a government can be set-up that has some form of legitimacy so that the authorities have the main responsibility for maintaining stability. Just John - I agree , The men on the ground deserve much more suppoer, recognition and just plain old help. But I feel the damage has been done, the more extreme Muslim's have a far greater reach/power base now in Pakistan, due i suppose to their percieved "wests war against Muslims" , but also their social problems etc. If these extremists are allowed to gain a greater foothold, what could happen next?? Pakistan is a nuclear capable nation. Support and recognition and plain old help? Depends on what form that takes. What could happen next? Well I don't know, but the Taliban are NOT Al Qaeda. And Pakistan is not going to turn Taliban. The concern is that Taliban presence in the north of Pakistan makes it difficult (politically) to eliminate them and the north of Pakistan could potentially harbour some large elements of Al Qaeda if nothing is done. And the reason why the Taliban are in Pakistan is because of the fighting in Afghanistan. Edited August 19, 2009 by La_Dolce_Vita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.