British deaths in Afghanistan

[Johnny Canuck3]

Invading a country to topple a regime is never, ever the right thing to do. I don't just mean morally. .

Er, the Third Reich?

 

[butchersapron]

That depends on whether or not the population is behind whomever would be mounting the insurgency or guerilla war.

The US could not defeat the Viet Cong, because many of the people in the South were on their side. As I understand it, there are people who like the taliban in afghanistan, but a larger number will go along or stay silent, because the taliban uses fear as a weapon against them.

There are afghanis living here. I often buy lunch down the street from one. To a man, they say that living under the taliban, was indescribably horrid.

And yet people who hate the taliban are right now fighting the US. I wonder why.

 

[butchersapron]

Er, the Third Reich?

Fighting it to prop it up you mean.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think the two reasons are interconnected, as it was the rule of the taliban that allowed al Q to operate within afghanistan's borders in the first place.

Yes, but those Al Q forces that were in Afghanistan have simply moved south into Pakistan. They are not now fighting in Afghanistan to rid the world of terrorism. That bird has flown. So they have to come up with a different justification unless they are going to pull out. They tried briefly with the ending the heroin trade line. Maybe they'll try that again in the future. The fact that herion production shot up after the invasion makes that one hard to sell.

As to whether or not they should pull out, yes they should. And they should do a whole bunch of other things too, which they won't.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Fighting it to prop it up you mean.

It's a bad propping, when the main guy and his girlfriend and dog, end up in the barbeque pit in the back yard.

 

[butchersapron]

No that's good propping. It doesn't get better.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Er, the Third Reich?

The Second World War was not fought in order to free the German people of the Nazis. I doubt the Soviet Union would have sacrificed 25 million lives in such an altruistic endeavour.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

As to whether or not they should pull out, yes they should. And they should do a whole bunch of other things too, which they won't.

I think that NATO or whomever have embarked on a course of action, and now is too late to decide it wasn't the best idea in the first place, and just withdraw. To do so would create a power vacuum that the taliban would rush in to fill, and they'd come back twice as bad as before, in retribution.

 

[Pickman's model]

Invading a country to topple a regime is never, ever the right thing to do. I don't just mean morally. Civil war (or, in propaganda-speak, insurgency) is the inevitable consequence.

The Second World War was not fought in order to free the German people of the Nazis. I doubt the Soviet Union would have sacrificed 25 million lives in such an altruistic endeavour.

can't you see the goalposts moving?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The Second World War was not fought in order to free the German people of the Nazis. I doubt the Soviet Union would have sacrificed 25 million lives in such an altruistic endeavour.

The war was fought to topple the Nazi regime.

 

[butchersapron]

NATO or whomever

star!

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think that NATO or whomever have embarked on a course of action, and now is too late to decide it wasn't the best idea in the first place, and just withdraw. To do so would create a power vacuum that the taliban would rush in to fill, and they'd come back twice as bad as before, in retribution.

There is already a power vacuum. Pulling out would save lives, Afghan lives.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Originally Posted by littlebabyjesus
Invading a country to topple a regime is never, ever the right thing to do

................

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

There is already a power vacuum. Pulling out would save lives, Afghan lives.

Ask an afghani about the lives lost while the taliban controlled the place.

 

[8ball]

I think that NATO or whomever have embarked on a course of action, and now is too late to decide it wasn't the best idea in the first place, and just withdraw. To do so would create a power vacuum that the taliban would rush in to fill, and they'd come back twice as bad as before, in retribution.

I've never heard a 'power vacuum' argument that's totally convinced me - always smacks of 'something's going, let's take it'.

That said, I have no constructive counterargument - it's a mess.

 

[DexterTCN]

I think that NATO or whomever have embarked on a course of action, and now is too late to decide it wasn't the best idea in the first place, and just withdraw....

Indeed...one should never learn from ones mistakes. Or the mistake of the USSR for 20 years.

Best just to get drawn into a multi-decade pointless war with no tangible objectives.

That's who we are, that's what we represent.

 

[butchersapron]

It's odd, you can never ever withdraw from anywhere these days because if you do it'll be worse for those poor souls you're currently fucking over.

 

[EddyBlack]

Johnny, would you be greatly surprised if Afghan women now had it worse? Afghan women are in the top five for infant mortality and 2nd for those dying during birth.

Karzai has pardoned 5 men for raping a 13 year old, he has allowed marital rape, and the security of Afghan women is in many ways worse than what it was under the taliban.

Nobody is saying they like the taliban. But it isn't that simple. It isn't acceptable to think the choice is between fighting a war with the aim 'defeat the taliban' or else 'you are supporting the taliban'. That is the bullheaded attitude that will see us locked into this futile and bloody fight with no direction or progress for the Afghan people or the NATO occupiers.

 

[8ball]

The war was fought to topple the Nazi regime.

You know how mealy-mouthed that sounds, doncha?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

can't you see the goalposts moving?

Maybe I'm not being clear enough. Invading a country in order to topple the regime is very different from invading a country in order to protect yourself from that country's regime. One of the main differences, of course, is that in the latter case, you do what it takes. To properly conquer Afghanistan could cost, let us say, 100,000 British lives. If Afghanistan were intent on attacking the UK, that might be seen as worth it. You think anyone would tolerate that in the current situation, where the Taliban pose no threat whatever to the UK?

 

[Voley]

You've got to kill some people to help them. It's the only language they understand.

 

[butchersapron]

You know how mealy-mouthed that sounds, doncha?

He doesn't, he does really believe this.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

It's odd, you can never ever withdraw from anywhere these days because if you do it'll be worse for those poor souls you're currently fucking over.

I think you'll find that the majority of afghani civilians being killed these days, are being killed by the taliban, not by your country's soldiers, nor mine.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Ask an afghani about the lives lost while the taliban controlled the place.

Which Afghani shall I ask, a Taliban supporter or an opponent of the Taliban?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

You've got to kill some people to help them. It's the only language they understand.

Woman being helped by the taliban:

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think you'll find that the majority of afghani civilians being killed these days, are being killed by the taliban, not by your country's soldiers, nor mine.

They are being killed in a civil war started by NATO.

 

[butchersapron]

I think you'll find that the majority of afghani civilians being killed these days, are being killed by the taliban, not by your country's soldiers, nor mine.

I think you're wrong but so what - you prove my point.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Which Afghani shall I ask, a Taliban supporter or an opponent of the Taliban?

Ask an afghani female.

 

[Pickman's model]

vietnamese after being helped by the yanks

 

[butchersapron]

Woman being helped by the taliban:

I fucking love the taliban we all do, but let's talk sensibly.