Afghanistan poll

[Pubey]

This was always one of the phenomenally stupid invasions of modern history, though it has to be said that we've been spoiled for choice recently. I have no doubt about the valour and competence of our troops, but they haven't got a chance of turning that country around.

You've got the most inhospitable terrain imaginable, unless you're a guerrila of course. You've got the poisoned end of the Islamic stick, you've got a thriving drug trade and you've got a well-trained, well-aimed militia in place.

Then there's history. We couldn't take them in the 19th Century and Russia couldn't take them in the 20th Century and, I tell you what, I bet their interpretation of the Geneva Convention was a little different from ours.

As far as I know, we went there because a Saudi-funded, Saudi-manned team of terrorists may or may not have trained there and a Saudi warlord may or not have lived there. I say 'may or may not' because the people pointing the finger also said that there were WMD in Iraq and if they can't accurately position inanimate objects, I don't think we should take their word on people.

The only problem is that Afghanistan is now such an utter, ****ing nightmare that it's not morally right to zip off into the sunset and leave them to it. To hell with morals, you might say, we're getting a spanking. It's a decision for a wiser head than mine, but I just hope that next time our hopelessly inept rulers send thousands of kids off to get maimed they stop to read a history book or do some research first.

absolutely 100% how I feel. Part of me wants them to stay and finish 'the job'... but what the **** that job is i don't have a ****ing clue

 

[EastStandBlue]

I am not sure if Afghanistan has ever had what we in the West would consider a "democratic" government, and anyone thinking (as Bush & Blair did) that bombing Afghanistan back to the stone age would help, well it didn't they're already there. Afghanistan has proved unconquerable, and the might of the Soviet Army was driven out in the early 80's. Despite what Brown and Obama say & think this war is unwinnable, and while it's not just UK & US forces, it seems it's our troops that are at the sharp end. All the senseless deaths of our troops to protect what has proven to be a corrupt election is the last straw. Therefore, and I acknowledge that our armed forces are the best in the world we should pull out before any more young lives are lost.

Ironically Iraq under Saddam Hussain wasn't ruled by religion, and Al Qaeda weren't in Iraq prior to the invasion, they are now with a vengeance.

Iran is ruled nominally by a President in Ahmedinijad, but it's the Supreme Leader of the Religious Council that calls the shots there. What is IMO proven beyond doubt is that the Iranian people want to be free of the system they are now saddled with. That isn't to say they want to be rid of their religion, the majority want to live in peace with the rest of the world which includes Israel & The Great Satan.

I'd agree with most of that... Russia had a far larger and more mobile force in Afghanistan yet were driven out, Most people would be too pleased to see us withdraw from the country to launch too much criticism at us "not finishing the job". You'll never get a truely democratic government in places like Aghanistan, like you say it's already in the Stoneage, so it's best to just stop trying.

The only people I'd say that could do more would be the UN. They're all happy to get involved if it's nuclear sites that need checking, but it strikes me that when the **** hits the fan, they've already left... If they could come in with a considerable force, even if it is supplied by the US or UK, and lay some groundwork it'd achieve a damn site more than what we've done in what is now approaching a decade.

 

[Smudger]

Withdraw ground troops but keep our hand in by carpet bombing any new training camps. I'd rather we sorted our own back yard out first as opposed to sanctioning a daily flow of dead or maimed teenage boys coming back to the UK.

 

[Slipperduke]

If we're going to stay, and I think we should, then we need to ensure that our troops are properly armed and equipped with the tools to do their job, and with sufficent numbers to carry out their mission. We need to go all the way or go away.

Why do I think we should stay? Firstly, the Taliban are evil men and they must not be allowed to take power. All of you pantywaist liberals who claim to believe in women's rights should think twice before telling me I'm wrong in advocating the annihilation of the Taliban and militant Islam.

Secondly, we shouldn't give the Islamofascists any more reason to believe that we don't have the stomach for the fight. We're constantly proving that we're weak in our tolerance of Islamic dogma (which is rooted in the 12th century it seems) and in the case of the US, that they allow a card-carrying (literally!) Jihadist nutcase to attain high rank in the army tasked with fighting this lunacy, so another pathetic capitulation would show these *******s that they're not just winning, they've won.

Couldn't agree with you more on the first point. We've got to stop 'sort-of' going to war. If we're going to do it, divert the finances and do it properly. I'd rather pay a bit of extra tax for a bit than watch this steady stream of bodybags.

I'm actually not so fussed about Afghan women's rights that I want our soldiers to die for it. It's always been a daft argument for me because if it's going to be our stated policy that we invade anywhere with a human rights issue, then we're going to need a lot of recruits for a mission to China.

Your final point is a real doozie. Historically, weakness always attracts aggression, but how far does that go? The US didn't collapse under Communism after Vietnam. They could have carried on there until the mid-80s, but would they ever have 'won'?

As I say, I'm nowhere near informed or intelligent enough to make a call on what happens next. I just ****ing well hope we've learned something. We've been there two years longer than World War Two lasted and I can't be the only one to question whether it's been worth it.

 

[steveo]

Thus resulting in the same situation we are in now?

No. Bomb from long range. No need to land.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

It'd be nice if the rest of the western world apart from the US and UK did their fare share.

As someone who works in the railways, I thought you'd be more aware than most that fare isn't the same as fair......

 

[DTS]

Personally one British death is too big a price to pay. Half of them seem to want to kill us anyway so why the **** are we there risking our own people for them.

I am sure its all about money at the end of the day hence why we wont come out but to put out boys out there with a lack of equipment is an insult to every British serviceman past or present.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I'm actually not so fussed about Afghan women's rights that I want our soldiers to die for it. It's always been a daft argument for me because if it's going to be our stated policy that we invade anywhere with a human rights issue, then we're going to need a lot of recruits for a mission to China.

You make an excellent point about women's rights Slipper. **** 'em. It just always frustrates me that some people can champion human rights and feminism with one breath and oppose the elimination of radical Islam with the next. You're also right that we can't police the world, but at the same time we shouldn't be squeamish about smashing a regime like that of the Taliban which is openly hostile towards us and also treats its people like Ron Martin treats Southend supporters. (Ooh! See what I did there!)

Your final point is a real doozie. Historically, weakness always attracts aggression, but how far does that go? The US didn't collapse under Communism after Vietnam. They could have carried on there until the mid-80s, but would they ever have 'won'?

Another fair point, but I would argue that Communists were a far more rational and pragmatic opponent than the Islamo-loons. Despite the reversals of the Berlin Wall and the Vietnam War, the regular folks behind the Iron Curtain still wanted blue jeans and Coca-Cola. We were constantly winning the cultural war, and I don't think that's the case here. This isn't a war of political/economic ideologies, it's a war between cultures. The trouble is, only one side sees it that way, whilst the other (the one with all the shiny tanks and thermonuclear devices) wants to wage war against its own culture, heritage and identity and excuse the excesses of its enemy.

 

[chadded]

From someone whose been there, twice, lost collegues, and played a heavy part in mentoring the Afghan National Police, here's my two cents;

On September 11th 2001, a terrorist group, known to be operating out of Afghanistan had their finest hour. The 'government' harbouring them, the Taliban, were given a choice- surrender those who carried out the attacks or face the consequences. They chose not to surrender, and I defy anyone to disagree with the initial invasion of Afghanistan in late 2001. Realistically, they left the US/UK and other allied countries no choice. There was no way we could let them get away with it.

The problem stems from the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. The Taliban were toppled easily and everyone put Afghanistan on the back burner, thinking the war was won. Iraq then, rightly or wrongly, became more important.

UK Troops have operated in Afghanistan since about September 15th 2001 (got to give the SBS a few days to get ready ;)) but overtly since about October 2001, operating mainly out of Kabul. Note, the first troops into Helmand, operating properly and not just building Camp Bastion, was not until March 2006, 4 and a half years after the orignal fall of the regime.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind, that we should be there, and I for one cannot wait to go back out there. The Afghan people that I met during my two tours in 2006 and 2008 are the some of the most simple, peaceful people you will ever meet, and that is what they want, peace.

I wish it was as simple as destroying all the Poppy fields, but it is not. Even if we did do that, they would grow back. The problem is the farmers who grow a lot of the poppy are simple peaceful people who just want to make ends meet for their family. They couyld grow corn, or something else, but Opium is more profitable, and until they can grow something that is as profitable, by destroying the poppy fields, you run the risk of turning more people to the Taliban.

There is no doubt corruption is rife across the country, but that is something that has to be dealt with at all levels.

One of the biggest problems I found out there was that there were too many agencies trying to do the same thing- train. RMP, not RMP British soldiers, the US Forces, UK Civil Police Officers, and an American Company- Dyncorps, all had some form of job to do training the ANP. Now, if I was teaching them how to search a person or a vehicle for example, I'd keep it simple, as long they dont miss anything, and safety isnt comprimised, then great. The problem was different groups teaching different things to the same Policemen, who in turn think **** this, and go back to their old ways.

I've lost collegues and friends in Afghanistan. To pull out would mean they died in vain. To pull out would give victory to a Terrorist group that supported Al Quaida 8 years ago. Can you really say that that is acceptable?

As already said in this thread, give the troops the right numbers, equipment and backing, and we will do the job.

I could go on for ages, but my keyboard is ****, and I should be working.

 

[steveo]

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind, that we should be there, and I for one cannot wait to go back out there.

That's good enough for me then. Ill retract my previous posts and go with your view as you are far closer to it than i'll ever be. I just get extremely hacked off with hearing of another British soldier losing his life out there.

 

[chadded]

Get your facts straight mate and stop reading the tabloids!

USA - 29,000 + 19,000 involved with NATO
UK 7,800
Germany 3,210
Italy 2,800
Canada 2,500And small handfuls of elite soldiers from Singapore, Austria, Ireland, Luembourg & Iceland.

Bear in mind this is just Afgan & not taking into account Iraq, Iran, Pakistan etc

I hate to agree with MK Shrimper, but he's pretty much correct. Contributing troops is all well and good, but when most are at KIA (Kabul International Airport) doing **** all, then whats the point. If you are going to accuse MK of reading tabloids, then where's the recognition for the Danish and Estonian's, who aside from Uncle Sam, are quite blatently UK Forces biggest allies in the region. Certainly proving themselves of not being afraid to get stuck in.

 

[osymandus]

I hate to agree with MK Shrimper, but he's pretty much correct. Contributing troops is all well and good, but when most are at KIA (Kabul International Airport) doing **** all, then whats the point. If you are going to accuse MK of reading tabloids, then where's the recognition for the Danish and Estonian's, who aside from Uncle Sam, are quite blatently UK Forces biggest allies in the region. Certainly proving themselves of not being afraid to get stuck in.

Those Norwegians not pulling their weight over there ?