Home Drink & Drugs
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Narcotic Enforcement a major reason for continued presence in Afghanistan

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6636113.stm

The Defence secretary has told the commons today that we should expect British troops to be in Afghanistan beyond 2009, and could take decades for afghanistan to stand properly without aid.

A major reason for this, he also commented, was the need for narcotic enforcement particularly with respect to the booming trade in opium. Of course my learned friends on the board will remember that, in the aftermath of invasion, Afghan opium production skyrocketed in areas where the Taliban were keeping a lid on such production.

And I am also sure that Iran, where in 2004 one in 20 people were thought to be addicted to Heroin, will be just delighted with this.

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The Defence secretary has told the commons today that we should expect British troops to be in Afghanistan beyond 2009.

    A major reason for this, he also commented, was the need for narcotic enforcement particularly with respect to the booming trade in opium.

    It do think that our troops would be pissing into the wind with regards trying to stop the growing and production of heroin in Afghanistan.

    Heroin will still be grown and it will still find its way into the UK, regardless of the presence of British troops or not. So lets not have our forces out there any longer than need be.

    :thumb:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Calvin wrote: »
    It do think that our troops would be pissing into the wind with regards trying to stop the growing and production of heroin in Afghanistan.

    Heroin will still be grown and it will still find its way into the UK, regardless of the presence of British troops or not. So lets not have our forces out there any longer than need be.

    :thumb:

    To be honest, as Martin mentioned, the opium trade has been hugely helped by the removal of the Taliban, so it's a very bogus arguement. Especially since we're not going to use the same methods they used.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Jim V wrote: »
    To be honest, as Martin mentioned, the opium trade has been hugely helped by the removal of the Taliban, so it's a very bogus arguement. Especially since we're not going to use the same methods they used.

    Let the Taliban government deal with it, but I dont see why it should be down to British troops to deal with.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well the main problem with that is that we got rid of the Taliban government...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    We'll probably get some no-brainer threat analysis about Heroin money funding terrorism, but from where are many Taliban fighters coming now? Pakistan, specifically Warzistan and the mountainous areas surrounding the boarder, and over which the government of Pervez Musharraf has little control.

    How does one fight an enemy for whom total annihilation is the most supreme victory?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The Taliban may in the past have been against opium, but now they have a war to fund, so many of them are up to their necks in the trade because its the best way to make money.

    If all EU countries prescribed heroin to addicts it would be more effective than ten times as many troops in Afghanistan.
Sign In or Register to comment.