If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
300 British troops now dead...
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
300 British troops now dead.
David cameron states that until the afgans can secure their own country, our troops will stay out there working with them to help support them.
I see some sense in what David Cameron is saying. It is important to leave this war as such in the best way, rather than too soon enabling the afgans to deal with their countries own issues. by staying out there to support them when eventually it comes a time where they can go alone in sorting out the country's mess.
What i have to ask is how long will this take? -will it take another 300 of our troops?
when will the Afgans take more responsiblity for their country?
what is your opininon on this?
David cameron states that until the afgans can secure their own country, our troops will stay out there working with them to help support them.
I see some sense in what David Cameron is saying. It is important to leave this war as such in the best way, rather than too soon enabling the afgans to deal with their countries own issues. by staying out there to support them when eventually it comes a time where they can go alone in sorting out the country's mess.
What i have to ask is how long will this take? -will it take another 300 of our troops?
when will the Afgans take more responsiblity for their country?
what is your opininon on this?
0
Comments
Let's see if Barack Obama will be so keen to slag off the Brits if we leave the Yanks to deal with all the shit in Afghanistan.
hmmm
They are taking quite a bit of responsibility. The number of Afghan National Army, and Afghan National Police recruits, is ever increasing.
Ive mentioned this in many other posts on another thread in here, but its not the majority of Afghans who are causing trouble for our troops.
Oh and its 307 now.
What exactly is the job you'd like to see done?
Funding Enemies to Maintain Trillion Dollar Racket
A few recent news items help expose the true drivers of current wars around the world.
#1) Wherever there is a war, look for CIA/IMF/private military war profiteers covertly funding and supporting BOTH sides in order to keep the wars raging and the profits rolling in. As former CIA Station Chief John Stockwell explained: “Enemies are necessary for the wheels of the US military machine to turn.”
Here’s an important glimpse of truth to seep through last week in the NY Times, via Raw Story:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25771.htm
Nope, 307.
All this doing is increasing resentment by muslims across the world against Britain and America and making us bigger targets for Islamic terrorism.
Mark my words this war will surely be lost by America and Britain by January 2013!
http://www.stopwar.org.uk
I think that calling people 'right wing scum' and labelling them as 'war criminals' is hardly the way forward either. If you can't agree with someone's views you attack them? Wait, isn't that kind of against the point that you are trying to make?
As for how the operations in Afghanistan can be about protecting us here in Britain from terrorism, well, if that's where the terrorist leaders are and that's where the training goes on then wouldn't it make sense to remove the power from those at the top of the chain of command? Or should we stay at home and keep trying to predict the places that will be hit next, a job that is near enough impossible to do comprehensively? The cancer has to be cut out from the source.
I'm not advocating the war, and the reason for that is because I don't have access to the intel that provides the basis for these decisions. It's not my call to make, and I won't jump on a bandwagon unless I feel I am fully informed. All I'm stating is that the reasons for trying to tackle the problem at source, if indeed that's where the source lies, are pretty obvious. And that your aggressive slur towards G is no example of doing things the peaceful way.
Aren't you the supporter of the right wing racists?
I don't want to be picky, but as he supports the BNP he would be a supporter of left wing racists.
The BNP is also not 'right wing', right wing means a party that supports the bosses. The BNP support the workers. The majority of real right wing party members like the Tories have also never supported strict immigration control. Only the odd exception like Enoch Powell spoke out against mass immigration.
I am also not a BNP supporter just a supporter of strict immigration control and a hater of the politcally correct mafia who want to ban the BNP and who support mass immigration.
By the way if you think this war in Afghanistan is to protect us against terrorism then why are we not fighting in Saudi Arabia too, as Saudi Arabia has far bigger links with Islamic terrorism than Afghanistan ever had!
The 9/11 attacks also did not justify the war on Afghanistan as the Afghan government and none of the Afghan people had attacked America. The ruling Taliban had also agreed to handing over Bin Laden if shown evidence of his involvement in the 9/11 attacks. But the American government refused to provide any evidence.
http://www.stopwar.org.uk
ah, fuck off.
possibly because they're a bunch of idiotic racists? :banghead:
Just out of interest, do you think they have a view on whether a sexual frustrated man raping a woman is the same as a starving man stealing a loaf of bread?
You're Steelgate (et al.) and I claim my five pounds/octi.
Tosser are you?
Or perhaps more properly, RIGHT wing racists, whose rank and file membership support the coming together of state and corporate power, which has historically been linked with the Right wing ideology of fascism.
And if you're going to bring the 'big state' into this (i.e. they must be left wing because they support a large powerful state) then how do you square this up with large swathes of the Anarchist bloc who make up the bulk of the people who actively oppose them (i.e. have been fighting, literally, with them in their localities for 100 years) - most of them are self avowedly Radical left.
...now if you were going to argue that actually left/right is all a little too simplistic to actually get a grip on the issues I might agree - but I don't think anyone's being fooled by this recent fashion for those of a centre-right position to shift this further towards others they disagree with...
Back on topic
I have been there several times. I notice most people on these boards are what you would call anti-fascist yet they are supporting a war of aggresion in Afghanistan. Don't they know that it is fascist to attack and invade other countries which are no threat to us.
http://www.stopwar.org.uk
You're right in one way, I think you could sum up your point of view as: "In for a penny, in for a pound." We have invested 300 lives into this already so if we pulled out that would essentially be for nothing.
But there is a saying in finance, not to throw good money after bad. If things are going badly and you are losing a lot, then sometimes you just need to cut your losses.
300 deaths without victory is tragic.
3000 deaths without victory would be horrific.
I'm not advocating we pull out btw - it has to be balanced. Ultimately there is a 'human cost' that I'm sure David Cameron has in his mind that's acceptable.
http://www.stopwar.org.uk
Anyone else think it's a coincidence that there is a similarity between these two posts?
For those who never came across Steelgate before, he was banned from these boards for saying that there was no difference between a hungry man stealing a loaf of bread and a frustrated man raping a woman.
He's returned in a few forms over the years - Stealgate, Stee1gate for example. Each time he's been banned.
It's worth noting that he's appeared on several discussion boards and been banned from them too, haven't you Angus?
Cos he's a cunt, who didn't give a fuck about his mates. He was a loggie for fuck's sake, not inf. The only PTSD he suffered was where to put the tin cans in the storeroom