The second post was probably a joke. That's why I laughed. The earlier one wasn't I think. I'm a bit tired of your attitude towards me... So yeah, take it easy, probably best we don't talk anymore.
That's a bit like your private message telling me not to participate in debates in the forum I help to moderate... if you continue to post horrendously ill-informed comments like the ones earlier in this thread, I will continue to pick you up on them. Still, I'm sorry that you took offence, you seem to take everything so personally and aparently can't contribute constructively without descending to name calling. Your behaviour is frequently that of a troll, intentionally or not. Sorry but that's the truth. The fact you've been banned from these forums multiple times should surely have given you a clue about that by now...
This is a long thread,my apologies for not reading most of it.But both the US+UK are just wasting alot of money. resources etc. in Afghanistan and so on.There is really no way they can accomplish much of anything.--If I had my way I would have the US+UK withdraw fully from that area,and let Afghanistan etc. hande their own affairs.It would be better for both the UK+US.--Sometimes you have to know when to walk away,and know when to run.The US itself would be alot better off if it stopped meddling in everyones business period,and often agitating things in the process.And again as far as the US goes America would be alot better off tending to it's own problems within.The US should ony get involved in world conflicts if one of its allies were in big trouble.
*sigh*Lithium: All I'm sayin' is we seem to rub each other up the wrong way, or you rub me up the wrong way. So, perhaps it wise we just don't talk to each other about much. I can't remember ever saying you can't contribute to the debate, but I'm sure you can find some comment and turn its on its head. One of the reasons it wise we don't get into anything anymore, because it just ends up getting a little tedious. I'd just like to say, I've never had a problem with you picking up on anything I say, which can range from being right to horribly ill-informed, like most human beings; me more so because you simply don't agree with the majority if anything I say. I only took offence at your tone, I got a little angry, calmed down and then apologised. *moves on*.
I'd just read the first few posts if I were you... I was reading today that one of the popular contenders in the elections (Ramazan Bashardost) has promised to kick all foreign troops out, if he wins. It will probably end up like the Obama promises, where it takes over a year to implement, but that is his promise. Imo, it will be too early, we need to be there atleast a few morre years, I'm sorry to say. If we did leave them to there own devices everything that has been accomplished, will unravel. That seems more like "Cut and Run" rather than a graceful withdrawl. The worst thing to do, even if you just see it as us clearing up our mess, we can't just leave in the middle of something.
I know what you're saying odon,and in many ways you're right.Maybe cut and run is not the way to go about it.It would be nice though if the US+UK took a long break from trying to solve the worlds problems.And of course the US is alot worse than the UK in trying to be the worlds policeman.
Not that it seems likely there'd be another situation like this, but after Iraq and Afghanistan I think they will think twice before trying this kind of thing again... Obama in the White House seems genuinely less bullish and belligerent than the Bush regime, and thankfully Tony Blair with his evangelistic notion of "righteous war" is history too... I just hope the level of harm we have caused will one day soon die down. We have made bad situations worse.
I do think we should remember it is not just the UK and US, even though most of the focus is placed on the UK and US, there is still other foreign troops out there and ofcourse the Afghan army. I do understand that we are seen as the "worlds policemen" but that phrase does seem to only rear it's head in the less popular interventions. If both countries actually did retreat into isolationism, then many would argue the US and UK are turning their backs on the world. You certainly can't please all the people all the time. I think far too much focus has been placed on Blair and Bush's apparent motivations, even now, and far less on the mission at hand and what has been achieved. Even now, the main focus seems to be on the death toll and the violence, though horrible and heartbreaking (I shed a tear to a fallen soldier that came from near where I live - that brought it all home for me) it is a fraction of what is occurring out there.
This is a no win situation. I would like to see all of our guys and gals come home immediately. But this is not Iraq. The stakes here are huge. Lest we forget, Afghanistan is where al Qaeda freely set up terrorist training camps to foment 9-11 and other attempted plots. While we could argue forever about what the nature of that organization is or is not at this moment in time, it is really superfluous.....its successors and the Taliban are certainly forces to be reckoned with. After 9-11, unconnected wannabe franchises hatched all over the world from Morroco to the P.I. In Afghanistan, the Taliban are kicking the hell out of the coalition forces. In Pakistan, it is the same story...only 2 million people have been displaced (already)....just wait till this thing really starts cooking in the cities. According to the Economist, Canada and the Dutch have said they're pulling out of Afghanistan next year. The U.S. and the Brits are all but bankrupt. The French and the Germans will not fight. Who else is left? The Ites? The Brazilians? The Greeks? The Spaniards?...all Jokes......No one is left....the Jihadi Muslims win, until some day, probably 5-6 years from now, when the world truly wakes up and the knife is at our collective throats........and blood is staining our shirts...and then, it is going to be a nightmare that will make WWII look like child's play. Nostradamus spoke eloquently of this...at length. We are living EXACTLY what he predicted. IMHO.......the Sunni Muslims are destined to build their Caliphate just as they have said they will (and again, Nostradamus predicted). And as it gets bigger, the weak countries of the Middle East will crumble like cheap straw huts in a Florida hurricane. Eventually, the threat will be at the doorstep of Europe. The jokers in the deck? Yes there are jokers.Israel, the Shiites of Iran and the nukes in Pakistan. Any or all of these could really put a twist into the grand equation.
Odon I'm afraid I haven't read the whole of this thread, so I'm sorry if I'm repeating points, but there seem to be a few fallacies floating around. Certainly there are other armies in Afghanistan; the Uzbek government is one of the most corrupt in the world, but they wouldn't have their troops in Afghanistan were it not for the US and UK, neither do they propagandise the war to the same extent. The US and UK ending their military commitment to Afghanistan has nothing, in my view, to do with isolationism. It is an extremely powerful, and prevalent, idea to propose. Most people who are opposed to the war on terror, if it can be reduced to that phrase, have many other positive rather than preventive, ideas on how the state could intervene beneficially in foreign countries. There are a host of situations that would benefit massively from the amount of attention, monetarily and otherwise, that has been given to Afghanistan. I know that this line of argument does not address at all the physicality of the situation there, but this is a conscious decision not to debate what has been pretty conclusively established, trying to avoid situations much like the interminable climate change debates that continued (and continue) to rage years after it was clear that humans adversely affected their environment, and at a greater rate than ever before. The quality of life in Afghanistan is 3rd or 4th from the bottom of the world, close on Iraq's tail, no matter the rhetoric used to distance the situation. It has decreased massively since the war began, many polls show overwhelming opposition to the occupation, and the war is creating a huge backlash which is evident in any basic analysis of casualties and economic losses. Of course, Afghan casualties have never really been reported. Of course we must avoid the cult of the individual - this was not down to Bush and Blair, there were very apparent vested interests that are still at play. These are still apparent in the media's exaggeration of the sectarianism at play in the country, to help keep public opinion behind the war. A look at any non-commercialised European newspaper will show the discrepancy between eye-witness accounts and mainstream media lines. We should be leaving all the conflicts we are engaged in immediately, as should all other countries. It is never better to bear arms. i just left New Orleans, trust me. I hope I don't sound overbearing, I just feel very strongly about this. Peace and love and shit Jacob
Don't bother. I'm not quite sure what you mean. What do you mean? Do you mean: The Afghans wouldn't be fighting if there were no foreign troops fighting? I don't get what you mean. What do you mean? Such as? What has been "conclusively established"? What chart are you looking at? The The Human Development Index doesn't have either on their list, as far as I am aware. Their top 30 "least livable" countries are primarily in Africa I think even those in support of both missions would vote "yes" to get the hell out of there as soon as possible. I know I would vote "yes". I think the results to polls asking: "Should we be there now" and "Should we have been there in the first place" are two very different questions, the answer to the second one, imo, has pretty much unchanged since the beginning. The second one sometimes being confused with the first one. However, I think the general level of support has wained slightly because we have been there for too long. That isn't that true. Such as? I'd be interested to know the discrepancies. Have you any e.gs? No. You do sound like somebody who has a simple philosophy but likes to talk a lot, anyway. We are kindered spirits as far as that is concerned.
Pakistan Capital Now Under Siege Islamabad -Taliban and al-Qaida insurgents have killed more than 300 civilians in recent months as the war has expanded now into the Pakistani capital. The country's armed forces seem powerless to stop the onslaught of the Muslim insurgents..." the feeling now is that things have degenerated terribly," said Javeed Akhtar, a corporate lawyer... "Every morning we pray to Allah that we get back safe and sound, " said Mohammad Hahim, who runs an electronics business in the city center. "Many parents are keeping their children at home now," he said, "even though schools have been open for months." So while Obama plays golf, the West folds its tent and goes home due to minor losses, the rest of the world hides under the covers and the band plays on...the Caliphate breaks out of its coccoon and begins its slow, bloody but relentess march to the west. My evaluation: Afghanistan might just be a moot question...while the president dawdles interminably on an old battlefield, I think al-Qaida already has its eyes on a newer, bigger, more valuable prize.
