When I see the degree of tolerance, acceptance and the freedoms given to immigrants and adherents to other faith groups by us in UK I have to wonder what we are doing in Afghanistan. We have wasted the lives of 350+ troops and hundreds of others have been maimed for life, we have wasted £Billions and for what?
tinyurl.com/4u995no
Last edited by: overthehill on Mon 7 Feb 11 at 08:18
|
|
How are the two related (the war in Afganistan and our tolerance and acceptance in UK)?
|
|
Compare and contrast the religious and social freedoms we grant to ALL faith groups and people in UK while supporting and encouraging a government elsewhere which denies these freedoms to its citizens.
Last edited by: overthehill on Mon 7 Feb 11 at 08:34
|
To adapt the old army song,
We're there because we're there because we're there because we're there,
We're there because we're there because we're there because we're there.
We're there because ...............
There is no reason. Somebody thought there was once, but now it's too difficult to get out.
If we thought they could form a government stable enough to survive long enough for the evacuation, we'd scuttle out thankfully before it collapsed.
|
|
Think Tony Blair and a Cabinet with no spine.
|
>> Think Tony Blair
He has much to answer for agreed
However he didn't take power by force, he appealed in a smarmy door to door double glazing salesman way to a gullible brainwashed electorate who believed in Santa Claus on borrowed money, he could do no wrong in the eyes of an adoring public, he was a media icon, the candle in the wind sun in particular thought the sun shone out of his back side...he was our first president, a shallow showman.
The next 4 years will show to those who have the gumption to see the truth through the propaganda whether son of blair is indeed his true name, or his own man.
I can't see what the Afghanistan debacle has to do with the way we treat minorities in this country either.
It is high time we stopped trying to be an imperial power though, our present leaders still strutting round like peacocks telling the rest of the world how to behave in and bizarrely how run their own countries, armies of media following like some pop star's lackey entourage...it's quite amusing in a sickening way, and it does serve to divert the blinkered public's attention.
|
I obviously haven't expressed my question too well. In this country we grant a wide range of civil, religious and social freedoms to all our residents. Why are we wasting time, lives and money supporting a weak and corrupt regime, in a country which is nothing to do with us, and which denies its residents the same basic freedoms? How many Christiams are under threat of death in UK for changing to the Muslim faith, for example? There are 143 mosques in Birmingham - tinyurl.com/4f6jvgd. How many Christian churches are there in Afghanistan?
|
We tried imposing "our" values across the world for 200 years and failed. No reason why we should succeed now. The original reasons for going there were valid enough as it was perceived that UBL and merry band of warriors were being hosted by their chums in the Taliban were waging war on the West from there. There is no doubt that the Taliban are a bunch of fascist criminals and visited horrendous crimes on the native Afghan. Depending on your political leaning you can believe that we're there because of oil/gas reserves from former Soviet states and the need to route any pipeline across Afghanistan or that it is actually the front line in an undeclared war against Iran or plain old imperialism, I don't know.
Bearing in mind that a lot of UK citizens would struggle to point at the place on a map, I don't really think that Mr and Mrs Average care, unless they deal drugs of course.
Last edited by: Pugugly on Mon 7 Feb 11 at 10:11
|
|
I may have it completely wrong but wasn't there also an element of sorting out the drugs trade in this one, which is a supposed benefit to us?
|
|
The other question is I suppose - which may answer the OP's original question, why do we maintain a military presence on a bunch of islands 8000 miles away - it's certainly not to protect the freedom of speech of a few thousand penguins...perky or not (sorry PP !)
Last edited by: Pugugly on Mon 7 Feb 11 at 10:16
|
|
I think it may be because the islands are British territory of some status, inhabited by British citizens, and there appear to be vast reserves of oil. There is certainly a pro oil and anti drugs aspect in Afghanistan but it isn't ours, never has been and we wouldn't have it as gift! I shouldn't think that there is more than a handful of British citizens living in AFG, other than those employed by the military and the civil service. Let us cut our losses and begone, it will happen sooner or later and it won't be an edifying sight whenever it does.
Last edited by: overthehill on Mon 7 Feb 11 at 10:40
|
|
Arguably British - I agree with the status quo, but many don't for equally good reasons. We went to Afghanistan as it was a NATO response in 2001, again arguably right or possibly wrong.
|
Your original question connects two entirely unconnected issues.
There are a number of reasons why we are in Afghanistan, the primary one now is to train their Army and Police forces to be able to prevent anti-West terrorists (such as those that were led by Osama-bin-Laden) from turning the country in to a lawless terrorist training camp. Whether the aim succeeds or not is something that can only be judged by future events.
>> Afghanistan but it isn't ours, never has
>> been and we wouldn't have it as gift!
>>
"never" - Not entirely true. It was British for a while.
www.britishempire.co.uk/article/pashto.htm
www.afghan-web.com/history/chron/index3.html
www.afghangovernment.com/briefhistory.htm
"on two separate occasions, British armies from India outright invaded Afghanistan in attempts to install puppet governments amenable to British economic interests, and that would oppose the economic interests of Czarist Russia.
The first, which became known as the First Anglo-Afghan War, took place in 1838. Outraged by the presence of a single Russian diplomat in Kabul, the British demanded that Afghanistan shun any contact with Russia or Iran, and that it hand over vast tracts of Pashtun inhabited land to British India (regions that are today party of Pakistan). Dost Mohammad, the Afghan ruler, agreed to these humiliating demands, but the British still invaded the country. The British seized most of the major cities in Afghanistan with little resistance, but their heavy handed rule soon resulted in a popular uprising by the people which resulted in the massacre of the entire British army of 15,000, save one.
British outrage over the uninvited arrival of a Russian diplomatic envoy in Kabul in 1878 resulted in the Second Anglo-Afghan War. Again the British were able to occupy all of the major cities, but unlike the last time, the British got wind of an impending rebellion against their occupation, and brutally crushed it in a pre-emptive move. They did subsequently withdraw, but not before they set up a puppet ruler and forced the country to hand over control of its foreign affairs to Britain.
Afghanistan would remain a British protectorate until 1919. Then, following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and the wave of popular rebellions that rippled through Asia subsequently, the then king of Afghanistan, Amanullah, declared his country’s full independence by singing a treaty of aid and friendship with Lenin, and declaring war on Britain. After a brief period of border skirmishes, and the bombing of Kabul by the Royal Air Force, Britain conceded Afghanistan’s independence. Stung by this turn of events though, Britain conspired with conservative religious and land owning elements with the country who were unhappy with Amanullah’s attempts to secularize and reform the country. The outbreak of an uprising and civil war forced him to abdicate in 1929.
Note - Many of the current troubles in the region can be traced to the artificial political boundaries drawn up by the British.
|
>> I may have it completely wrong but wasn't there also an element of sorting out
>> the drugs trade in this one, which is a supposed benefit to us?
>>
Yes: the Taliban were interrupting supplies so we invaded to increase production.. and succeeded. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19431056/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/utput more than doubled.
But since then output has fallen and prices risen.
( I am being serious:)
|
Afghanistan isnt the problem
Pakistan is
|
|
If Pakistan goes west - it's pretty grim all round. Again an imperial legacy. Didn't we do well !?
|
...Didn't we do well !?...
Depends how you look at it, arguably we did too well in imposing our will on the world.
I'm amazed at how many of the wars in faraway places are 'our fault' because of some line we drew in the sand/scrub/tundra or whatever 100 years ago.
I think the OP has a point in that we are incredibly tolerant, some say over-tolerant, of different faiths, religions and beliefs in this country.
You might expect such a nation to be more neutral than Switzerland on the world stage, and about as willing to fight as France.
Yet if there's a scrap to be had, we are there.
Last edited by: Iffy on Mon 7 Feb 11 at 11:14
|
>> Yet if there's a scrap to be had, we are there.
>>
Well we do have to find a reason to keep our "defence industry" in place, and with that to train the British Armed forces. What better than to do so in a real theatre of war?
Otherwise we would scrap our Navy, Air Force and Army completely, rather than just the 10% cuts we are making now.
|
>> I'm amazed at how many of the wars in faraway places are 'our fault' because
>> of some line we drew in the sand/scrub/tundra or whatever 100 years ago.
Whether they're 'our fault' in the sense of taking responsibility for untangling them it seems unarguable that we did our bit as causation.
|
>> Afghanistan isnt the problem
>> Pakistan is
>>
and always has been.
The route to the terror camps in Afghanistan has always been via Pakistan. (supplies of food, arms, know-how, Jihadis, etc. have all come via Pakistan with Pakistani army's blessing).
The nuclear bomb know-how was passed by Pakistan to the other "Axis of Evil" states (Korea, Iran, Syria).
p.s. and yes, there are vast oil and mineral deposits in Afghanistan.
afghanistan.cr.usgs.gov/oil.php
oilprice.com/Geo-Politics/International/Will-Afghanistans-$1-Trillion-of-Minerals-Secure-Foreign-Investment.html
Last edited by: John H on Mon 7 Feb 11 at 11:14
|
>> >> Think Tony Blair
>>
>> He has much to answer for agreed
>>
>> However he didn't take power by force, he appealed in a smarmy door to door
>> double glazing salesman way to a gullible brainwashed electorate who believed in Santa Claus on
>> borrowed money, he could do no wrong in the eyes of an adoring public, he
>> was a media icon, the candle in the wind sun in particular thought the sun
>> shone out of his back side...he was our first president, a shallow showman.
Nothing to do with a previous government mired in sleaze, out of ideas & at its own throat over Europe then?
|
Nothing to do with a previous Government?
Correct.
|
Tony was the greatest Conservative P.M. ever. 0)
We should sort THIS country out as a priority, although I believe that it is far too late to do so. We haven't even sold out, we have given it away. Until we come down hard on the scum (for starters) we don't have a chance. It is impossible to state what my definition of hard is here because it would upset some of you softer folk, but I am quite sure that AC, GB and one or two others know exactly what I mean.
|
"It is impossible to state what my definition of hard is here because it would upset some of you softer folk"
Oh go on do tell us, so we know exactly what your politics are, although I suspect we already know.
|
>> Nothing to do with a previous government mired in sleaze, out of ideas & at
>> its own throat over Europe then?
Couldn't agree more Brompton, few decisions or policies of the last 40 years were of any long term benefit to this country.
Politicians still doing very nicely though thankyou...kerching.
|
Why are we in Afghanistan? - Rob81
