observer Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 ..... now known as a "surge"; the call of the Generals of WW1 as young men went "over the top" to die in their thousands; seems to be the decision of he US Commander in Chief, as another 30,000 US troops with 10,000 European troops are commited to the occupation of Afghanistan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 I immediately thought of Douglas Haig when I read the thread title. Let's hope history is wrong, or at least, same result without a similar loss of life. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 With a similar loss of life Harry, the entire force (numbering some 150,000 troops) in Afghanistan would be dead by Friday.... such were the scale of losses in WW1! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted December 2, 2009 Report Share Posted December 2, 2009 I thought the topic was about childbirth. Didn't the Soviets go for one more push, before packing up and going home in effect defeated, leaving Najibullah, the puppet President of Afghanistan to be hung by the Taliban. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 Correct Paul, which proves an incapacity for policy makers to learn the lessons of history. Baz, the WW1 losses occured in an age of deference; the Western public want instant solutions in all things, and without cost - unfortunately dead squaddies are a bi-product of war, but something western public opinion can't take. The Taliban now know the US and Allies can't wait to exit their Country, which ensures that any anti-Taliban sentiment in the Country will now be muted - as I said; all they have to do now is maintain themselves in existence, until we finally abandon this adventure - then they'll take over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 5, 2009 Report Share Posted December 5, 2009 The troops are there, we want them home. Two choices if you're the man in charge - send in more and finish the job or come home tail between your legs. What do you pick? Which makes more sense of the loss of life so far? This is the corner you paint yourself into when you start sending in guns and tanks. Nobody is going to win; nobody ever does. Pick any war you like, any battle you like, add up the damage and "winner" isn't really applicable to anyone, is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2009 As the saying goes: "when in a hole, stop digging" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 As the saying goes: "when in a hole, stop digging" Yeah? And what, just leave a ruddy great useless hole? You either get some mates and finish the job you started or you leave a right shambles behind you and make a mockery of the effort that's gone in to date. When that effort includes people laying down their lives, you need to be careful about undermining it. The reason we went in was that Al Quaeda were based there and their intention was mass murder worldwide. Whether you agreed with the decision to go in or not (and I didn't), you have to acknowledge that the motivation was reasonable, and you now have to accept that handing terrorists a victory isn't, so just packing up and going home isn't the right answer. I did find a charity called Nowzad dogs - they raise funds so soldiers can bring home and quarantine the stray dogs they've adopted and keep them as pets. I am saving them all my postage stamps, because I just think that's incredible. And don't start on the fact that there are PEOPLE going hungry over there - I donate to relief charities too, and in greater amounts! I was just really taken by this little charity doing its thing because in the middle of all the fighting, soldiers were worried about puppies. Gave me a bit of hope....google them up and have a read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 http://www.nowzaddogs.co.uk/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 As I've posted umpteen times LP; there is an alternative strategy to the one being pursued, and just cos lives have already been needlessly lossed, doesn't mean the justification of throwing more away. The alternative requires the co-operative and concerted action of all intelligence agencies, to identify and locate Al Queda cells, whether in Somalia or Bradford, and then surgically "take them out" using drones (which the CIA are now doing in Pakistan); air strikes, special forces attacks or special branch raids. While 300,000 troops waste time, money, energy and their lives on the Taliban, Al Queda are quietly setting up shop elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 I know you keep posting that. It's just that the rest of us can't quite grasp the fact that you apparently have bettter knowledge of the inner workings of A-Q than the combined global intelligence community. If you really do know where Bin Laden is, and where his mates drink, then please polish up your WWII souvenir Luger and go and pop them all in a series of commando raids with your pensioner pals. Medals will be yours. Until then, the rest of us will have to carry on guessing and doing our best...... Odd they've not appointed you head of a special task force really, innit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 Lp I am surprised Obs knows everything and if he doesn't he asks his neighbor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 Lp I am surprised Obs knows everything and if he doesn't he asks his neighbor I am beginning to think he's like the Scarlet Pimpernel - you know, playing the dimwitted dandy to cover up his daring undercover work..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 It's a misunderstanding to assume that Al Quaeda is some vast organised conspiracy headed by Bin Laden. What we have is an extreme ideology born out of a misinterpretation of Islam and a festering resentment against Western neo-Crusaders, disseminated by anyone with access to the internet - thus giving rise to wannabee martrys anywhere in the world from Somalia to Bradford. Special Branch has already foiled several conspiracies in the UK; the CIA have "taken out" many Al Queda leaders in Pakistan with their drones - so, in part, they are already doing it. We require a surgical an targeted approach; rather than wasting money and lives in Afghanistan, protecting a potential oil pipeline. Not rocket science, just common sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted December 7, 2009 Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 There is a book for sale at the moment called "where's Bin Laden" have a look in there..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 7, 2009 Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 Obs clearly wrote it, so can we all have signed copies for Christmas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 It's frankly irrelevent where Bin Laden is; he's no more than a figure head now anyway - the genie's out of the bottle. btw he was created and supported by the US in the first place; and wern't his family house guests of the Bush family - the plot thickens! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 7, 2009 Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 He's a figurehead. He's a figurehead. He has eluded all the Western efforts, masterminded some of the worst atrocities we've seen since WWII and if we do not find and deal with him, he will continue to draw together extremists. The very nature of those extemists is their belief that this terrorism is in fact the will of Allah and they believe Bin Laden is protected by Allah. Every day he is out there recruits another legion to that extreme belief. If you are a westerner, yes, he is just a bloke. If you are a Muslim extremist, he is living proof of everything you believe and your best recruiting tool. For that reason and no other, we have to find him and reduce him to bloke status, just as happened with Saddam Hussein. When he was executed, people finally realised he was just a bloke - all the fear and myth fell away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted December 7, 2009 Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 Agreed Lp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 On that basis LP; Christianity would have been strangled at birth - wasn't Christ crucified, shouldn't that have told his followers that he was "just a bloke". No the genie is out of the bottle, and any wannabee martyr with a festering resentment at the perceived treatment of Muslims by the neo-Crusading Armies of the West, with a good dose of brainwashing, will be recruited to the IDEA - it's the idea that has to be erased, not the man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 7, 2009 Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 Christ rose from the dead. That was the big deal, Obs. Extremists are called Extremists because they take the basic ideas of a faith system and take them to EXTREMES. They are not unique to Islam either. There's no IDEA that has surfaced recently and can be rooted out. The Koran teaches that the faithful must defend the faith and community against attack and there is great glory in doing so. What extremists do is take that basic idea, something all devout Muslims believe, and they twist it to justify attacking people. When they apparently succeed, they say that proves it's the will of Allah. We leave Afghanistan, Osama pops out and says "See, I am blessed. I am protected. There's nothing they can do to me because Allah wants me in charge." and enough people will believe him to make sure we have more 9/11s. Belief gets you a long way - look at Hitler! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 Well that's a cracker LP; "Christ rose from the dead"; you don't actually believe that nonesense do you - no wonder the world's in such a mess, with such levels of gullibility. Have you worked out the troop numbers and logistical requirements for your Crusade against every "bad leader" in the world yet, oh - and the costings?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 7, 2009 Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 Well that's a cracker LP; "Christ rose from the dead"; you don't actually believe that nonesense do you - no wonder the world's in such a mess, with such levels of gullibility. Have you worked out the troop numbers and logistical requirements for your Crusade against every "bad leader" in the world yet, oh - and the costings?! Didn't say I believed it - said it was the big deal for Christians, as opposed to your view that it was the crucifying, which was fairly commonplace back then. Your trouble is a standard western disease - you have no faith yourself, so no understanding of those who have, or the importance it has in their lives. I don't subscribe to any religous system, but I try to understand and respect all of them. Nor am I crusading. I am just saying that there is no need to criticise or investigate a war that removed a man capable of those things and who knows what else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Sometimes one poison is the best antidote for another - Saddam was the antidote for radical islam in Iran and provided stability in Iraq - the Yanks just got fed up using him, when they lost control of him. As for primitive belief systems (ie religions), yes I have nothing but contempt for them, as they clearly are the main factor in conflicts, throughout history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Now we have common ground there - religion is at the root of most of the nastiness on all scales. I respect anyone's personal beliefs, and where religion provides support and help, I am in favour. When you start hurting other people though, you're moving away from the whole point of your faith - whatever your faith may be. All major religions actually teach respect for life and a duty of care to fellow beings. As usual it's people who muck it up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.