Jump to content

Paying off the Taliban


Wireless
 Share

Recommended Posts

I see our new plan in Afghanistan is to pay the Taliban to stop fighting.I suppose if nothing else works. The Afghans have now seen off Britain (when we were a world power) ,the Soviet Union and now the UN force. Perhaps someone should have told Bush and Blair of the history of Afghanistan before they invaded?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Works for me. Undermine support for the Taliban by offering people a better option. If nobody wants to fight, that's the end of the fighting. Who cares HOW we win, as long as we do win and our lads stop dying? If we can wipe out the Taliban forces by the swift application of money instead of bullets, then that's fine with me.

 

But then, I suggested something very similar for Somali pirates and got shouted at quite a lot, so I'll probably get shouted at again shortly. Or longly, if Obs is back! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not shouting at you LP, but you may have noticed that the Somali pirates seem to be doing quite well financially thank you without us saving them the bother of hijacking the ships in the first place :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Works for me. Undermine support for the Taliban by offering people a better option. If nobody wants to fight, that's the end of the fighting. Who cares HOW we win, as long as we do win and our lads stop dying? If we can wipe out the Taliban forces by the swift application of money instead of bullets, then that's fine with me.

 

But then, I suggested something very similar for Somali pirates and got shouted at quite a lot, so I'll probably get shouted at again shortly. Or longly, if Obs is back! :lol:

 

To stop people fighting will involve an ongoing blank cheque, I doubt the West has the resources or the willpower to keep militant Islam at bay in Afghanistan. You never really defeat an idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if Terry the Taliban gets more money to stop fighting than one of our own soldiers gets to compensate him for having an arm and a leg blown off by aforementioned Terry, will you all still be so supportive?

 

I know I wouldn't and we just know that is how it will work out don't we!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if Terry the Taliban gets more money to stop fighting than one of our own soldiers gets to compensate him for having an arm and a leg blown off by aforementioned Terry, will you all still be so supportive?

 

I know I wouldn't and we just know that is how it will work out don't we!!

 

What's it worth to stop another of our soldiers losing a leg to Terry then? Or dying? I don't care what they hand out, I don't care what it costs me, I just want someone to find a way for us to bring our troops out of there without it being a victory for terrorism. Recruit all the Taliban to grow beetroot, write poetry, keep sheep on EU subsidies - anything they like. Fine by me. Any cash deal is cheaper than another 100 dead soldiers. Where do I donate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But then the next conflict kicks off and the next line of terrys come along to kill a few soldiers and then stand there with their hands out waiting for the payoff.

 

Difficult, but I wouldn't give them a penny unless it was a cheque covered in anthrax spores that they could take home to show the rest of their clan. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oooooh, liking your work there Baz! :twisted:

 

Do you know, I think I'd be OK with all wars becoming a cash transaction. Stand down the army, send in the bean counters and by the time they'd finished haggling, everyone would have forgotten how it actually started. With tax deductions, Gift Aid and charitable status, it would be cheaper than the ammo alone.... :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A case of extreme naivity and desperation I'm afraid; as any experience of blackmail will tell you - 1. Terry the Taliban and their fellow travellers, are steeped in an archaic religious belief that allows him to resort to strapping body bombs on his 9 year old daughters and sending them on a trip to paradise. 2. They live in the Country, and naturally resent foreign occupation, particularly by crusading christians. 3. They are natural fighters, and when not employed in killing foreign invaders, will cure their boredom by fighting each other. 4. They will think nothing of accepting our bribes on a tempory basis, even joining the expanding police or army, where improved accesss allows them to enter our HQs and blow up our unsuspecting squaddies or CIA controllers. 5. They've tons of experience, having routed a much stronger and capable (in their opinion) Russian Army, in the past. :shock: No: forget trying the Byzantine bribery tactic, Constantinople was eventually overun when they ran out of gold! The original objective was to enter Afghanistan to seek out and destroy Al Quaeda (the real naughty folk), who fled to Pakistan and a dozen other countries to continue their plotting. Bring our lads home; make a peace agreement with Terry, not to entertain Al Queda again or he'll start receiving paradise entry tickets from 10,000 ft and concentrate our resources on identifying and targeting Al Queda cells throughout the globe and methodically eliminating them, coupled with a preventative stragey that stops young Muslim boys being radicalised by a distortion of their faith. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Obs. Terry and many like him are fighting because there's no alternative, not because they like the Taliban rules. They live under oppressive religious rule and the penalty for not conforming is death. If you offered them an option somewhere in between being shot by us or hanged by their own, you'd get enough take up to put an end to the deadlock.

 

If you're wrong, they'll just turn down the offer, so no harm trying, even if it only proves you right, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Errm NO: they live under a feudal system, where they owe loyalty to their tribal chiefs and ultimately Regional War Lords; most of whom were actually fighting against the Taliban until a common enemy (IE us) arrived to unite them. :roll: Obviosly you share Gordy's idea that we taxpayers are prepared to donate to the largess, that he liberally sprinkles around the globe nowadays. Personally, I'd prefer my tax Pounds to be invested in cruise missiles, drones and WMDs targetted on anyone hosting terrorists - until, like Pavlov's dogs, they get the message! :twisted:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or until they get nukes of their own and start behaving like you..... and tell me exactly how nuking the hell out of places is going to diminish in any way the impression that extremists are working so hard to create of Westerners as monsters. We feed that beast by blowing up civilians.

 

As a taxpayer, I am happy to fund anything that sees our lads home without giving the terrorists a win. Whatever it is, it's cheaper than funding a war, Obs!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"blowing up civilians" - isn't that what happens each time a suicide bomber detonates his/her payload? Isn't that what happens whenever explosive ordinance is used? It' called "war" - and delivery by aircraft or missile is less costly in the lives of OUR military personel. :roll: As for the naive notion of "buying off" the enemy, there was a reciprical trade arrangement prior to our arrival, our druggies paid for their poppy juice, and the money was converted into weapons, now your asking our taxpayers to fund such re-armament! :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"blowing up civilians" - isn't that what happens each time a suicide bomber detonates his/her payload?

 

Yes. That's exactly what happens. It happens because people believe that westerners are a bunch of bloodthirsty heathens who persecute the faithful and wipe them out every chance they get. So, your starter for ten is what happens when we take your advice and do behave like that, strafing cities and nuking communities? Do we get more suicide bombers and converts to extremist views, or do they all think we're actually probably quite nice people?

 

Bombs, cash, nukes, nothing will work until there is something that deals with the lack of familiarity and mutual fear. Perhaps by going into Afghanistan with something more constructive than bullets, we might actually manage a bit of progress? Offers to help rebuild their homes and so on? Not payment for stopping, but constructive results from working together?

 

I can't remember a single time that trying to crush out a belief by force has worked. The Romans failed, we failed, China failed - you just make people dig in harder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not bad at all Baz as Great Britain did inflict Heroin on the world in the first place :wink:

 

Did we? I know it was a branded cough medicine in New York in the early part of the 20th century. Cured coughs really well, but created huge numbers of junkies. Obs probably came up with the idea.....blast the coughs and never mind the damage certainly sounds like one of his strategies! :twisted::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not bad at all Baz as Great Britain did inflict Heroin on the world in the first place :wink:

 

Heroin History

 

Heroin has a very long history of use throughout the world. It is thought that the Arab traders during the 7th and 8th century AD took opium to China where it was used medicinally up until the 17th century. In Victorian times opium was taken by all classes in the form of pills or laudanum. Laudanum is opium dissolved in alcohol. In 1874 heroin was created to be a cure for those addicted to morphine. With the intention of being a safe, non-addictive substitute for morphine, heroin fell short of its expectations. Soon it was noted that heroin produced addiction exceptionally quickly in many and was made illegal in 1920.

1853 Hypodermic needle-syringes with a point fine enough to pierce the skin are invented simultaneously by Charles Gabriel Pravaz (French surgeon) and Alexander Wood (Scottish physician). It is first used to inject morphine intravenously.

1874 Heroin is first synthesized from Morphine by chemist C.R. Alder Wright at St. Mary's Hospital in London. Its potential was not recognized.

1897 Heroin is synthesized by Felix Hoffman at Bayer Pharmaceutical. Bayer immediately recognized its potential and began marketing it heavily for the treatment of a variety of respiratory ailments.

1898 One year after beginning sales, Bayer exports heroin to 23 countries.

 

As you can see, heroin may have been synthesised in England, but it was Bayer (in Germany) that "inflicted" it on the world. But never mind, don't let the facts get in the way of a good smear job eh! :wink::wink::wink::wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps it's difficult for you LP to take in the depth of deceit involved in global politics and the two faced compromises with expediency that are done in the name of the greater good, one has to cling to one's cynism in order to comprehend it! But, the original reason for Western involvement in Afghanistan, was the pursuit of Bin Laden and Al Queda by US special forces shortly after 9/11. Now a cynic might add, that plans to link southern Russian oil fields via a pipe line to the gulf, provided an added incentive for Bush and his friends; and the eliminatuion of the Taliban in order to stabilise the Country and install a puppet regime, created "mission creep". I've no doubt we could secure a peace deal with the Taliban providing we quit the occupation of their Country; and but the deal would have to include a proviso that they don't harbour AlQueda or similar global terrorist groups in future OR any identified training camps will receive a ticket to paradise delivered from 10,000ft I accept that doesn't solve the problem or cure the resentment of Muslims - but it certainly suppresses any overt activity. btw the majority of suicide bombings currently involve Muslims killing Muslims - so perhaps the mainstream Muslim community should be asking who is the real enemy of the people and of their progress?! :?:?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice one Asperity,

 

In your very concise history of heroin, There was not one mention of the opium wars we fought with China, When the Great British Empire was flogging it. You might find that The British refined the opium into heroin, as it was easier to transport and they could transport more of it as compared to raw opium, and it also had the added benefit of being a lot more addictive than raw opium.

 

Baz

:roll::wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...