Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Learn more Handmade Shop now Learn more Shop Fire Shop Kindle Pre-order now
Customer Discussions > politics discussion forum

Afghanistan


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 177 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 7 Mar 2012 23:31:28 GMT
David Rudd says:
Please remind me - why are our troops in Afghanistan? There is absolutely no possibility of a positive outcome for Britain, nor was there ever, nor will there ever be.

Posted on 8 Mar 2012 00:22:51 GMT
Last edited by the author on 8 Mar 2012 00:39:33 GMT
J A R P says:
The evil empire had some spare money rolling about in its pockets - and, as is most often the case over historical time where humans come into it - we spent the excess on soldiers, planes, ships, tanks, bombs, ammunition, and general death.

We make too much, work too long, breed too fast, and talk too much. The result is an excess. The solution is waste - of money and lives.

The conclusion is a return to poverty, and the cycle continues, but now (as the old saying goes) because it did not kill us, we are stronger (ie stupider).

I believe this sums it up.

Posted on 8 Mar 2012 03:39:50 GMT
I. Dunn says:
DrDR says:Please remind me - why are our troops in Afghanistan?

Your closest ally was attacked and 3,000 civilians killed in a murderous raid. This raid was launched by elements close to the then Afghan government and with its complicity. Your country joined a UN coalition to close down these terrorist elements and install a peaceful government in Afghanistsn. That process continues. Despite further terrorist assults in your own country and those of other allies launched by the same source.

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Mar 2012 09:56:56 GMT
Last edited by the author on 8 Mar 2012 09:58:00 GMT
gille liath says:
I know a rhetorical question when I see it...

Anyone remember the Thompson Twins? 'Can't you see I'm burning, burning...'

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Mar 2012 10:11:00 GMT
"'Can't you see I'm burning, burning...'"

Bad timing for those words considering the latest casualties...

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Mar 2012 10:20:11 GMT
gille liath says:
I suppose so, for those on the lookout for such things.

I agree with the OP actually - we should never have gone, and it's impossible to see how the original aims can now be achieved. But as always, we are where we are; it would be irresponisble now to just abandon the country to its fate.

Posted on 8 Mar 2012 10:25:00 GMT
Last edited by the author on 8 Mar 2012 10:25:21 GMT
Not on the lookout just the first thing that came in to my head.

But to the Op it's a bit late now to be questioning why we're there or why we went, it's been 10 years and talking of otherwise (i.e. we should never have gone etc) is pointless because it's in the past and can't be changed. On the plus side, it's only 2 years until we withdraw...

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Mar 2012 10:30:09 GMT
gille liath says:
Well - I don't suppose there's a day goes by without someone dying in a fire. Were the Thompson Twins deeply irresponsible to have written a song incorporating such an image? Should it be banned, along with Disco Inferno, Jimi Hendrix's Fire, etc?

I'm just saying you can't be too thin-skinned about these things.

On your second para I agree and, as I say: we are where we are.
Your reply to gille liath's post:
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
 

Posted on 8 Mar 2012 10:55:23 GMT
It's not the making a song about fire that's any problem (nor should any song referencing fire be banned o.O) - it's just that 6 guys burned to death in Afghanistan the day before yesterday and it seemed a little insensitive given the circumstances and topic.

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Mar 2012 11:13:56 GMT
Last edited by the author on 8 Mar 2012 12:03:33 GMT
gille liath says:
What more can I say? I don't think we can afford to be that uptight about figures of speech. But if you really feel that way, I guess you'd better not keep drawing attention to the offending post by talking about it.

EDIT: Just to make it absolutely clear, folks, I only quoted the song because of the OP's tag, 'DrDR'. It was nothing to do with this as a news story at all, at all.

Posted on 8 Mar 2012 11:27:01 GMT
RABB says:
Thompson Twins should be sent down for "Love on Your Side" anyway.

.....That was the Thompson Twins right?

Posted on 8 Mar 2012 11:32:06 GMT
Dunno - never heard of them lol

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Mar 2012 11:41:06 GMT
RABB says:
Before our time, but I get way too much music from my Dad.

Posted on 8 Mar 2012 16:11:01 GMT
The UN Charter forbids countries to use force, or to threaten to use force, against other countries. The wars against Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya served no interest but capitalism's, have brought not democracy but disaster to those countries, and did not `save lives' but killed more people. Likewise, wars against Syria or Iran would serve no interest but capitalism's, would bring not democracy but disaster, and would not `save lives' but would kill more people.
The pull-out of British and American troops from Afghanistan could reduce the threat of terrorism in the West, says the International Institute for Strategic Studies in its recent study. It says that a less visible security presence in the region could reduce extremist attacks.

Posted on 8 Mar 2012 16:11:02 GMT
David Rudd says:
Dunn: If we want to stir up Islamist extremism, there's no better way than to mess around militarily in the Dar Al-Islam. If you play with fire... (Distasteful? Not quite so bad as sending British soldiers off to fight in utterly futile wars!)

Since I haven't got any wise sayings of my own, try these:
'Those who sow to the wind will reap the whirlwind.'
'Those who live by the sword will die by the sword.'

Oh, I nearly forgot: 'The wall on which the prophets wrote is cracking at the seams; upon the instruments of death the sunlight brightly gleams...' Is that in the Bible too, or in the Qur'an, or from another place? I wonder if anyone really knows? Prophetic though.

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Mar 2012 17:12:11 GMT
Last edited by the author on 8 Mar 2012 21:07:07 GMT
Pipkin says:
Baaa Baaaa... are you for real?

Nothing! has been proved conclusively that the people you accuse of being terrorists committed the crime. We had the word of the American Government, whose head was the imbecile George W Bush, Cheyney and Rumsfeld. All proven liars.

Remind me again, who did you say gained from this charade? It certainly wasn'lt the Afghanis or Iraqi's. Over two million innocent people DEAD through sanctions and carpet bombing... innocents who don't know the first thing about America or oIL. Then add on all the 'enemy soldiers:' People who can see that their families are being murdered, so take up arms, just like you or I would if someone came into my village and began murdering my family and freinds.
I think we are very lucky to only have four hundred dead in ten years, donl't you?
They could take down the twin towers with 19 men - seven of whom are still alive, Oops they arn't very good at this fighting lark are they?
Incidentally - the first news out last night said it was thought to be old ID's from the previous war with Russia that blew the convoy up; but that doesn't inflame people half as much as saying the Taliban did it - does it? And what hope in hell have they got of disproving it.
''The Taliban'' who reduced drug production to 19% pre war; but then the US went in there and increased it to 98%.
''The Taliban'' who the US have been negotiating with? But obviously reached an impass. Oh but I forget - that was last week?
I believe you should add ''The US and British Oil Imperialism'' by Norman Livergood, to your list of History books. Then think again. WHO DID YOU SAY GAINED?
I would also suggest you read ''The War Poem'' by Mark Twain.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TCj4gKri_c&feature=related
and beware of what you pray for!

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Mar 2012 17:35:41 GMT
Pipkin says:
Yes it was the Thomson Twins.

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Mar 2012 17:38:57 GMT
Pipkin says:
gille
I don't think you needed to explain yourrself, we did understand.
M

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Mar 2012 05:22:21 GMT
Last edited by the author on 9 Mar 2012 05:26:18 GMT
Molly Brown says:
Thought you were too young - Rap Boy Rap!

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Mar 2012 05:25:03 GMT
Molly Brown says:
Margaret, there is a silent p in the name - as in Swimming Pool. :-)

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Mar 2012 09:51:12 GMT
Last edited by the author on 9 Mar 2012 10:11:59 GMT
gille liath says:
Ha, I didn't say I *liked* them - I only remember that one song, which I found really annoying. Not least the haircuts.

And they're not even twins!

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Mar 2012 10:19:45 GMT
Molly Brown says:
They were a great trio though!

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Mar 2012 10:23:03 GMT
RABB says:
That's debatable. Give me Human League over them any day.

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Mar 2012 10:25:41 GMT
Molly Brown says:
Well I had one of their haircuts back in 1984 and I'm NOT telling you which one! Quick Step and Side Kick was my fave album, for a short while. Great tracks........Human League the same! And I had his haircut at one time before or after, I can't remember. So many haircuts, so little time!!

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Mar 2012 10:27:46 GMT
RABB says:
Closest I've come to a musician's haircut is a Dave Grohl-esque mop of hair. Only a few months till it grows back too.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the politics discussion forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  politics discussion forum
Participants:  19
Total posts:  177
Initial post:  7 Mar 2012
Latest post:  28 Mar 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers