ARmy Rumour SErvice

**ASICarrot** · 25-05-2010, 11:05

Pride comes before the fall.

If we cant or more accurately wont commit to a war footing then thats the answer to the only question that matters. A lack of political will, and the finger can be pointed back at the populus with some measure of scorn.

**western** · 25-05-2010, 11:23

What absolute nonsense. Please explain legitimate?

**jonwilly** · 25-05-2010, 11:30

"And to pull out of Afghan in response to public pressure / overstretch or any other reason will, among other things, serve to reduce the credibility of why we deployed there in the first place."

Er Tone's Credibility ?

john
Brown Broke Britain

**Stonker** · 25-05-2010, 11:36

Originally Posted by DavidCameron

Originally Posted by western

Originally Posted by DavidCameron

If we decided to start withdrawing now, it sends a rather bleak message that those nigh-on 300 servicemen and women died for very little. Although this can't be further from the truth, I know if my son had died on active service for example and next minute they're all pulling out - I'd be asking some serious questions about what he was doing there in the first place.

So why are you not asking questions about our defeat in Iraq?

Because one conflict is seen as legitimate, and the other is not. And to pull out of Afghan in response to public pressure / overstretch or any other reason will, among other things, serve to reduce the credability of why we deployed there in the first place. (And probably raise more questions than it answers)

That argument simply puts us in a cleft stick in which even though we cannot afford the resources to enable us to prevail, yet we are unable to walk away.

In what way is that good?

**jonwilly** · 25-05-2010, 11:49

The army of my day was simple, Ivan who never came, Paddy who played holy murder, and the men who got the sea trip down Sarf.
Tom of today has been shafted something chronic in my opinion.

john

Mine is the first generation able to contemplate the possibility that we may live our entire lives without going to war or sending our children to war.
Phoney Blur.

**easesprings** · 25-05-2010, 11:53

Lets pull out and then use the country as Target Practice for Trident to see if the money spent on it was really worth it

**Domovoy** · 25-05-2010, 12:11

Originally Posted by DavidCameron

- I'd be asking some serious questions about what he was doing there in the first place.

1. US control over Trans-Afghan pipeline = control over Pakistan and India gas suply;

2. US control over Afghan natural resources (including oil in the North);

3. encircling of US main target -- Iran = US control over Caspian natural resources, and its supply to Europe.

**DavidCameron** · 25-05-2010, 14:59

Originally Posted by Stonker

That argument simply puts us in a cleft stick in which even though we cannot afford the resources to enable us to prevail, yet we are unable to walk away.

In what way is that good?

I never said it was good. If you look at my original post I was saying this was another issue. Not good at all - more of a 'pickle' if you will.

And Domovoy - somebody told me a while ago that Iraq was all about US control over oil, and Afghan was all about US control over gas - although I couldn't quite see the bigger picture with the Afghan argument. Interesting.

**Stonker** · 25-05-2010, 16:05

Originally Posted by DavidCameron

Originally Posted by Stonker

That argument simply puts us in a cleft stick in which even though we cannot afford the resources to enable us to prevail, yet we are unable to walk away.

In what way is that good?

I never said it was good. If you look at my original post I was saying this was another issue. Not good at all - more of a 'pickle' if you will.

Can't see the problem - if resources are so short we see no chance of prevailing, we should get out.

We could not look any weaker thatn Basra made us appear, and we would (a) spare our soldiers from fighting in a conflict in which we seen no chance of success, and (b) Have troops available for taks elsewhere.

If the view is that this is 'winnable' (whatever that may mean) within resources we can afford - then FFS stop arrsing about, commit the necessary resources, and let's get the f#'ck on with it.

**EScotia** · 25-05-2010, 16:12

Originally Posted by DavidCameron

I find it alarming (although not surprising) how many out-and-out civilians there are that have no idea why we are there. Even more worrying is the amount of Junior soldiers that don't have a clue either.

I agree with Dr Fox - especially his reference to a 13th century country and not being there to send young girls to school etc, but you just know that's going to get some serious incoming. You'll have all the 'hearts and minds' types shouting off for starters, despite how futile hearts and minds tactics are in such a country. Ask yourself - after being 'won over' in heart and mind, what's the poor Afghan farmer going to do when Mr Taliban comes along and waves a $100 bill in his face? Is he going to consider his lack of wealth, and switch sides maybe? And there's the other thing to consider of course:

If we decided to start withdrawing now, it sends a rather bleak message that those nigh-on 300 servicemen and women died for very little. Although this can't be further from the truth, I know if my son had died on active service for example and next minute they're all pulling out - I'd be asking some serious questions about what he was doing there in the first place.

Mine did and I have been asking myself that question since September.