Afghan success. Whos responsible? and Why?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by NEO_CON, Oct 18, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Feck me Neo who gave you permission to post good news?
     
  2. Maybe he doesn't think it's good news, afterall the article makes it look like the UN is working. That can't be right, can it?
     
  3. Should one of our readers and contributors be in Afghanistan, I'd be grateful for a comment - when the repatriation kicked off in early '03, the flow was in two directions: people would return on a temporary basis and then bang out at the first hint of things getting rough. If this moving ain and out of the 'Stan is still the case, is the floating population moving for economic, rather than skin preserving reasons?
     
  4. It may cause a few heart attacks but it's worth the risk. Even if I am nice to the UN.
     
  5. well i guess there's a first time for anything, eh! however, i see no comment regarding that the only reason the UN are actually there doing something, is because the US/UK actually got rid of the Taliban.
     
  6. ... the UN won't go into Afghanistan... It's NATO all the way I'm afraid.
     
  7. Most of the aid and military organization have worked together fairly well.