Afghanistan - have we lost the plot ?

#1
I am, I believe one of many who now wonder what the aim is in Afghanistan and why our soldiers are paying the high price. It seems we are replacing the Taliban with a corrupt government, byt that's ok as they are sympathetic to the west.

Gordon Brown reiterates the reason for British involvement in Afghanistan.

Excerpt

But Mr Brown will say that the case for a British presence in Helmand remains as strong as ever. He will warn that if the Taliban are successful it will lead to more terrorists being sent to carry out atrocities on British streets.

Full article

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...public-Afghanistan-merits-British-deaths.html

So how did having British Forces in Afghanistan prevent

7/7 and the failed 21/7 bombing ?

And the Glasgow airport attempted suicide bombing ?

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/terror-attack-on-glasgow-airport/2007/07/01/1183228931518.html

But even if we catch them, we can let them go again.

40 Fanatics to be freed
FORTY convicted Islamic terrorists are back on the streets after being released from jail, a Sun investigation has revealed.

And another 50 plotters, including al-Qaeda trained Sohail Qureshi, will be free soon.

Security experts said Britain's justice system was lax compared to the US, where jailed terrorists often never get out.

Full article

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2628304/40-fanatics-go-free-from-jail.html

Even without releasing known terrorists, what about these ?

As many as 947,000 illegal immigrants could be living in Britain, more than double a previous Home Office estimate.

A study by the London School of Economics found evidence of a massive surge in the illegal population since 2001.

Full article

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...egal-immigrants-Britain-nearing-1million.html
 
#2
Did we ever have a plot to lose?
 
A

ALVIN

Guest
#3
Yes we have!! I have been banging on now about the amount of casualtys that we have now sadly sustaind, which is the equiverlent of severel terrorist attacks here in the U.K. ------ So much for protecting our citerzens Mr. Brown. ------ And all for a perminently corrupted Afghan Government to exist. ---- Our Service men and women have gone through hell to satisfy Gordon Brown`s ego to a war he can only dream he can win. I have never seen such an arrogant primeminister in all my life!!
 
#4
Lost the plot? As someone above said: 'did we ever have a plot?'.

We entered Afghanistan, for the fourth time in our history, because Bliar wanted his nasal orifice to be as close possible to the sphincter and rectum of Bush! In addition to the 'good feeling' this proximity occasioned, the 'grinning spiv' Bliar wanted to be recognised as a 'serious player on the world's stage - a war leader in the mould of a 'Churchill or a Thatcher'.

The only similarity I discern 'twixt Churchill and Bliar is that they both went to public schools. I recognise no similarities between Lady Thatcher and Bliar.

As Network Rail couldn't run a railway in a toy-shop, this hapless and hopeless government couldn't run a war in a game of 'Risk'.

It would be amusing if soldiers were not being killed!
 
#5
I think everyone knows we've lost the plot.

Parliament are running around like headless chickens barking random reasons for staying in Afghanistan which change from week to week.

I think people are just too fed up to comment anymore.
 
#6
And all for a perminently corrupted Afghan Government to exist.
Our Service men and women have gone through hell to satisfy Gordon Brown`s ego to a war he can only dream he can win. I have never seen such an arrogant primeminister in all my life!!
this hapless and hopeless government couldn't run a war in a game of 'Risk'
Yet it seems Her Majesty's finest are still prepared to do their dirty work...

Someone 'up top' needs to grow a pair and end it.
 
#7
I can't see why the UK gobment doesn't do what the Septics did in Vietnam. Just declare that they've won and up sticks. Easy, innit?

On the other hand, it could be that Gobshite Gordon's angling for the same as his slimy predecessor once he's out of office, namely cushy and lucrative speech-giving in the US.

MsG
 
#8
Jip Travolta said:
And all for a perminently corrupted Afghan Government to exist.
Our Service men and women have gone through hell to satisfy Gordon Brown`s ego to a war he can only dream he can win. I have never seen such an arrogant primeminister in all my life!!
this hapless and hopeless government couldn't run a war in a game of 'Risk'
Yet it seems Her Majesty's finest are still prepared to do their dirty work...

Someone 'up top' needs to grow a pair and end it.
I strongly doubt very much this conflict will end anytime soon, Nato have a commitment to Afghanistan although many other countries are 'still' not pulling there weight in contributing sufficient troop numbers of which along with many other threads ref Afghan this debate will continue for some time to come.

Coalition Forces have a long tough job ahead of them, our service men/women will still be in Afghanistan long after Mr Brown & Liebour have been voted out & the Tories in for some time to come whether we like it or not, Gen Richards quote on staying in the area for 30/40 yrs is grim but true,

A re-evaluation of how to deal with Afghanistan is what is clearly being discussed within NATO and UK Prime Ministers will come & go during this conflict, so it will be interesting how Mr Cameron & Co will take the lead post next years election.
 
#10
Why do so many of you "bang on" about a plot ? What plot do you need ?

Strategies and priorities are changing all of the time and have done since 2001 so why do you have to have an "end game'. Surely most of the detractors on this site would be the 1st to jump down Gordon Browns throat the second the "end game" changed and a new direction had to be taken. Even the "wiley" character Obama has refused to be drawn into laying down a "plot". To do so would be madness, BY ANYONE ! Military and Politician.

Stephen Harper (Canadian Prime Minister) was forced into a troop withdrawal timeline of 2011 by the opposition party. Since then the US have been asking for more troops, Harper is now caught between a rock and a hard place. Dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't.
 
#11
"What Plot"
Yes how true.
Memory says seven years ago, Tom went to overthrow Al Fred, then his Lords and Masters lost their plot, whatever it had been and all way to Iraq to overthrow good old Saddam the US's old friend.
Six seven years on job done and now it's max effort from Tom to prop up a government which the World has just watched fix it's relection.
john
No matter what anyone says they can't afford a long war, bit like the good old USSR.
 
#12
Spank-it said:
Why do so many of you "bang on" about a plot ? What plot do you need ?

Strategies and priorities are changing all of the time and have done since 2001 so why do you have to have an "end game'. Surely most of the detractors on this site would be the 1st to jump down Gordon Browns throat the second the "end game" changed and a new direction had to be taken. Even the "wiley" character Obama has refused to be drawn into laying down a "plot". To do so would be madness, BY ANYONE ! Military and Politician.

Stephen Harper (Canadian Prime Minister) was forced into a troop withdrawal timeline of 2011 by the opposition party. Since then the US have been asking for more troops, Harper is now caught between a rock and a hard place. Dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't.
This is barking! Only a fool would commit troops, or anything come to that, to a cause with no purpose or aim and with not a single thought of what he hoped to achieve, surely?

I have memories of being taught the First Principle of War - 'Selection and maintainence of the aim'. The New Labour approach to war seems to be 'Don't select an aim, then there is nothing to maintain.'
 
#13
I've been saying for a few years now that its a waste of time. Tactically the guys are kicking arrse but there is no strategic plan. Nobody has a clue as to what the end state needs to be.

If they install Karzai again in the face of what appears to be widespread fraud, then I think any popular support that may have been there will collapse.

I actually like Bugsy's idea, declare victory and come home.
 
#14
Spank-it said:
Why do so many of you "bang on" about a plot ? What plot do you need ?

Strategies and priorities are changing all of the time and have done since 2001 so why do you have to have an "end game'. Surely most of the detractors on this site would be the 1st to jump down Gordon Browns throat the second the "end game" changed and a new direction had to be taken. Even the "wiley" character Obama has refused to be drawn into laying down a "plot". To do so would be madness, BY ANYONE ! Military and Politician.

Stephen Harper (Canadian Prime Minister) was forced into a troop withdrawal timeline of 2011 by the opposition party. Since then the US have been asking for more troops, Harper is now caught between a rock and a hard place. Dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't.
The "plot" is the reason you do something or what you want to achieve - not the plan how you go about achieving it.

Are you really suggesting that it is a good idea not to have a reason behind committing troops to conflict or not knowing what you want to achieve? I mean, are you really suggesting it is good that the UK's elected policymakers should send troops to fight on a whim?
 
#15
I see Brown has given notice to the Americans to bring British involvement (numbers wise) in line with other NATO 'allies' within a couple of years. A ploy no doubt running up to 2010 General Election? But perhaps a genuine sign that Britain is ready to pull troops out in the near future?

We will not achieve what the politicians seem to invisege, as one former officer put it on Newsnight 'We're not going to have cheap Ryanair flights into Helmand province anytime soon', it'll never be truely peaceful, nor will the government be squeaky clean, as long as it isnt the Taliban then UK/US will be happy. We need to be focusing on Pakistan where SF are no doubt operating anyway on the quiet. But pouring serious numbers in, in a show of force.
Its concerning how Brown and the rest of them talk about preventing terrorism at home, while we release literally hundreds of Terror convicts serving literally a couple of years in prison. The 'shoe bomber' got 110 years in a US jail, his mate has served less than 4 years in this country and is due for release soon.
The failed 21/7 bombers are serving life with a minimum of 40 years, surely this should be more commonplace for terrorists caught red handed plotting to attack this country...?
 
#17
The Canadians are pulling out in 2010, we will either have to take up the slack, or better still, leave with them declaring job done. We can then sit at home and never mention Afghanistan. It will just be a far away place.
 
#18
lewis1991blue said:
Its concerning how Brown and the rest of them talk about preventing terrorism at home, while we release literally hundreds of Terror convicts serving literally a couple of years in prison. The 'shoe bomber' got 110 years in a US jail, his mate has served less than 4 years in this country and is due for release soon.
Apparently, it's costs a lot of money to house prisoners, and what with the parlous state of our finances, it's cheaper to let the tosspots go after a while. It was bad luck for Labour that it was found out and their hopes of a quiet, private, out of the public eye release was torn to shreds.
 
#19
ALVIN said:
Yes we have!! I have been banging on now about the amount of casualtys that we have now sadly sustaind, which is the equiverlent of severel terrorist attacks here in the U.K. ------ So much for protecting our citerzens Mr. Brown. ------ And all for a perminently corrupted Afghan Government to exist. ---- Our Service men and women have gone through hell to satisfy Gordon Brown`s ego to a war he can only dream he can win. I have never seen such an arrogant primeminister in all my life!!
Gordon is only interested in protecting people from the Golden Mile( Financial sector in London), Which is full of people like Gordon and his cronies.
 
#20
Spank-it said:
Why do so many of you "bang on" about a plot ? What plot do you need ?

Strategies and priorities are changing all of the time and have done since 2001 so why do you have to have an "end game'. Surely most of the detractors on this site would be the 1st to jump down Gordon Browns throat the second the "end game" changed and a new direction had to be taken. Even the "wiley" character Obama has refused to be drawn into laying down a "plot". To do so would be madness, BY ANYONE ! Military and Politician.

Stephen Harper (Canadian Prime Minister) was forced into a troop withdrawal timeline of 2011 by the opposition party. Since then the US have been asking for more troops, Harper is now caught between a rock and a hard place. Dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't.
Good god man!!

I hope you never have to direct a war!

We could f'uck around without a plot and say "afghanistan can be done in 20 or 40 years".
But we have cash for 5 years at most, the government is virtually bankrupt and we have one of the biggest deficits in Europe!
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads