• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Afghanistan. This has got to stop!

#1
Whils't British soldiers and certain other nations troops are falling like skittles at the moment, I would like to know where and what the Germans, Italians, Belgians and Spanish troops are up to out there? If they are in NATO, THEN FIGHT, NOT COMPLAIN! These combat opt out clauses are just not on. I don't give a shite if it's an popular war! If part of NATO, then surely you shouldn't be able to pick and choose your wars? If these Nations won't take the full burden and stand and fight alongside NATO, then kick the fcukers out of NATO. Time to dissolve NATO I think and the boxheads and their likes can just FRO!
Their spineless behaviour and up yours NATO attitude is just not acceptable, whilst our fallen troops blood leaches in the desert sands! :x
 
#3
wedge35 said:
I hate to break this to you but the Yanks say pretty much the same thing about us...
If that is so, then they are more out of touch with reality than I suspected.
 
#4
banjotrooper said:
Whils't British soldiers and certain other nations troops are falling like skittles at the moment, I would like to know where and what the Germans, Italians, Belgians and Spanish troops are up to out there? If they are in NATO, THEN FIGHT, NOT COMPLAIN! These combat opt out clauses are just not on. I don't give a shite if it's an popular war! If part of NATO, then surely you shouldn't be able to pick and choose your wars? If these Nations won't take the full burden and stand and fight alongside NATO, then kick the fcukers out of NATO. Time to dissolve NATO I think and the boxheads and their likes can just FRO!
Their spineless behaviour and up yours NATO attitude is just not acceptable, whilst our fallen troops blood leaches in the desert sands! :x
I totally agree with you, what REALLY worries me is this so called Euro Armed forces, we will be in an even worse place, we won't get involved in anything, and if we are threatened then the Euro crats will just to talk their way out of trouble, and we know from history that rarely works

Duncan
 
#6
priest said:
The day i fight alongside a frenchman is the day it's all gone to pot.
Don't get me wrong, im all for more cooperation between nations, like lusty has been doing over the last 12 months, but thats all it should be, not under the command of Europe

Duncan
 
#7
Dunc0936 said:
Don't get me wrong, im all for more cooperation between nations, like lusty has been doing over the last 12 months, but thats all it should be, not under the command of Europe

Duncan
Amen
 
#8
priest said:
The day i fight alongside a frenchman is the day it's all gone to pot.
Really. Was that post for comic effect, or were you just spouting balls? The French have taken casualties in AFGN , and have got in there and done their bit, though not members of NATO. Which will be changing soon.

I'm all for a pop at the French, it's traditional. In the context of this conflict, it is not fair on them and fails to recognise they have lost people fighting too.
 
#9
What a load of sh1te. BJT are you just trying to get a rise. As for other Euro-nations not taking the hits perhaps one should ask that question of the recently appointed Dutch CDS. He lost his son in AFG on the day he assumed his appointment.
 
#10
And of course it begs the question of when exactly NATO became the US Empire? Member states still have the final say on when, where and with what constraints they deploy their armed forces. Just because two of them said, "Yee-Hah!" doesn't commit the rest to follow suit.

I don't hear any pressing demands to deploy Brits in support of French troops in their African hotspots. Sauce for the goose.
 
#11
I think a few more nations servicemen and women are taking casualties than you think, BJT. What is perhaps lacking is a common purpose and leadership within NATO, but that has always been the same. Each nation will protect its own interests.
 
#12
Last I heard was the Germans were not allowed to engage in a combat role and were spending their time in their newly constructed bar - much to their disappointment. They are soldiers and want to do what they trained for. They have taken a few casualties, as I found out when I stumbled across some tribute clips to the fallen on youtube.
 
#13
Perhaps we should be looking at it from the other side and asking why the British government is so willing to put our troops into harms way at the drop of a hat while the other governments are more interested in their own troops' welfare.
 
#14
smartascarrots said:
And of course it begs the question of when exactly NATO became the US Empire? Member states still have the final say on when, where and with what constraints they deploy their armed forces. Just because two of them said, "Yee-Hah!" doesn't commit the rest to follow suit.

I don't hear any pressing demands to deploy Brits in support of French troops in their African hotspots. Sauce for the goose.
I apologise if I'm out of line here, but I thought as far as NATO was concerned 'an attack on one was an attack on all'' therefore we went into Afghanistan after the US was attacked 9/11? So surely that would be different than helping France sort out it's colonial past in Africa?

It does seem (and obviously I'm old and dim) but as a 1960/70' Wren, NATO's then objective was to stop Eastern Europe invading Western Europe via Germany. It does look at times, that now this threat has gone(?) that some members of NATO are now taking a back seat.

Please correct me - I'm sure you will!
 
#17
auntsis said:
I apologise if I'm out of line here, but I thought as far as NATO was concerned 'an attack on one was an attack on all'' therefore we went into Afghanistan after the US was attacked 9/11? So surely that would be different than helping France sort out it's colonial past in Africa?

It does seem (and obviously I'm old and dim) but as a 1960/70' Wren, NATO's then objective was to stop Eastern Europe invading Western Europe via Germany. It does look at times, that now this threat has gone(?) that some members of NATO are now taking a back seat.

Please correct me - I'm sure you will!
NATO, IIRC, was set up as an Alliance whereby the signatory countries would come to one and others aid to DEFEND each other. Due to the timing of this treaty it was pretty much a balwark against communism spreading in to West Europe (bearing in mind that many countries in the "West" would have found it hard to fund such a fight.

Whilst it could be claimed a good defence is a good offence, I don´t think any of the members of NATO signed up for tagging on to any offensive operations that didn´t involve the direct defence of a member country.

And I quote.....
The Parties of NATO agreed that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense will assist the Party or Parties being attacked, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area
Depending how you (or your lawyers) inerpret this passage depends on how your country will respond. ie Do you believe that operations outside of the North Atlantic area will result in security inside the North Atlantic Area?

Did NATO jump on board during the Falklands? for example? You could say they did, in that certainly America took on some extra NATO tasks freeing up British assets (such as Nimrods) likewise I believe they released operationial stocks of Sidewinder 9L and Stingers, but other than that... A few Gebirgsjäger might have come in handy.
 
#18
The Govt make a big thing out of defeating the Taliban and eradicating a safe haven for terrorists. Acts of terrorism have taken place in many countries and all would benefit by the establishment of a democracy in Afghanistan. However I don't see many countries as committed as the UK and the US in terms of numbers of troops.
 
#19
Taffnp said:
The Govt make a big thing out of defeating the Taliban and eradicating a safe haven for terrorists. Acts of terrorism have taken place in many countries and all would benefit by the establishment of a democracy in Afghanistan. However I don't see many countries as committed as the UK and the US in terms of numbers of troops.
How many terrorist live in UK? Knowing we wont deport them to countries with the death penalty/dodgy human rights pasts? Hardly "stoney ground" for terrorists, then we could check some of our own Members of Parliment.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top