British troops are propping up a corrupt government...

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by PartTimePongo, Jul 18, 2009.

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. Afghanistan
    Continues here
  2. I thought you were meaning the Labour Government.
  3. Historians have long attributed the final fall of South Vietnam to the withdrawal of troops followed by a decline in aid but many say the real tipping point was years before with the South Vietnamese people being wholly p1ssed off by the rampant corruption and incompetence of both the South Vietnam Government and ARVN.

    Nothing really changes and those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.

    In some respects we are in the same position as the Aussies were then, so if the pattern is followed will start pulling out by a phased withdrawal before the US finally pulls the plug.
  4. msr

    msr LE

    There isn't much difference.
  5. Seconded! :evil:
  6. Karzai is not that bad.
  7. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Yeah, but would the Armed Forces actually prop up a Labour government?

    No. One good turn deserves another, and I'm sure we'd hang them out to dry at the first opportunity . . . . . . . . . .

    by the neck :twisted:
  8. Whilst the Karzai government is corrupt, it is a major improvement on the Taliban one. The campaignm isn't about propping up the government (though that is a process towards the end aim). It's about esablishing a security situation for the Afghans where they can establish their own governmental processes at all levels. We have seen very definite improvements in the ANA and the ANP, a long way to go admittedly, but this is the primary medium term goal
  9. I thought the thread referred to our own disgraceful government.
  10. UK troops are engaged on one side of a vicious civil war. The UK is trying to ensure that one element of the Afghan political scene doesn't muster enough support to 'win' a 'democratic' election, whilst providing untold electoral advantages to the other element.

    That's how 'liberal democracy' works in the 'New World': election 'winners' are selected in advance by foreign powers and the veil of legitimacy is provided by one-sided elections.

    In the 'Old World', we considered that abhorent and of generally of a Communist flavour - although we did indulge ourselves too.
  11. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    I don't think we really care how ghastly the Afghan Govt is as long as it can hold the ring against the Taliban creeping back and providing safe haven for Al-Q. This mission is being sold to the soft and fluffy as some sort of humanitarian thing for the poor Afs but I HOPE it is really about snuffing out the Taliban and curtailing the heroin trade. If we waste time and resources trying to be nice it will all just take longer.
  12. Karzai,crazy name,crazy guy?
  13. Surely the Taliban is one of the political parties in the democratic race. Snuffing it out is taking sides and perverting the course of democracy. Are 'we' frightened they might win?

  14. North Vietnam was worse than Saigon, brainwashing hundreds of thousands into human wave tactics....

    I think its easier for those who are worse to hold power, North Vietnam could be totalitarian while South Vietnam, though corrupt, was somewhat free.
    The Taliban are totalitarian and wont allow anyone to step out of line and thus they have control.

    You can see it when the IRA controlled estates. Compare the tight grip they had over communities to policing in a "normal" location in Dublin or London and national police forces dont have that control...

    See what Im gettin at!!
  15. The Karzai government might be corrupt, but it is a government voted for by its people. This didn't happen when the Taleban ruled the roost.