Should we meddle in other countries problems?

What should Britain do?


  • Total voters
    83
#1
As the title says. Should we get involved in other countries problems?

Iraq. Is it any better since we ousted Saddam Hussain? Were the sacrifices we made there worth it? Was Iraq really a threat to the western world or was it just about getting a better foot in the door of the oil reserves and trying to get someone in power there we could use as our puppet?

Afghanistan. Is Afghanistan really going to be a better place in 2015 when we pull off the ground? Are the sacrifices worth the dubious final outcome? Is Afghanistan really a threat to the western world when Pakistan and Somalia amongst other countries are safe havens for Muslim extremists?

Libya. Are we just looking at ousting a dictator we don't like? Are we just trying to get a puppet in power we can use to our own ends? Why do you think Libya is such a threat to the western world we feel the need to give aid to the rebels?

Would it be better to concentrate on our own security within the UK by spending the billions on inner security measures?
 
#2
As the title says. Should we get involved in other countries problems?

Iraq. Is it any better since we ousted Saddam Hussain? Were the sacrifices we made there worth it? Was Iraq really a threat to the western world or was it just about getting a better foot in the door of the oil reserves and trying to get someone in power there we could use as our puppet?

Afghanistan. Is Afghanistan really going to be a better place in 2015 when we pull off the ground? Are the sacrifices worth the dubious final outcome? Is Afghanistan really a threat to the western world when Pakistan and Somalia amongst other countries are safe havens for Muslim extremists?

Libya. Are we just looking at ousting a dictator we don't like? Are we just trying to get a puppet in power we can use to our own ends? Why do you think Libya is such a threat to the western world we feel the need to give aid to the rebels?

Would it be better to concentrate on our own security within the UK by spending the billions on inner security measures?
Yup I agree with that one.Spend more money on our own border controls/security measures.Start to manage the immigration problem robustly and deport all that are in this country that should not be here.While we are at it deport all all the cnuts that are jumping up and down about the British way of life,and British military actions.What i cannot grasp is MI5 and MI6 (as well as other agencies) are putting under surveillance suspects that are deemed to be a threat.Why not just deport them?

The problem in getting involved with other countries problems governments do not support the military properly,it is always done on the cheap and the military are relied upon to use their professionalism to get the job done.Not acceptable.
 
#5
If it is in our (wider) interests - yes. That is the purpose of a foreign policy. All the ethical crap under New Labour did nothing to help the country. We should not look at it (initially) in terms of effects on other countries. This, of course, is inevitably balanced by the strength of feeling generated by popular opinion and, in reality, the press. Finally there is the International club that we wish to be part of and the implied pressue that is brought to bear by it. Sadly the first aspect is often marginalised by the other two.
With regards to Iraq, and having been there twice in uniform, I have my doubts as to both validity and effects.
For me Afghanistan, and I have done that as well, is a difficult one to call. I am heading back out to that region later this year, so may be able to form an opinion then.
 
#6
Iraq. Is it any better since we ousted Saddam Hussain? Were the sacrifices we made there worth it? Was Iraq really a threat to the western world or was it just about getting a better foot in the door of the oil reserves and trying to get someone in power there we could use as our puppet?
We went there on a lie, we gained nothing from it except a large bill and the hatred of a few more million Muslims
Afghanistan. Is Afghanistan really going to be a better place in 2015 when we pull off the ground? Are the sacrifices worth the dubious final outcome? Is Afghanistan really a threat to the western world when Pakistan and Somalia amongst other countries are safe havens for Muslim extremists?

Because of 9/11 we were obligated to go. Its not a bad reason. Its just not being ran very well. As usual the the army has gone in and ousted the enemy from power but noone knows what to do next, it need some investement (without too much corruption) along with a stong force backing up the ANA.
Libya. Are we just looking at ousting a dictator we don't like? Are we just trying to get a puppet in power we can use to our own ends? Why do you think Libya is such a threat to the western world we feel the need to give aid to the rebels?

Cameron seems to have****ed it right up, Gadaffi was quite profitable for the UK before Cameron opened his gob, he also looks like a hypocrite, when Syria and Bahrain are kicking off and he doesnt want to do anything about it. The rebels might well be worse than Gadaffi.
 
#7
When invading/bombing/protecting civilians in a sovereign state, it should at least be for something a bit more flimsy than securing your next general election, having a bigger prominence on the world stage or appeasing the US hawks to stay in the big boys club (UN Security Council).

We're not financially or politically deft enough to get involved in large complex overseas conflicts anymore. The mission creep already happening in Libya is yet another example of a crap knee-jerk reaction without a full assesment of the long term factors.
 
#8
I believe unless we have the political (Foreign Policy more importantly) acumen (which we don't) then we should perhaps take a more Isolationist stance and begger the consequences. For far too long the British Military have been expected to produce gold from lead by the political establishment.

By further undermining our military resources in a slap dash manner (by politicians), and continuing to pledge military support to overseas countries, which have no political, traditional or economic ties to the UK, then the stage is set for an impending disaster, militarily, morally and ethically, which we can ill afford, yet alone extracate ourselves from.
 
#9
Wouldn't NATO's involvement and the aftermath have been better for Afghanistan, the region and it the NATO member states if we had gone on into Afghanistan for a swift punitive raid and withdrawn rather rapidly after smashing the Taliban?

It seems that mission creep and (notions of) nation building (PC word for neo-imperialism IYAM) has left NATO in a stalemate and allowed the Taliban and other insurgents to re-group, re-supply and train a whole new generation of zealots to fight for the cause in Afghanistan and further afield. I believe Afghanistan's population has nearly doubled in 30 years, so there is no shortage of manpower and no doubt the Taliban QMs have plenty of AKs and flip-flops on the shelves...

Britain has been there before, 1842 and again in 1878-80 when we were the world's only superpower and had similar problems even then. Nevertheless, they had an exit strategy from the start.
 
#10
All I can say is that if democracy had won the Spanish Civil War, it would have probably have prevented the need for WW2!

What are the consequences for the Western Democracies if we lose is Afghanistan?

The war in Afghanistan is a just war againsts middle ages nutters and must be won!
 
A

allgone2ratsh1t

Guest
#11
Iraq is no better off. The cynics would say (i am one) that is was primarily about oil and Dubya wanting to finish what Daddy couldnt. I dont believe it was worth the sacrifices made of any country and also those forgotten hundreds of thousands of civilians killed.
Afghanistan. As all we, the public, seem to hear are the negative stories as they generate more headlines the jury is out. We dont hear about the constant injuries received, the firefights, the high morale (?) amongst soldiers and the banter they share everyday.
Libya. Not our business. We seem to find money to help evacuate people and yet we cant find money to allow our Forces, NHS, Police, Educational and other services to run properly without corners and sacrifices being made. It doesnt help matters when William Hague says that we "are in for the long haul" according to some press reports. John Reid said we wouldnt fire a shot in Afghanistan so forgive me for not believing a politician.
I do however think that our Forces personnel excel in every avenue and as long as I have a hole in my arse I will for one support them.
That my shitty opinion. Dont like it dont care.
 
#12
All I can say about Afghanistan is look to the History booksn read all about Afghan wars; we should accept defeat (like the russians) and pull out now; we'll never 'win' there.

Middle Eastern and African countries we should keep the hell out of as well, let them sort themselves out. We can sell arms & oil equipment to the survivors.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
#13
All I can say is that if democracy had won the Spanish Civil War, it would have probably have prevented the need for WW2!

What are the consequences for the Western Democracies if we lose is Afghanistan?

The war in Afghanistan is a just war againsts middle ages nutters and must be won!
There was a democratic side in the Spanish Civil War? Which one was that then, surely not the one that fractured into a range of fratricidal left-wing splinter groups of varying lunacy which then got mopped up by Franco?

Back on thread, it's taking an inordinately long time for the great and the good to realise the limitations of Western hard power, particularly if it has to be applied over an extended period and in the full glare of the 'uman rights' lobby.

In my view it's time to recall and regenerate our forces and focus on stabilising, deradicalising and integrating our own country rather than wasting huge sums on the Dark Ages re-enactment society currently active in Afghanistan who are not interested in anything that they can't bugger, kidnap, behead or generally oppress. Whatever the question is in the Islamic World, we are not the answer. We should give them Tony Blair and our best wishes and focus on restoring the neglected fortunes and cohesion of our own rather battered motherland.
 
#14
There was a democratic side in the Spanish Civil War? Which one was that then, surely not the one that fractured into a range of fratricidal left-wing splinter groups of varying lunacy which then got mopped up by Franco?

.
You are of course right in your knowledge of history, but you know what I am trying to convey.

Had the western powers had acted in a cohesive manner and fought fascism in Spain then maybe WW2 would not have happened.
 
#15
Sad thing is I can't see a leading politician in the Western world with the integrity and balls to actually say that the current plan in Afghanistan isn't working whether as a result of lack of a genuine strategic overview, lack of men and equipment, massive Afghan corruption etc and that we'd probably be better off using airstrikes and advisors to prop up whichever tribal chief/warlord is the best balance of least morally offensive and actually a ruthless enough bastard to take it to the Taliban.
Would also be nice if we took the Pakistani's to task and made it clear that until they sort their house out and actually use that large army they've got sat on the Indian border doing nothing to put the sword to the Waziristan Taliban safehavens they will be getting precisely **** all aid or equipment from the West.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
You are of course right in your knowledge of history, but you know what I am trying to convey.

Had the western powers had acted in a cohesive manner and fought fascism in Spain then maybe WW2 would not have happened.
I'd put failing to act over the Rhineland as more important than failing to act in Spain.

We need to identify our vital interests and not commit until we're sure we can achieve the aim and extract afterwards. If the aim is to teach the other side to mind their manners, then that's within our ability. If the aim is to fundamentally reshape societies then we'll lose every time. The biggest problem is that the only war most people know anything about is the Second World War and they take total victory with the bad guys hanged for war crimes and German society rebuilt from scratch as their model. They are oblivious to the fact that very few wars are so morally unambiguous or end so decisively and they have unrealistic expectations which our forces can't fulfil.
 
#17
You are of course right in your knowledge of history, but you know what I am trying to convey.

Had the western powers had acted in a cohesive manner and fought fascism in Spain then maybe WW2 would not have happened.
Sadly even had the UK and France moved openly against Franco and the Republicans won as a result I doubt it would have done much to stop the war. Had the Allies opposed the Wehrmachts entry into the Rhineland would have done far more. The Wehrmacht had orders to in no circumstances engage Allied forces if they encountered them and numerous senior German generals were fundamentally opposed to it, had French troops moved into the area to stop them the Germans would have been forced to undertake a humiliating withdrawal possibly fatally undermining Hitler and so stopping the war in Europe at least.

Edit- Apologies for repeating FF's point
 
#18
As the title says. Should we get involved in other countries problems?

Iraq. Is it any better since we ousted Saddam Hussain? Were the sacrifices we made there worth it? Was Iraq really a threat to the western world or was it just about getting a better foot in the door of the oil reserves and trying to get someone in power there we could use as our puppet?

Afghanistan. Is Afghanistan really going to be a better place in 2015 when we pull off the ground? Are the sacrifices worth the dubious final outcome? Is Afghanistan really a threat to the western world when Pakistan and Somalia amongst other countries are safe havens for Muslim extremists?

Libya. Are we just looking at ousting a dictator we don't like? Are we just trying to get a puppet in power we can use to our own ends? Why do you think Libya is such a threat to the western world we feel the need to give aid to the rebels?

Would it be better to concentrate on our own security within the UK by spending the billions on inner security measures?
As I posted on the "Arab Spring, should we get invovved?" thread, we no longer have the financial or military resources to get involved!
quote "Cameron more & more appears to be a "man of straw", who seems to be following closely in the footsteps of the odious lump of slime Blair, he desperately needs to grow a set of balls & stop pussyfooting around with all the touchy feely policies of his predecessors such as the ludicrous ring fencing of expensive & unaffordable overseas aid to corrupt countries in the third world and take a firm stance on telling the EU to FO & sort their own financial mess out, not stumping up billions more out of our pockets! Any whinging apologist who supports this total waste of money should be forced to contribute out of their own pockets, not continue to leech on our taxes!
The latest problems with Syria will see yet more deaths, but its NOT our fault, Syria like most of the other countries in the ME have been de facto dictatorships for decades, I seriously doubt if ANY ME or African state really understands democracy as we in the West understand it!
Where were all the handwringers when Mugabe virtually commited genocide by killing & expelling thousands of people in Zimbabwe? We are not just talking about the "ever so evil" white farmers & businessmen (who actually made Rhodesia a prosperous nation) but tens of thousands of opposing tribesmen see more details here :- Nightmare of Mugabe's Matabele atrocities | Sokwanele
Leaving Zimbabwe to become the basketcase it is today! Once again Nigeria is having massive problems during the recent elections, where it would appear hundreds have been killed or burnt out in inter religion/tribal disputes! It goes on almost ad infinitum, the Ivory Coast, Kenya, Somalia etc, etc! We cannot possibly sort all these cases out and IMHO should concentrate on looking after any British subjects who happen to be in any problematic country and re establish trade etc once the dust dies down, but definately do not send any British troops to get involved! They are INTERNAL disputes, let the useless talking shop that is the UN condemn them, but let some of the other countries (there are after all 192 in it) pay for and deal with any so called interventions!"
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#19
Where were all the handwringers when Mugabe virtually commited genocide by killing & expelling thousands of people in Zimbabwe? We are not just talking about the "ever so evil" white farmers & businessmen (who actually made Rhodesia a prosperous nation) but tens of thousands of opposing tribesmen see more details here :- Nightmare of Mugabe's Matabele atrocities | Sokwanele
Dunno about anyone else, but I would definatley support an invasion of Zimbabwe. (ComFor?)
 
#20
We should only meddle if it affects our national interests. Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya had nothing to do with us. I still cannot understand why we became involved in any of those conflicts.

I semi understand why we are involved in Afghanistan, being an ally of the US and part of NATO we were bound to be involved at some point, however, as NATO only became involved in 2003 I have to wonder why we were involved from the start. I also wonder why the US can't actually fight its enemies by itself. We have spent years in N.I. without rushing round the world asking other countries to help us.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top