What Browns Afghanistan speech didnt say

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Skynet, Sep 5, 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. What Brown's Afghanistan speech didn't say
    Gordon Brown put his case well – but he must now decide whether to please his generals and send more troops

    Martin Kettle
    guardian.co.uk,

    Whether you agree with him and his views or not, Gordon Brown's speech on Afghanistan was a speech which needed to be made – and made by him, with the full authority of his office – if the British presence in Afghanistan is to command public support and understanding as the losses mount. It was a good speech too. Someone had put a lot of effort into ensuring that the prime minister addressed many of the public's – and the military's – worries head-on and in clear language. Brown's speeches don't always do that – his own default use of English can often be maddeningly opaque, as some of his post-speech answers to a very distinguished top brass audience at the IISS today illustrated. But the speech itself was a good clear text. It is also a good basis for a serious debate.
    More
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/04/gordon-brown-afghanistan-speech
     
  2. Listened to browns speech and it was really well written clear and precise, yet as many news companies have stated brown said nothing on deploying more troops or what will be done too those extra troops which were sent too guard the elections. so although good was pointless for any new information to be passed on
     
  3. Even the US have said a significant increase in troops would pretty much mean that we're occupying Afghanistan.

    Alas we have reached the same stage Russia did right before they pulled out.

    A significant increase would mean we basically are outright occupying Afghanistan but with the troops we've got we're at a complete stalemate with no end in sight

    But yeah I can see why he didn't come out with

    "We f'ucked up. We f'ucked up the beginning, the middle and now we're f'ucking up the end. If you want anything that needs money thrown at it but absolutely no gain then give us the job. We're absolutely brilliant at f'ucking up, not as good as our special friend, but in our own humble-humble way, just as determined and just as stupid.
     
  4. "we f'ucked up. We f'ucked up the, beginning, the middle and now we're f'ucking up the end. If you want anything that needs money thrown at it but absolutely no gain then give us the job. We're absolutely brilliant at f'ucking up, not as good as our special friend, but in our own humble-humble way, just as determined and just as stupid.[/quote]

    When were politician known for been honest LOL !!!!!

    :D :D
     
  5. A good speech you say - well, in that it was highly political, full of patriotic rhetoric but without actually committing the Government to any actual action, yes - a great success.

    As always with Brown, it is the small print and what he doesn't say that you have to study. This was a speech designed to calm the Party faithful. He has implied that once they win the next election, the stage will be set for a major handover to the Afghan Army and then withdrawel to swiftly follow. Once that is achieved there would be huge scope for swingeing cuts in Defence. This will be music to the ears of the die-hard socialists and pacifists throughout the Labour Party. (Winning the next election may seem fanciful but there seems to be plenty of evidence of Brown's delusions and if/when they lose power they will spend their time in opposition claiming troops would have come home if they were in power )

    The war in Afghanistan is not a lost cause because we cannot afford to let it be lost. If NATO is not fighting and winning the war in Afghanistan then it will be impossible for Pakistan and other countries to wage their war. If Afghanistan falls back into the dark ages of Taliban rule, Pakistan, Iraq and others will soon follow and then we face a region in turmoil and nuclear weapons in the hands of religious fanatics. Can we let that happen, would India or China allow it? To argue that the threat of Al-Quaida has moved elsewhere and we should give up on Afghanistan is disingenous - it's like saying don't fight crime in certain areas because it will only force the criminals to go elsewhere.

    We are faced with a long and probably bloody war with the Taliban but setting a deadline for withdrawel, being over-optimistic about ANA's capabilities or not being prepared to fund the war properly will be playing right into the enemy's hands.
     
  6. Any chance of doing your job (Gordon) instead of trying to do that of the Generals'?
     
  7. You say it's a war NATO must by all accounts win.

    Let's equate the unrest with IRA to the unrest in the EAST.

    The IRA managed to wreak havoc with a sentiment of the population muttering under their breath their support for the IRA. This, in a first world country with a stable economy and an educated public but who still adhere to a draconian religion. Ireland is still divided with the catholic and protestant no go areas. I forget the name for the actual divides that people still do not want them pulled down for fear of more unrest.

    Now let's take the knowledge we have of terrorism within the UK and put it into context with Afghanistan. Afghanistan is the 4th poorest country in the world with almost no trade except for the heroin and ailing wheat trade. A massive majority of the population are severely uneducated, illiterate and turn to both a draconian religion and village elders for important issues.

    If we are to "win" in Afghanistan we should first make "winnable" objectives." Building schools for girls is a waste of time and trying to improve womens rights there you may as well pi's in the wind.

    Our goal in Afghanistan should simply be to make sure Al Qaida cannot call Afghanistan their home. Heroin exports were lower under the Taliban and the country was more stable.
     
  8. Always remember that what Gordon says and what Gordon does are two different things.

    What does surprise me is that someone on this thread actually listened to one of Gordon's speeches - now THAT'S courage!
     
  9. This should help put things in context http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2529368.0.the_war_wounded.php