Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
22 September 2009
21:2329265#21
Harry - good post, they should indeed have to fight for their own country and you cant help get that same feeling, except, the consequences of pulling out and the encouragement that would give to the extremists whos attacks on the West will be stepped up.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
23 September 2009
07:1629278#22
Harry, I think there is merit in your suggestions.
The Taliban must think they are invincible now with the recent comments of various American and British military supremos.
They certainly have a never-ending supply of people and arms; stopping both seems to receive less attention than it should as the soldiers are fighting on a day to day basis and not making much progress.
They talk of changing tactics with the emphasis now on winning hearts and minds and not fighting the Taliban.
If the Taliban are not destroyed, they will come back straight away, re-sow the poppies and re-harvest the Heroin crops and we'll be back to square one.
They will also of course have control of Afghanistan again and have time to organise terrorist activites with Al Quaida around the World, almost at will.
Britain and America are supporting a corrupt government that is not really a friend of the West (echoes of Rhodesia here); we should have declared the elections void and had them done again; why should our troops be killed to support a corrupt Government ?
Roger
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
23 September 2009
07:3029282#23
Roger, we are not there in so much as to support a corrupt Government as to pursue the interests of the west in taking on the terrorists and denying them bases in the 'Ghan and the border region of Pakistan. One big fear is that if we were to pull out and let the Taliban have free reign it is not only Afghanistan that could fall but Pakistan as well, with their nukes.
Yes, we need a decent Government in the 'Ghan in order to win 'hearts and minds' which is the key to success, but that in itself is not the objective but a means to an end. That 'decent Government' does not appear to be the present one but sadly that is the one they have and we must be careful not to makes things worse by being heavy handed.
Personally I dont think you can enforce our standards of what a 'decent Government' is in that part of the world and must work with what there is.
Guest 667- Registered: 6 Apr 2008
- Posts: 919
23 September 2009
18:4929301#24
I just do not see why we are fighting out there while a good number of their young men pay to get smuggled over to France, then the UK.
Look at the news last night and they all appeared to be men, where were the women and children? I can only assume they have been left behind in Afghanistan. Good brave men that run from their home land and leave their families behind can only leave me to assume they are not so brave. So let them in give them military training and send them back as a military unit (Afghanistan Regiment) to fight for their families, their homes, their Country.
I am just sick and tired of seeing our young service personnel die for a Country who's people do not appear to want freedom, want to stand up for that freedom or fight for it in any way and their turn out on the elections shows that.
We have the best troops in the world and i will always fully support them but I find it hard to see this as a winnable war and how it secures our peace here.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
23 September 2009
19:0729302#25
some good points made here.
firstly roger mentions our support for a corrupt government, we warch the bodies of our servicemen and women being brought home after dying to keep the evil karzai and his cohorts in power.
disagree with roger on the subject of beating the taleban, they cannot be beaten, only controlled long enough for us to go away.
secondly harry mentions that it is only men queuing up to get in here.
the same used to apply during the balkan conflicts, firstly everyone claimed to be from serbia, then later kosovo.
once they were in their wives, children and hangers on were granted entry.
are we to believe that these young men ran away from their country leaving their families at the mercy of their enemies?
if so, do we want that sort of individual living here?
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
23 September 2009
23:2929308#26
The problem is not a French or British problem it is a European problem.
Whilst the UK has a reputation as being soft, we do have the advantage of being an island and having a significant natural barrier to entry, also all the evidence suggests that the real problems lie in Spain, Greece and Italy.
The real problem is that these countries do not wish to spend the time and money to process asylum requests so turn a blind eye and let these people move on across Europe, especially where it is clear that their goal is the UK. It is currently estimated that there are well over 300,000 political refugees across the 27 EU states based on applications for asylum, however the real figure for all refugees (political and economic) is probably over 1m. Unfortunately, as I said earlier the EU is failing to find a joined up solution and is busy playing pass the parcel with these people.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
24 September 2009
07:2929311#27
the answer is simple,close all borders and all those here back to country of origin.