UK goverment waisting our money

  charmingman 23:01 16 Jun 2008
Locked

AGAIN we are seding more troops into Afghanistan, have we actualy gained anything from all of this..? imho all i see is us loosing our men/women & it costing the tax payer BILLIONS of pounds that could be far better well spent over here...

Also if i remember correctly didnt the goverment say not so long ago that they was giving a date for pulling out.??

click here

  laurie53 08:37 17 Jun 2008

I think you'll find the Government is talking about pulling out of Iraq, where our presence is of dubious legality anyway.

Afghanistan is an internationally agreed legal intervention agreed by the full UN of which the UK is a member.

We made a commitment, we must honour it, if our membership is to mean anything at all.

Too many people lump Iraq and Afghanistan together.

One is about oil, the other about humanity.

  jack 09:11 17 Jun 2008

This lesson should have sunk in by now since Britain got a 'Bloody nose' 200 years ago,
Then the the Russians 30 years ago.
It is a land of tribal warfare - just let them get on with it.
The Opium/Heroin trade is the thing and the best way to treat that is to burn it.

  Chegs ®™ 10:01 17 Jun 2008

Saw an interview with a grieving father(lost a son in afghanistan)His view on hearing the news was "will simply increase the numbers of targets the suicide bombers can kill"

  GANDALF <|:-)> 10:49 17 Jun 2008

The Russians had 300,000 troops there and contrary to popular belief, they were not a bunch of idiots. They failed miserably. in spite of controversial 'techniques' and it does not take a military genius to work out the final success rate of the British lot there.

G

  peter99co 12:16 17 Jun 2008

I think Alexandra the Great found Afghanistan a bit of a handful when he visited but he wasted the place by changing the course of a river.

Correct me if I have blamed the wrong guy.

  Cymro. 12:24 17 Jun 2008

I suspect that the government don`t want to be in Afghanistan any more than we do and are only there due to as laurie53 rightly said "an internationally agreed legal intervention agreed by the full UN of which the UK is a member"

If the present government could find a way out without loosing too much face then they would be out of there ASAP

As far as I know the Tori party have not advocated pulling British troupes out without agreement of the UN.

  Stuartli 14:22 17 Jun 2008

Are they putting it in money belts? ...:-)

  Forum Editor 14:34 17 Jun 2008

some people are failing to understand the issue involved here.

The UK is one of the five permanent members of the United Nations - the other four being China, The Russian Federation, America, and France. The UN security Council was responsible for setting up what's called The International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, and all five permanent members had the chance to veto the decision.

We're there because we're part of the UN, and as laurie53 points out, we must honour the commitment we made if our country's name is to retain its standing in the eyes of the international community.

I share Cymro.'s impression that the UK government would probably much prefer to be out of Afghanistan, as would the other contributing nations, but like them we've given our word, and we must stick to it.

  johndrew 15:09 17 Jun 2008

It would help if all nations were to put troops in with a mandate to operate in a combat role where necessary. Unfortunately there are those who want to be seen to be present but not put themselves at risk. Added to that, there are countries who could volunteer forces but are sitting back and doing very little.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

OnePlus 5 review

Alice Saey's mesmerising animation for Dutch singer Mark Lotterman

iPad Pro 10.5in (2017) review

Comment booster votre iPhone ?