RE: Afghanistan..troops out NOW!
July 13, 2009 at 2:29 pm
(This post was last modified: July 13, 2009 at 2:48 pm by bozo.)
(July 13, 2009 at 4:33 am)leo-rcc Wrote:(July 12, 2009 at 4:27 pm)bozo Wrote: I would not aprove of any of my family getting sent there.
Well that is not up to you is it? I would prefer it if he was safe at home, but as he volunteered that is his decision.
(July 12, 2009 at 4:27 pm)bozo Wrote: The sane decision is to withdraw.
It is not that easy. Just because it gets a bit dicey the forces cannot leave the people in Afghanistan behind in the mess they created in the first place.
Whether I approve is very much up to me actually. I am father of 3 and if any of them had expressed a wish to join the military, particularly at cannon-fodder level, I would have done my damdest to convince them not to. At the bottom level, it is essentially the fact that for working class lads ( in the majority, I'M not being sexist ) job opportunities are so poor that the armed forces offer just enough remuneration to tempt youngsters with not much of a future to " take the queen's shilling ". Once taken they are then caught in the trap and must " do their duty ".
If you are involved in a war that is unwinnable, as the history of incursions into Afghanistan show, then I wqould argue that the government has a primary duty to protect its own, in this case the armed forces whose lives are at stake. It's that easy.
(July 13, 2009 at 8:02 am)Dotard Wrote: Hitler committed atrocities. An alliance was needed to stop him. The entirety of Europe had to be reduced to rubble to achieve this. They did not stop and turn around and leave once he was stopped, an occupation was needed.
Saddam committed atrocities. This alliance was needed to stop him.
The Taliban committed atrocities. This alliance was needed to stop them.
The alliance cannot just pack up and leave, an occupation is needed to keep the warlords from just installing more of the same.
Just the 2 cents from one who has been there (Iraq - PurpleHeart recipient) and believes in the cause.
The Hitler period was a WORLD WAR. In my view it was a just war. Fascism had to be defeated. My own country, England, was threatened with occupation. I would have fought and I would have approved of my offspring fighting for our freedom. Fortunately, Hitler was defeated...at a cost of 54 million dead and a divided Europe and the beginning of the cold war and the threat of nuclear annhilation, so it wasn't all good news.
The war in Iraq was different. It was illegal, in my view and unnecessary. Occupation and curbing Saddam's excesses until he could be removed from power by the people of Iraq could have acieved a satisfactory outcome without all the suffering and loss of life, both military and civilian.
Afghanistan is not solely about the Taliban. The government is made up of all sorts of villains, warlords, drug barons etc, which reflects the history of the country, with its warring factions. In essence it is a civil war that is going on. We shouldn't be there.
Bottom line, there are bad regimes around the globe yet not all are selected for invasion. I wonder why?
I respect that you have been a fighter but at the same time I'm glad I've never been.
I just don't accept that being in the military means that you obey orders without questioning the legitimacy of the conflict.
Wasn't the nazi defence at the end of ww2 " I was only following orders "?
A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
