Ad Lib Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 2 minutes ago, Left Back said: Seeing as there is no conscription we all know you really mean no. He literally described a situation in which I'd be conscripted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 If the Syrian Government had surrendered to the Salafi rebels it would have been Alawite 15 year old girls being raped watching their parents murdered. It was literally a war for survival. The Assad regime is the closest to a secular Government with full rights for women on offer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 3 minutes ago, welshbairn said: If the Syrian Government had surrendered to the Salafi rebels it would have been Alawite 15 year old girls being raped watching their parents murdered. It was literally a war for survival. The Assad regime is the closest to a secular Government with full rights for women on offer. The choice was not between Assad being allowed to gas schools with impunity or "hand over to the Jihadis". If a NATO military presence was what either (a) forced outright Assad's government to resign or surrender or (b) brought them to the table to negotiate a peace settlement and a powersharing agreement, we would have been looking at international mediation directed precisely at the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups. There is no prospect that an agreement would be reached that a Taliban-esque flavour of Sharia law would be permitted in Syria in those conditions. We can all reasonably disagree about whether NATO had a feasible military strategy to bring us to that point, but just as the choice in Afghanistan wasn't between "total withdrawal in the summer of 2021" versus "a massive surge in NATO troops" so too the plausible outcomes in Syria were a lot more complex than "dictator or Sharia". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 48 minutes ago, Ad Lib said: I'm literally criticising the whole of NATO (and America especially), not just the UK Government in isolation. They should have "got this presence" by "not withdrawing". They are literally the two examples other people asked me about earlier in the thread about whether I'd support fresh military interventions. I agree with you that our strategy towards Saudi Arabia has been a counterproductive one. I agree with you that we shouldn't arm them to the hilt. And I agree with you that invading Riyadh would not achieve any strategic objectives that would justify it. I don't require a "guarantee" of success at all. I think we should only initiate military operations that aren't absolutely certain to be complete and utter failures. Until this withdrawal of troops happened, NATO's military intervention in Afghanistan was not, by any objective standard, a complete and utter failure. It achieved many strategic objectives and drastically improved the lives and prospects of several millions of Afghans. Apparently this is a controversial statement now? Who knew. ..and with this risible pile of pish the last of your credibility falls. All those Afghans whose lives were improved - what do you think their prospects are now? Twenty years to these boys is fúck all. All it does is give them plenty of time to take notes. There can be few theatres worldwide where "complete and utter failure" is a more likely prospect. The Afghans have a better home record than Torino in the forties. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 (edited) 54 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said: That's already been established - there's a bit of it twice the size of Wales, what size is the whole of it? Quick google - 652,000 sq. km complared to the UK at 242,000. About seven and a half square kilometres each for Are Brave Boys, in Adlib's fantasy. Edited August 19, 2021 by WhiteRoseKillie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 51 minutes ago, Ad Lib said: I've already said if drafted I'd gladly serve, so fine. Can I ask why? Seems pretty obvious you generally don't agree with UK foreign policy, so I'm intrigued to know why you'd go and fight their wars for them if asked. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 53 minutes ago, Ad Lib said: Literally no one is saying that it was as successful a mission outside of Kabul as in it. I'm not sure why you think this is a killer point. Fewer than 3 UK military deaths a year in operations in Afghanistan in the last 8 years. Like I said earlier, we're probably losing more men from heat stroke on training operations on hillsides in the UK than in Afghanistan. Foreign policy shouldn't be dictated by the whims of the electorate. The electorate are fickle and short-termist. The whole point of governing is to do the right thing because the people left to their own devices won't or can't think in strategic terms. I've already said if drafted I'd gladly serve, so fine. No-one except you mentioned being drafted yesterday - you were asked if you would back up your conviction by going into a combat zone. (paraphrasing). You, as is your wont, answered a different question. I would describe this as mealy mouthed. Your failure to even bullshit that you would back up your principles with action would make you, in some eyes, a bit of a shitebag. Or coward, if you will. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 6 minutes ago, Ad Lib said: The choice was not between Assad being allowed to gas schools with impunity or "hand over to the Jihadis". If a NATO military presence was what either (a) forced outright Assad's government to resign or surrender or (b) brought them to the table to negotiate a peace settlement and a powersharing agreement, we would have been looking at international mediation directed precisely at the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups. There is no prospect that an agreement would be reached that a Taliban-esque flavour of Sharia law would be permitted in Syria in those conditions. We can all reasonably disagree about whether NATO had a feasible military strategy to bring us to that point, but just as the choice in Afghanistan wasn't between "total withdrawal in the summer of 2021" versus "a massive surge in NATO troops" so too the plausible outcomes in Syria were a lot more complex than "dictator or Sharia". You have an awful lot of faith in the West's power to shape fair and tolerant governments. With a massive Sunni majority with the Salafists by far the most effective militarily and organizationally, full of sectarian hatred encouraged by their Gulf backers, the Alawites would have been toast. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 21 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said: ..and with this risible pile of pish the last of your credibility falls. All those Afghans whose lives were improved - what do you think their prospects are now? Twenty years to these boys is fúck all. All it does is give them plenty of time to take notes. Their prospects are now horrendous. Because Western governments are trying to appease people like you by withdrawing the one thing that ensured those lives were in a better place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 19 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said: Quick google - 652,000 sq. km complared to the UK at 242,000. About seven and a half square kilometres each for Are Brave Boys, in Adlib's fantasy. How many goats does he get with his seven and a half square kilometres? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 19 minutes ago, The Moonster said: Can I ask why? Seems pretty obvious you generally don't agree with UK foreign policy, so I'm intrigued to know why you'd go and fight their wars for them if asked. Because I'm not a draft dodger. If the democratically elected government of this country considers it necessary to conscript from the adult population, it would be unreasonable for a comfortably-off middle class man in his 30s, even a very unfit one with poor vision and hearing, to refuse to serve in some capacity. To adopt any other position would be hypocrisy on my part, and in all that I do I try not to be a hypocrite. If nation-wide military solidarity is what our democracy demands, I will follow that. One can absolutely protest in the political sphere that a draft was unwarranted and unnecessary, but that doesn't mean one wouldn't serve. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tight minge Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 1 hour ago, Ad Lib said: Yes, I absolutely want to impose on absolutely every single corner of the planet a political structure which gives women and girls meaningful legal and social protections against forced marriage, rape, stoning and beheading. I couldn't give two shits how "artificial" that is or isn't. If a society is writing off more than half of its population based on its sex that is no more defensible than slavery. There are moral absolutes. Playing devils advocate here. Would you accept it at the point of dowry payments for marriage, the legal consent of a marriage to be between the prospective husband and the females male guardian and the acceptability of the husband to have multiple wifes as well as separation based on gender for some day to day activities/public activities? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 With just about every anti Taliban group in Afghanistan deciding it's better to deal with them than fight yet another extended war, it seems a bit arrogant for outsiders to claim a hundred year war would be preferable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 7 minutes ago, welshbairn said: ...full of sectarian hatred encouraged by their Gulf backers, the Alawites would have been toast... None of these Gulf states are exactly renowned for being paragons of virtue on women's equality while the Baath party controlled states further north that NATO targeted did push it quite a bit and were very much pro-secular. Probably easier to set up and maintain the petrodollar cycle with kleptocratic monarchies though so no huge shock that the boat has never been rocked on that. The scary thing about the Syrian Civil War was that the neighbouring NATO member appears to have been cooperating with ISIS on illicit oil sales and the United States Airforce and the western media appeared to be turning a blind eye to it as ISIS advanced remorsely towards Damascus, Aleppo Homs and Hama. Only at that point did Putin intervene when it became clear that NATO powers were probably not going to do anything to prevent a hardline Sunni Islamist takeover of Syria. That wasn't without an element of self-interest as the Assad regime stands in the way of gas pipelines from the Gulf through Turkey to Europe that could be very bad news for the Russian economy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meldrew Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 (edited) i've not really paid too much attention to this, but from what i've seen, one side got the upper hand, then established themselves, could've really finished things for good but didnt, then either got complacent or discovered there was more money to be made if the other side was a bit better.....Peter Lawwell US pentagon Chief of Staff Edited August 19, 2021 by Meldrew 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 11 minutes ago, Tight John McVeigh is a tit said: Playing devils advocate here. Would you accept it at the point of dowry payments for marriage, the legal consent of a marriage to be between the prospective husband and the females male guardian and the acceptability of the husband to have multiple wifes as well as separation based on gender for some day to day activities/public activities? Forced marriage (note, plenty of cultures distinguish between forced and arranged marriage) is never acceptable. All marriages in which the parties involved do not independently consent for themselves, free from coercion, are unacceptable, regardless of the "values" of a society. It starts from the position that an adult woman does not have agency over her own body. In that context, that society is not one that is "chosen" but one that is imposed on her. When choosing between the range of societies that are imposed on people, we should always prioritise those that honour the basics of human agency. Especially, not despite, when the majority or the powerful in that society want it to be otherwise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
101 Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 Anyone watch Trump discuss the withdrawal which was broadcast on Fox? It sounded like he was prepared to nuke them if they had done what they have done, which I'm sure would have calmed it all down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 Too old for it to be an issue, but I'd like to think I'd have refused to go and shoot people in a war I considered unjust or unnecessary, just because the Government of the day ordered me to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 1 minute ago, welshbairn said: Too old for it to be an issue, but I'd like to think I'd have refused to go and shoot people in a war I considered unjust or unnecessary, just because the Government of the day ordered me to. Some people considered World War 2 to be unjust or unnecessary. I'm glad my great grandfathers and tens of millions of others like him didn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted August 19, 2021 Share Posted August 19, 2021 56 minutes ago, welshbairn said: If the Syrian Government had surrendered to the Salafi rebels it would have been Alawite 15 year old girls being raped watching their parents murdered. It was literally a war for survival. The Assad regime is the closest to a secular Government with full rights for women on offer. US policy wasn’t, at least in the time I was there, regime change in Syria. It was recognising Assad’s role in creating a failed state - which it unquestionably is, and providing institutional support for the results of his failure to do anything about it, which mainly involved support for neighbouring states - all of who treat Syrian refugees with great deal more decency than we do. Post Aleppo, where Trump didn’t have the wherewithal or interest to deviate from militaristic/corporate advice, that policy has been reframed somewhat. Assad is not in any way, shape or form, the best of a bad lot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.