Afghanistan Crisis

[Ad Lib]

It's completely clear that the only morally acceptable policy was a substantial NATO military presence in Afghanistan for several more decades, perhaps even a century.

But the cowards that run our countries weren't prepared to make the case to a domestic audience that is just as morally deficient because it just doesn't care that much about the lives and wellbeing of ordinary Afghans.

[Ya Bezzer!]

All through the Trump era I was getting 'angry feminist' type posts all day, every day from Biden/Democrat supporters on Facebook.

Yesterday Biden hands over the entire female population of a country to Islamic extremists and they are posting.....what cocktails they are drinking/box set they are watching.

 

[Ad Lib]

Biden might as well just call up Trump to ask for all his America First placards, as that's clearly what he's campaigning on in the midterms next year.

[scottsdad]

4 minutes ago, Ya Bezzer! said:

All through the Trump era I was getting 'angry feminist' type posts all day, every day from Biden/Democrat supporters on Facebook.

Yesterday Biden hands over the entire female population of a country to Islamic extremists and they are posting.....what cocktails they are drinking/box set they are watching.

 

Ah, but you see the flaw here is that Facebook is complete bollocks. 

[welshbairn]

7 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

It's completely clear that the only morally acceptable policy was a substantial NATO military presence in Afghanistan for several more decades, perhaps even a century.

But the cowards that run our countries weren't prepared to make the case to a domestic audience that is just as morally deficient because it just doesn't care that much about the lives and wellbeing of ordinary Afghans.

You think that that continual insurgency and sending out government troops to be slaughtered would be a morally acceptable status quo, just to retain a pretence at liberal democracy in Kabul?

[beefybake]

1 hour ago, Detournement said:

 

 

On the basis of your previous quotes, your main agenda is anti US, and very little to do with with being too bothered

about Afghanistan., or anywhere else.

[superbigal]

Afghan president is the biggest shitehouse in this.
Should be sent back to negotiate in person and bring back the gold bullion in his 22kg Jet2 case allowance.

[Detournement]

6 minutes ago, beefybake said:

 

On the basis of your previous quotes, your main agenda is anti US, and very little to do with with being too bothered

about Afghanistan., or anywhere else.

American imperialism is the most destructive force on the planet. 

I was just pointing that you don't have a fucking clue about education in Afghanistan. All the people who are very concerned about the Taliban but couldn't look away from Netflix for two minutes to read about CIA torture or drone warfare against civilian populations are hypocrites who should be ignored.

[Ad Lib]

18 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

You think that that continual insurgency and sending out government troops to be slaughtered would be a morally acceptable status quo, just to retain a pretence at liberal democracy in Kabul?

When compared to the alternative, which is the complete and utter re-emergence of a theocratic regime that will treat tens of millions of women like animals, treat young girls as spoils of war to be forcibly married off and raped, and a refugee crisis that will cause significant instability in the region, yes, absolutely the death of tens of thousands of soldiers a year, supported both financially and in raw military personnel by the west some of whose own soldiers will also die, is a far less bad option and therefore the only morally acceptable choice.

[welshbairn]

2 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

When compared to the alternative, which is the complete and utter re-emergence of a theocratic regime that will treat tens of millions of women like animals, treat young girls as spoils of war to be forcibly married off and raped, and a refugee crisis that will cause significant instability in the region, yes, absolutely the death of tens of thousands of soldiers a year, supported both financially and in raw military personnel by the west some of whose own soldiers will also die, is a far less bad option and therefore the only morally acceptable choice.

Easy for the Uk to say Afghani military and ciivilian deaths are worthwhile with 8 casualties since 2014, and the majority of the population already under Taliban rule for most of the last 20 years.

[Ad Lib]

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

Easy for the Uk to say Afghani military and ciivilian deaths are worthwhile with 8 casualties since 2014, and the majority of the population already under Taliban rule for most of the last 20 years.

I agree. More of the deaths should be NATO military deaths. But that's only achievable with a substantially increased, not a decreased, presence.

[Thorongil]

There was no justification for the invasion of Afghanistan in the first place. What a waste of time and lives.

[welshbairn]

4 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

I agree. More of the deaths should be NATO military deaths. But that's only achievable with a substantially increased, not a decreased, presence.

It seems very arrogant to impose something however worthy when consent is clearly not there, outside middle class Kabul and some other cities. If it was the Army wouldn't have switched sides or gone home as soon as the Americans pulled out. 

Edited August 17, 2021 by welshbairn

[beefybake]

9 minutes ago, Detournement said:

American imperialism is the most destructive force on the planet. 

I was just pointing that you don't have a fucking clue about education in Afghanistan. All the people who are very concerned about the Taliban but couldn't look away from Netflix for two minutes to read about CIA torture or drone warfare against civilian populations are hypocrites who should be ignored.

Thanks, you've pretty much demonstrated who you are.

 

[ICTChris]

Lib Dem’s advocating a century of war.

Corbyn weirdos giving it “switch off Netflix for ten minutes sheeple”.

Where will this thread go next?

[Ad Lib]

6 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

It seems very arrogant to impose something however worthy when consent is clearly not there, outside middle class Kabul and some other cities. If it was the Army wouldn't have switched sides or gone home as soon as the Americans pulled out. 

I don't give two shits about whether or not popular consent is there. The Taliban could have the support of every single man in Afghanistan and it still would be morally repugnant to abandon the military presence that guaranteed the freedom from murder, forced marriage and rape of millions of Afghan women and girls.

We went in. In doing so, we created the conditions in which these women were able to throw off their burqas, a significant number of young girls to go to school, to enter into professions and live something even remotely approximating a free-ish if still deeply suboptimal life for almost two decades.

It is morally repugnant then to abandon them simply because there isn't a domestic will, whether in Afghanistan or in the West, to defend their most basic of rights.

This is true regardless of whether you think we should have gone in in the first place.

[welshbairn]

Maybe they should have turned Kabul into a Berlin, a little Disneyland of liberal values with big walls keeping medievalism out.

[Granny Danger]

44 minutes ago, beefybake said:

 

On the basis of your previous quotes, your main agenda is anti US, and very little to do with with being too bothered

about Afghanistan., or anywhere else.

He’s an attention seeking nut job.  I only have to read his posts when others are foolish enough to reply to him.

[Thistle_do_nicely]

[Left Back]

16 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

I don't give two shits about whether or not popular consent is there. The Taliban could have the support of every single man in Afghanistan and it still would be morally repugnant to abandon the military presence that guaranteed the freedom from murder, forced marriage and rape of millions of Afghan women and girls.

We went in. In doing so, we created the conditions in which these women were able to throw off their burqas, a significant number of young girls to go to school, to enter into professions and live something even remotely approximating a free-ish if still deeply suboptimal life for almost two decades.

It is morally repugnant then to abandon them simply because there isn't a domestic will, whether in Afghanistan or in the West, to defend their most basic of rights.

This is true regardless of whether you think we should have gone in in the first place.

So you'd be in favour of invading China as well to "free" the Uyghurs from similar oppression?