Afghanistan Crisis

[Detournement]

15 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

Those crimes are indeed horrific and inexcusable. They are orders of magnitude fewer in number than those of, and tolerated and encouraged under, the Taliban.

I'm literally a public servant who votes for social democrats, but cool story bro.

The Lib Dems aren't social democrats you absolute divvy. Willy Brandt and Olof Palme were Social Democrats. You voted for Jo Swinson. 

You might be right about the number of incidents but the question is why do you think it's fine to sacrifice millions of Afghanis to utilitarianism when you would never dream of doing the same in the UK or advocating for similar policies in the USA? 

Edited August 17, 2021 by Detournement

[GordonS]

10 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

We don't have conscription. That's the beginning and end of the discussion.

Any soldier signing up for the US or UK military in the last three decades cannot have done so ignorant of the possibility, nay, likelihood, that they would be asked to serve in combat zones otherwise than for purely defensive purposes.

If conscripted I would of course join one of the Armed Forces, but I doubt they'd want me. I am an obese 5ft 7 man in my 30s with poor eyesight and impaired hearing, and I shit myself when a car unexpectedly backfires. Judging by the one and only time I went paintballing, or any of the times I've played Halo, it would be in their strategic interest to keep me as far away from combat as possible.

I was hoping for a less evasive answer tbh. It was obviously a hypothetical question. For me there's a moral problem is asking someone to risk death for something that, even if I were the right age, had all the skills and was ideally suited to, I still wouldn't do. In fact if I were conscripted I would choose jail over Afghanistan. My question was less an invitation to sign up, more something like the trolley problem.

I think a lot of those signing up in recent years have believed the war in Afghanistan to be about suppressing terrorist attacks that could be carried out in the UK. But I'm guessing on their motives, as I suspect you are. If you're right then fine, my moral problem goes away and if they are making a free choice to fight for human rights in Afghanistan I'm happy to pay for my share of it. I just don't think they are.

[Ad Lib]

4 minutes ago, Detournement said:

The Lib Dems aren't social democrats you absolute divvy.

I don't vote for the Liberal Democrats you absolute divvy.

4 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Willy Brandt and Olof Palme were Social Democrats. You voted for Jo Swinson.

Never voted for Jo Swinson.

4 minutes ago, Detournement said:

You might be right about the number of incidents but the question is why do you think it's fine to sacrifice millions of Afghanis to utilitarianism when you would never dream of doing the same in the UK or advocating for similar policies in the USA? 

If a permanent military presence from a foreign power was necessary to stop the British equivalent of the Taliban from taking over the country I would welcome it with open arms.

[Ad Lib]

Just now, GordonS said:

I was hoping for a less evasive answer tbh. It was obviously a hypothetical question. For me there's a moral problem is asking someone to risk death for something that, even if I were the right age, had all the skills and was ideally suited to, I still wouldn't do. In fact if I were conscripted I would choose jail over Afghanistan. My question was less an invitation to sign up, more something like the trolley problem.

But my answer is that if it was demanded of me I would do it. Is that non-evasive enough for you?

Just now, GordonS said:

I think a lot of those signing up in recent years have believed the war in Afghanistan to be about suppressing terrorist attacks that could be carried out in the UK. But I'm guessing on their motives, as I suspect you are. If you're right then fine, my moral problem goes away and if they are making a free choice to fight for human rights in Afghanistan I'm happy to pay for my share of it. I just don't think they are.

The very nature of signing up to the armed forces is that you do what you're told unless it's a war crime. It's not a pay-as-you go vocation.

[Detournement]

Just now, Ad Lib said:

 

If a permanent military presence from a foreign power was necessary to stop the British equivalent of the Taliban from taking over the country I would welcome it with open arms.

No shock there. The middle class are always collaborators.

[Ad Lib]

Just now, Detournement said:

No shock there. The middle class are always collaborators.

I'm sure the working class people of Berlin and Seoul share your contempt for foreign military personnel stationed in their countries.

[Detournement]

13 minutes ago, GordonS said:

Go to say, those having a go at Ad Lib for being in a "liberal bubble" aren't really recognising that we're all in the same nice safe bubble here. It's easy to play the cynical internet dude and castigate those capitalist pig dogs when we're not the ones who are about to have our freedom ripped away, and not the bullshit 'wearing a mask is like the holocaust' way, in a very real way none of us have ever experienced.

I can't say I trust the judgement of anyone who's certain about what's the right course of action here. It's all shades of doubt. 

I'm certain that the position of the rural majority living under occupation is untenable and that they have the right to resist it. 

The Taliban is obviously a deeply flawed expression of that resistance but decades of occupation and violence inevitably causes extremism. The Afghan people deserve a chance to develop functioning state without any Western/Russian interference.

[SANTAN]

2 minutes ago, Detournement said:

No shock there. The middle class are always collaborators.

Never had you down as a patriot! 

 

[Ad Lib]

15 minutes ago, GordonS said:

Go to say, those having a go at Ad Lib for being in a "liberal bubble" aren't really recognising that we're all in the same nice safe bubble here. It's easy to play the cynical internet dude and castigate those capitalist pig dogs when we're not the ones who are about to have our freedom ripped away, and not the bullshit 'wearing a mask is like the holocaust' way, in a very real way none of us have ever experienced.

I can't say I trust the judgement of anyone who's certain about what's the right course of action here. It's all shades of doubt. 

This is fair. I'm not asking you to trust my judgement.

[scottsdad]

This thread's gone a bit Coronavirus in the last couple of pages

[Ad Lib]

4 minutes ago, Detournement said:

I'm certain that the position of the rural majority living under occupation is untenable and that they have the right to resist it.

Not by raping and killing civilians as spoils of war they don't.

4 minutes ago, Detournement said:

The Taliban is obviously a deeply flawed expression of that resistance but decades of occupation and violence inevitably causes extremism.

The violence and extremism doesn't go away just because we do.

4 minutes ago, Detournement said:

The Afghan people deserve a chance to develop functioning state without any Western/Russian interference.

Now look who's being rose-tinted and idealistic. The Taliban are dictatorial theocrats who effectively treat women and children as chattels. That's not a "functioning state" worth having and it's certainly not one that those women have any effective choice about whether they want it.

Edited August 17, 2021 by Ad Lib

[Detournement]

The worst case scenario is Saudi Arabia and no one loses any sleep about that.

The idea that the occupation is benign and the violent acts committed by NATO forces aren't deliberate doesn't withstand the slightest scrutiny. Gina Haspel was in charge of torture in Afghanistan under Bush and is now head of the CIA. Daniel Hale was just recently jailed for exposing the true number of civilians killed by drone strikes. David McBride is up on trial later this year for exposing massive numbers of war crimes by Australian SAS. The British Government just made all British soldiers legally immune from any war crimes committed abroad. The USA has sanctioned the ICC investigators who are looking into Afghanistan.

Racist violence is absolutely essential to the occupation. 

[GordonS]

12 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

But my answer is that if it was demanded of me I would do it. Is that non-evasive enough for you?

 

It's not quite the same because you're saying you would do it if it were a criminal offence with serious penalties not to do it. If you were in your early 20s, in good physical shape and without the same career opportunities that you've had, would fighting in Afghanistan have been something you may have volunteered to do?

Quote

The very nature of signing up to the armed forces is that you do what you're told unless it's a war crime. It's not a pay-as-you go vocation.

There's an unwritten pact between the government and the armed forces that they won't be thrown into harm's way without a strong justification. They sign up for Queen and country, not girls' education in Helmand. There's an extent to which Western countries send armies into humanitarian wars because they have standing armies anyway and, as they can do something good with them, they feel like they should. But I'm far from convinced that's how the soldiers see it.

[GordonS]

10 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

This thread's gone a bit Coronavirus in the last couple of pages

I decided to jump past the cretin-off and see if I could maybe draw some wisdom.

[GordonS]

13 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

This is fair. I'm not asking you to trust my judgement.

Do you trust your judgement?

[scottsdad]

Just now, GordonS said:

I decided to jump past the cretin-off and see if I could maybe draw some wisdom.

Was any wisdom forthcoming?

[Miguel Sanchez]

Taliban press conference now. A man with very full eyebrows taking questions from American news. It's all very surreal.

[LongTimeLurker]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

Bombing Serbian TV news headquarters was unconscionable, they should have known that only Aljazeera and Reuters are fair game.

They also managed to bomb the Chinese embassy in Belgrade and a passenger train along the way. The problem was that Milosevic didn't give in as easily as anticipated in terms of responding rationally to a display of overwhelming military might (had they ever spent any time around Yugoslavs of a certain vintage?), so they had to keep widening the list of targets well beyond what could justifiably be described as military in nature to keep the whole thing going until he finally capitulated. To people following the western media narrative it all seemed justifiable enough, but a lot of the world still views it in the same sort of category as Russian interventions in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Crimea in terms of legality and still refuse to recognise Kosovo. 

[Left Back]

2 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

Taliban press conference now. A man with very full eyebrows taking questions from American news. It's all very surreal.

It's all very cuddly.  Everyone that worked with the US has been given an amnesty.  Wants all these people with skills and education to remain in Afghanistan to work for Afghanistan.  Women are free within the limits of Sharia law and can be educated and work.

Anyone seeking retribution is a gangster and not Taliban.

[GordonS]

8 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

Was any wisdom forthcoming?

It's early days.