Do you want to discuss boring politics? (241 Viewers)

Forums New posts
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
I don't understand what he thinks he gains from this? Its like taking on Rashford over free meals for hungry kids all over again.

And as with that once it was highlighted on social media and eventually into mainstream press instead of getting things sorted out ASAP to at least look vaguely competent and compassionate he's tried to double down and keeps coming out with clear rubbish. Even the MOD have contradicted what he's been saying as they don't want the blame placed on them.

The fact he's still going on about pet rescue and animals being prioritised over humans just shows him to be completely clueless. They aren't pets and its a private charter being paid for by public donations. The animals will go in the cargo hold where its not possible to transport humans and the spare capacity on the plane is being made available to whoever the authorities wish to get out of there.
Click to expand...

I doubt he’s getting out

www.google.co.uk

Ex-marine stuck with 173 dogs and cats at Kabul airport in desperate bid to flee

‘We’ve got hours now before animals start dying’, ex-marine warns
www.google.co.uk www.google.co.uk
 
X

xcraigx

Well-Known Member
Sounds like a third attack may have just happened. Looks like anyone still trying to get out is going to find it near on impossible.
 
Sick Boy

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
Absolutely terrible; the whole situation is beyond depressing. There’s going to be years of civil wars to look forward to there.
 
clint van damme

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
Why have the Taliban been allowed to take over again?
Click to expand...

Trump signed a deal in 2020 and Biden is going to seeing through by hook or by crook.
Biden claims he cant renege on it but these attacks will actually allow him to do that but he won't.
Whatever comes next, expect the usual suspects to profit massively, (Erik Prince charging 6.5k fora seat out of there as we speak).
 
Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Well-Known Member
clint van damme said:
Trump signed a deal in 2020 and Biden is going to seeing through by hook or by crook.
Biden claims he cant renege on it but these attacks will actually allow him to do that but he won't.
Whatever comes next, expect the usual suspects to profit massively, (Erik Prince charging 6.5k fora seat out of there as we speak).
Click to expand...

I seem to remember Trump saying if there were issues they would go back in.

Just to clarify I'm not trying to support either one of them in this, but love him or loathe him, I don't think he would take what happened today and just sit back doing nothing.
 
skybluegod

skybluegod

Well-Known Member
clint van damme said:
Trump signed a deal in 2020 and Biden is going to seeing through by hook or by crook.
Biden claims he cant renege on it but these attacks will actually allow him to do that but he won't.
Whatever comes next, expect the usual suspects to profit massively, (Erik Prince charging 6.5k fora seat out of there as we speak).
Click to expand...

The attacks were carried out by Isis, not by the Taliban. The Taliban have actually been fighting with ISIS also. And intelligence is suggesting they have actually stopped a number of other attacks. So using this as an excuse to renege would be a hard sell.

However, there are many more legitimate reasons that he could renege mind you. But you are right that he won't do that.

Although as a serving member of the armed forces I find it rather sickening that our own government isn't being given far more pressure, we pulled out most of troops over 7 years ago, and yet we are chastising the Americans for doing the same? We have just as much a moral responsibility to help these people as the Americans do. And we can do far far more than we are. (Not aimed at you CVD this part just rather than creating a separate post!)
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
dutchman said:
The same thing happened in Vietnam...
Click to expand...

The parallels with Vietnam are very stark. Read last week that the Taliban were already selling American hardware on line. The writing was on the wall before we invaded. America’s involvement in Afghanistan dates to when Russia invaded. They trained and armed many militias in Afghanistan including the Taliban because they wanted to give Russia their Vietnam.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
clint van damme said:
Trump signed a deal in 2020 and Biden is going to seeing through by hook or by crook.
Biden claims he cant renege on it but these attacks will actually allow him to do that but he won't.
Whatever comes next, expect the usual suspects to profit massively, (Erik Prince charging 6.5k fora seat out of there as we speak).
Click to expand...

That's the thing. This entire process was started by Trump and it was probably one of those 'amazing deals' he makes where he gets buttfucked because someone massages his ego during negotiations.

Biden has chosen to go along with it (maybe for fear of being seen as a warmonger or being too meddlesome in foreign affairs as is quite often the perception of the US) so has to take a lot of the blame for how it has panned out, even though I doubt the takeover by the Taliban would've been any different under Trump.

Given how things have unfolded today Biden's being way too meek but I think Trump would've gone too far the other way. He'd have been reaching for that red button already. He wouldn't be able to bear himself and the US being made to look weak and would ensure the reprisals were humungous.

So I think Biden's handling it terrible. But I'm so glad it's not Trump making the decisions instead.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
I seem to remember Trump saying if there were issues they would go back in.

Just to clarify I'm not trying to support either one of them in this, but love him or loathe him, I don't think he would take what happened today and just sit back doing nothing.
Click to expand...

No he wouldn't. But I'd fear he'd go too far the other way and massively over retaliate leading to an international incident.
 
Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
No he wouldn't. But I'd fear he'd go too far the other way and massively over retaliate leading to an international incident.
Click to expand...

I don't think you should let political feelings blind you. If you were in charge right now, what would you do? If I was a leader of a country and 10+ of my soilders trying to save lives were killed, I would be absolutely fuming.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
I don't think you should let political feelings blind you. If you were in charge right now, what would you do? If I was a leader of a country and 10+ of my soilders trying to save lives were killed, I would be absolutely fuming.
Click to expand...

I think Biden probably has a good reason to step back in. But if the attacks were ISIS, not Taliban, it does add in a bit of uncertainty over the legitimacy of such action. As I said I feel he's being to meek.

With Trump I fear he wouldn't just send troops etc back in - he may well have literally gone nuclear. He's not someone that would think about what a proportionate response would be. His fragile ego wouldn't be able to stand the challenge to his/America's alpha-male position and he'd just go big to make a point.
 
clint van damme

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
skybluegod said:
The attacks were carried out by Isis, not by the Taliban. The Taliban have actually been fighting with ISIS also. And intelligence is suggesting they have actually stopped a number of other attacks. So using this as an excuse to renege would be a hard sell.

However, there are many more legitimate reasons that he could renege mind you. But you are right that he won't do that.

Although as a serving member of the armed forces I find it rather sickening that our own government isn't being given far more pressure, we pulled out most of troops over 7 years ago, and yet we are chastising the Americans for doing the same? We have just as much a moral responsibility to help these people as the Americans do. And we can do far far more than we are. (Not aimed at you CVD this part just rather than creating a separate post!)
Click to expand...

Yes, I know it was ISIS, (ISIS K to be precise, as I stated in an earlier post), , but part of the deal was that they do not allow jihadist groups to flourish in Afghanistan. That clause is out the window already.

And the Taliban don't have counter terrorist capabilities anyway. I think the thwarted attacks may have been down to the now defunct Afghan army but you maybe right.

I suspect they'll needto be supported in this endeavour by some obscenely paid private contractors.
 
skybluegod

skybluegod

Well-Known Member
clint van damme said:
Yes, I know it was ISIS, (ISIS K to be precise, as I stated in an earlier post), , but part of the deal was that they do not allow jihadist groups to flourish in Afghanistan. That clause is out the window already.

And the Taliban don't have counter terrorist capabilities anyway. I think the thwarted attacks may have been down to the now defunct Afghan army but you maybe right.

I suspect they'll needto be supported in this endeavour by some obscenely paid private contractors.
Click to expand...

Apologies didn't see earlier post!

I have to disagree on the breaking of the clause though, they have been fighting ISIS (K) since before the withdrawal and a number of battles have been noted between the ISIS and them.

I believe they do have the capabilities I just don't believe they have been set up in Kabul, but I believe that is probably more down to not wanting to assist the evacuation process than anything, it's well documented they don't want people leaving. From what I have heard it is actually the Taliban who have thwarted some attacks, although I'd imagine they are attempting to avoid a Biden reneging more than than anything. Although the reality is, there is no political will for the war to continue, and unfortunately no matter what happens they won't change their minds about a withdrawal.

I don't expect you are wrong on that last point.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
clint van damme said:
Yes, I know it was ISIS, (ISIS K to be precise, as I stated in an earlier post), , but part of the deal was that they do not allow jihadist groups to flourish in Afghanistan. That clause is out the window already.

And the Taliban don't have counter terrorist capabilities anyway. I think the thwarted attacks may have been down to the now defunct Afghan army but you maybe right.

I suspect they'll needto be supported in this endeavour by some obscenely paid private contractors.
Click to expand...

It's a bit difficult to say they're allowing jihadist groups to flourish after one attack, even though it has occurred very soon after they took over. We've had Islamic terror attacks here - would you say we're allowing Jihadist groups to flourish?

I feel that Islamic terrorism will find a foothold in Afghanistan in he coming months, whether because the terrorist groups will just take advantage of a less organised government or because that government actively turn a blind eye or encourage it . But we'll have to wait to see if that is the case.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
I see Pen Farthing has left Afghanistan with his animals but forced to leave his staff behind. I thought the government had sorted this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Total: 240 (members: 3, guests: 237)
    Top