UK

Partly Sunny with Showers 9° London Hi 11°C / Lo 7°C

Minister defends Afghan mission as a nation remembers

By Craig Woodhouse and Tim Moynihan, Press Association

The Queen leaves a wreath at the Cenotaph

GETTY

The Queen leaves a wreath at the Cenotaph

As the Queen led the nation in paying respect to Britain's war dead on Remembrance Sunday the Defence Minister, Bob Ainsworth defended the country's mission in Afghanistan, saying the level of involvement could not be determined by public opinion.

As the death toll among British troops rose to 231, Mr Ainsworth acknowledged that support for the campaign had been "dented" by recent losses.

But he said it was important to "persevere" and "show some resolution", adding: "Failure will be a disaster for us."

A ComRes opinion poll today found that almost two thirds - 64% - now believe that the war is "unwinnable", while a similar proportion - 63% - wanted British troops to be withdrawn as soon as possible.

Speaking to Sky News, the Defence Secretary said: "British public opinion has been dented by the level of losses that we have received but we cannot run a campaign like this off the back of an opinion poll.

"We have to persevere, we have to show some resolution.

"This campaign is directly connected to our safety back here in the United Kingdom and people need to recognise that. Failure will be a disaster for us."

Mr Ainsworth insisted that progress was being made in Afghanistan and said troops on the ground understood the campaign was linked to Britain's national security.

He also said the Afghan government would address fundamental issues such as corruption.

Meanwhile, the Queen, warmly clad in a black coat against the autumn chill, placed the first wreath in the annual event at the Cenotaph in Whitehall.

Skies were threatening but the rain held off as the Queen was followed in placing wreaths by the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Harry, on behalf of the Prince of Wales who is on an official visit to Canada, and Prince William. More wreaths were also placed by the Duke of York, the Earl of Wessex, the Princess Royal and the Duke of Kent.

They were followed by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, David Cameron, Nick Clegg, foreign secretary David Miliband, high commissioners from Commonwealth countries and defence chiefs. Approximately 7,500 ex-Servicemen and women and 1,600 civilians then took part in a march past the Cenotaph.

The crowd 10 deep on the pavement observed the two minutes silence in perfect quiet at 11am before the wreath-laying event. Their minds were no doubt on the recent losses in Afghanistan, which were referred to frequently last night at the annual Festival of Remembrance at the Royal Albert Hall.

Stuart Gendall, director of corporate communications for The Royal British Legion, said: "It's gone very, very well. It's been a very touching ceremony, it's made all the more poignant that foremost in people's minds are the tragic deaths in Afghanistan.

"I think there are more people here today than other years, and there's a definite emotion in the air, you can really feel it.

"People are marching past remembering their fallen comrades from the Second World War, and people are falling even now in a foreign country, young men of the same age."

He said it was the first time that Prince Harry had placed a wreath on Remembrance Sunday.

The Prince has served in Afghanistan.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
The Queen must secretly hate Brown
[info]saxontimes wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 01:27 pm (UTC)
What do you think she was thinking seeing that craven coward behind her, who has let down our troops along with Bliar so many of the 231 dead in Afghanistan are down to poor equipment and squalid treatment of our serving men and women. She must have felt utter disgust for him and Blair. The hypocrisy of those two in laying wreaths makes me want to vomit.
She must also look at Britain today with disbelief that a British government knowingly and willingly allowed Taliban fighters to emigrate to Britain, plus the thousands of other dangerous people that were waved in (See Times today) without proper checks.
Re: The Queen must secretly hate Brown
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 09:34 pm (UTC)
not just the Queen, dear fellow, the whole damned lot of us; although I cannot afford to pollute my inner life with hatred of anyone
Needless bloodshed for Afghan gas pipeline
[info]freddyfresh wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 01:36 pm (UTC)
And here was me thinking that the purpose of the government is to serve the people, not send them off on illegal invasions to be blown apart by IED's.
Re: Needless bloodshed for Afghan gas pipeline
[info]saxontimes wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 01:48 pm (UTC)
More rubbish, advise you to talk to the UN prior to spreading your Islamist lies
AFGHANISTAN INVASION WAS ILLEGAL - [info]freddyfresh - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 02:10 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: AFGHANISTAN INVASION WAS ILLEGAL - [info]saxontimes - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:59 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: AFGHANISTAN INVASION WAS ILLEGAL - [info]vhawk1951 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 09:49 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Needless bloodshed for Afghan gas pipeline - [info]vhawk1951 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 09:38 pm (UTC) Expand
[info]mwreid wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 01:48 pm (UTC)
Mr Ainsworth Says

''This campaign is directly connected to our safety back here in the United Kingdom and people need to recognise that. Failure will be a disaster for us."

Sorry Mr Ainsworth what do you mean by failure ? More to the point please define success.

Sounds like your definition of success is subjugating and maintaining control of a large mountainous country full of very well armed hostile locals. Do you really think you can do that ?

Truth is this war is a Blair cock up he with joined Bush to catch OBL , failed and then started to invent different reasons for being there.

Our bombers didn't come from there -they came from Luton and other UK cities.

They were not ''trained in training camps in Afghanistan '' (There are no red double decker buses to train on in Afghanistan).

Arguing AQ is in Pakistan is also highly questionable. People seem hell bent on demonising Pakistan- a very long term ally of the UK.

The biggest impediment to pulling out our troops is that it requires the UK to face up to the fact that it was a wrong decision to go there in the first place.

Bring our troops home. And if we are really worried about terrorism chuck out the known dengers (the security folk know who they are) and guard the borders properly.

Sloppy control of our borders is a far greater danger than goat herders in Afghanistan.




Supporting the War but not the men Brown;s humiliation
[info]gorazdi wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 02:15 pm (UTC)
mwreid makes excellen point about domestic threat stoked by the Afghan adventure.

As someone who has visited the country more than onceI'd like to make these points

! There are no Afghans rather Pushtuns who overlap into Pakistan,Hazars who are tolerant of other religions Turkomens Balouchis Tadjiks and Khirghiz etc

2 Drugs and drug use throughout male population endemic as is mistreatment of women and boy soldiers

3 Corruption violence and rape are tactics

4 No foreign force even muslim with language skills e..g Iranian or Pakistani army could hold tribal areas

5 Uk has been used misled and misbled by the need of the |New Ameican Century"

6 None of it worth the life of another soldier,Deporting muslims and naval missiles are a backstop

7 Oddly Mis-selling the gold ,anarchy on the streets and failing economy will not be as disasterous as the Helmand humiliation not of the troops but of the
government which will have bled the Army for nothing

8 As for being an ally where are the Pakistan forces SIS and nuclea might to busy quaffing ?

9 Perhaps Brown can ask IDA to add S Afganisan to hit list when the Persian Carpet Bombing starts they seem to do what it says on the bomb
[info]voodoojedizin wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 03:15 pm (UTC)
Bob Ainsworth defended the country's mission in Afghanistan, saying the level of involvement could not be determined by public opinion.

If this were democracy public opinion would win The day and not be scorned upon. Why do these ministers always think they know better, and the public doesn't? Why not let the public decide if we make a mistake then we will all live with it but at least we will all be part of the decision.

What is the mission? It looks like the mission is for geopolitical control, and a pipeline that's what the Americans are fighting for. Propaganda misinformation and lies that's what the government has been doing since day one.
Proud to be British
[info]charlesdanwood wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 03:29 pm (UTC)

It makes me proud to be British to know that the Queen, was warmly clad in a black coat against the autumn chill.
On the other hand it make s me ashamed that our troops are occupying Afghanistan and slaughtering its people all for a gas pipeline.
Re: Proud to be British
[info]saxontimes wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:50 pm (UTC)
You are clearly not British otherwise you would not have written what you have written on Remembrance Sunday. Your total disrespect for our armed forces puts you squarely in the group of Islamic fascists that dishonoured the military march past in Luton.

Having a British passport will never make you British, not in a thousand years. I pray that people like you are outed, you are dangerous and I consider your remarks in your post absolutely disgraceful.
Where are the women of Greenham Common?
[info]ambricourt wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 03:32 pm (UTC)
Ambricourt

These fading New Labour politicians seem unaware that the public no longer depends on their words for information. When they lie, the lies are obvious. When they repeat, as U.S. puppets, the latest handouts from their masters, their spurious arguments and selective information are visible in these spacious days of world-wide, internet communication...

By offering alternative sources of information, the internet gives more people more opportunity to make decisions outside the official "narratives" devised in Washington think-tanks which are daily parroted by politicians and paraphrased by official media.

Ironically, foreign newspapers, on-line discussions, and well-informed blogs can offer more reliable information than a nation's offical spokespersons.

All that's presently lacking is the social organization to follow up on this alternative information - to protest - to proclaim - to cry out: BRING OUR TROOPS HOME. EXIT NATO. ABANDON BRITAIN'S MILITARY ECONOMY.

Where has the spirit of PROTEST gone? Where are the women of Greenham Common?
Should I Stay or Should I Go Now ....
[info]theprogramme wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:12 pm (UTC)
... If I go there will be trouble ... An if I stay it will be double.

Didn't someone once say that those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I can't help but draw parallels of 1930s Germany with our new 21st century: A humiliated army returning from a bloody war to a bankrupt country they no longer recognize as their own. Pulling out of Afghanistan would be a disaster. All those lives lost would have been for nothing and it would leave a very bitter taste in the mouth of the British people. Just think of the smug looks you'd see around the place, the army would look like a they've been defeated by the enemy and betrayed by their own government.

Pulling out = Curtains

If we stay then it will inevitably mean more casualties, more expense and, arguably, an increase in terrorist attacks on British soil. Staying means Pakistan could be pulled into the conflict, which would infuriate Pakistani Muslims who hate having anything to do with the US, especially killing fellow Muslims.

Staying in = Decades of strife

Makes one wonder what all this is really about. It looks like we've been stitched up like a kipper.

PULL OUT OF THIS STUPID WAR
[info]rocket111 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:38 pm (UTC)
The fake story being put out by the govt that 'the war directly affects' our own uk domestic security' is just a load of rubbish peddled about to keep us scared and make us blindly support a war that will never be won.

This is an occupation/invasion/war that was never backed by the british people, let alone the soldiers sent there to fight as political puppets.
The war will not be won, it's just going to be yet another 'vietnam' or northern ireland for UK.

Claiming that this war is needed to protect security in the UK is made up rubbish, it's about controlling natural resources and vital pipelines for the west. Period. Sure the taliban are a bunch of crazy extremists but so are the people who run Saudi Arabia...women can't vote or drive in Saudi....does that ring any bells for the UK?
All this human rights/democracy talk is just pathetic considering the recent fraudulent elections there that even mugabe would envy!
Let's not kid ourselves. In fact, being there makes the UK a target. It's a long way away, don't give them visas..they can't come here. It's quite simple. A war zone only generates asylum seekers, so perhaps the border agency should be pressing the MOD to pull out and save them the paperwork
Laughable Comments
[info]jim2509 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:51 pm (UTC)
I see there are people here 'freddyfresh' spouting the usual rubbish. Lets stick to the facts shall we, this war WILL continue until the Extremist Element of the Taliban have been deleted & that will be in the not too distant future. Once thats done Uk forces should switch fire to take care of those who think they can stand on our streets threatening violence against the our 'christian' state & others from other religions who live peacefully within GB. Even though NU Labour have cocked up at home & abroad with their ridiculous 'Mulitcultral' policies 'bungling Bob' is right we cant fight wars on opinion polls as most uk citizens havent been to AFGHANISTAN & do not understand the complexities or have had a first hand experience of the current battle..proven by some of the stupid comments on here.
This War will continue...thats for sure!!
Re: Laughable Comments
[info]rocket111 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:11 pm (UTC)
yeah..'we' don't understand, yet you are an expert in the whole Afghan arena. Sure.

But the war won't be won, the taliban never gave a shit about the UK before this war and probably won't after it. I don't see them flying into Heathrow somehow.
No one will win it, even the italians were paying the taliban to stop them attacking italian troops, it's the only way to keep them at bay.

This is more about Iran than anything - but if you wan't to claim it's about 'freedom' or democracy or 'fighting the taliban' feel free to have your opinion, most british people aren't so stupid as to fall for this smoke and mirrors trick anymore, we were already lied to over Iraq and the famous 'WMD's that were not there and the 'secret intelligence' we are not allowed to see or know about and are expected to just believe blindly and swallow...it wont happen again...the govt lied and in fact blair should be sitting in the hague right now standing trial for war crimes.
Re: Laughable Comments - [info]jim2509 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:38 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Laughable Comments - [info]rocket111 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 07:21 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Laughable Comments - [info]jim2509 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 10:44 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Laughable Comments - [info]jim2509 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 10:56 pm (UTC) Expand
If Brits admit defeat they might as well disband their army
[info]find_empire wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:05 pm (UTC)
A secret MoD report says that Britain's armed forces,especially after the defeat in Basra, will lose all deterrent credibility if they are defeated in Afghanistan as well. If Brits wave a white flag in Helmand they can forget about being a military power. Any future British deployment will be met with hoots of derision. The Brit military is particularly worried about its "special relationship" with the Yanks.

Armed Forces reputation is at risk in Afghanistan, MoD chiefs warn


The Times, November 7, 2009

The long-term future and reputation of Britain’s Armed Forces is at risk unless progress is made in Afghanistan, the two most senior officials at the Ministry of Defence warn in an internal document seen by The Times.

The internal MoD document, entitled Strategy for Defence, makes it clear that as far as the Armed Forces are concerned, the mission in Afghanistan has to succeed. “The International Security Assistance Force mission is of critical importance to the security of British citizens and the UK’s national interest, including the credibility of Nato, and to the reputation and long-term future of the Armed Forces,” the document says.

There are already concerns within the military that the premature British troop withdrawal from Basra in 2007 and the pullout from Iraq in July may have tarnished Britain’s reputation in the eyes of the American military.

Re: If Brits admit defeat they might as well disband their army
[info]jim2509 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:20 pm (UTC)
The STRATEGY FOR DEFENCE document mentions nothing from the MOD about what you call a 'retreat' but EVERYONE ELSE IN THE UK, US, UN, EU & IRAQ GOVERMENT CALLED A HANDOVER OF SECURITY CONTROL TO THE IRAQI FORCES. If all you can post is media mis-quotes & histeria thats a pretty poor effort...you been to Basra??? Thought not...LOL AGAIN!
lies lies,death,and more death
[info]borderreiver1 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:07 pm (UTC)
The gas pipeline begins construction next year (official)


Now does anyone else need to know the real reason for the invasion of Afghanistan.

"public opinion can not dictate policy"

Who the hell do these politician scum think they are.

I really wish I could state here what I would personally like to do to them-but labour have stitched us all up,and the independents moderator can not allow it.
Re: lies lies,death,and more death
[info]rocket111 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 07:58 pm (UTC)
You know Gordon Brown might as well be hitler. He doesn't care about public opinion. has no conscience. Neither do any of this cabinet, all of them are interested in stealing from the taxpayer for their 'second' homes, their wives get paid as 'secretaries'. Their expenses are blatant theft.
It makes one wonder, with all these lies...what exactly DID happen in WW2? As lies are seeping out all the time and we discover the truth...I wonder just what version of events the Germans had and how those differ from the UK's and their US 'allies' version? And how this version is at variance with the facts of the matter?

I'm not saying I support Germany for one minute, but just look at lies and spin we are fed, apply it to any other situation, especially war, and see what I mean? You just can't trust labour, or politicians for that matter.
As Wehrmacht in Yugoslavia in WWII
[info]terminus_h wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:11 pm (UTC)
I know this will be difficult to swallow, but Anglo-American presence both in Iraq and Afghanistan resembles Wehrmacht presence in Yugoslavia during WWII.

During the quick Axis victory in April 1941, much of light weaponry remained in the hands of population to provide ample seeding for the breakout of a civil war. In 1941, Axis forces directly occupied some parts, while in most of the territory installed various puppet regimes, which started atrocities on national (in the West, you like to call them ethnic, but then British and Americans are also two ethnicities of the same nation) and religious/ideological basis, pretty much following well-known brutality of Germans, Italians, and Bulgarians. Germans mostly focused on transport lines (particularly to supply Greece), several times tried in vain to capture and/or anihilate Tito's partisans, but their shear presence brought enormous suffering to the civilian population since they provided grounds for the civil war. Yugoslavian war theatre was never of importance for Germany (despite excellent Tito's propaganda, which British readily embraced), and they probably - with a bit more diplomacy and patience - even would not have had to invade it.

Now, I don't know the real reasons behind presence of Anglo-American and NATO forces (including my home country) in Afghanistan. If it is to fight terorism, let's cut the crap and this imbecile rhetoric of Bush-Blair era; if it is to secure the pipeline, politicians should say so, make the corridor (like around Panama canal), and this is it; our boys are then risking their lives for profit of big corporations. I know they are fine and brave people, but they should pick some other arena to prove themselves: now they are just mercenaries fighting in a foreign country for a wrong cause and making conditions right for enormous suffering of civilian population. Afghanistans don't need us, and I - and probably many with me - feel ashamed that our governments are cynically supporting Karzai and other thugs. This is a dirty war, just as World War II was dirty in Yugoslavia. So let's bring our boys back home for Christmas, there is so much work to do elsewhere.
Re: As Wehrmacht in Yugoslavia in WWII
[info]jim2509 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:23 pm (UTC)
There has not been ONE military operation to date to secure the area of 'The Pipeline'...FACT!!!
ahhh jim2509, another xenophobic plonker - [info]freddyfresh - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 07:19 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: ahhh jim2509, another xenophobic plonker - [info]rocket111 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 08:47 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: ahhh jim2509, another xenophobic plonker - [info]jim2509 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 10:26 pm (UTC) Expand
9/11 TRUTH NOW
[info]frase33 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:22 pm (UTC)
Disgarceful.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB....
Troops out now and reopen an investigation....
Anyone in doubt...
Watch this
http://video.google.co.uk/videosearch?hl=en&source=hp&q=zero%20an%20investigation%20into%209%2011&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#
Thanks
x
[info]mwreid wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:34 pm (UTC)
Leaving Afghanistan would not be a defeat.

That is a very immature line.

Walking away from fights without clear objectives is what all sensible people always do.

Only macho nutters fight for no good reason. Are we going to kill all the Taliban ? Err no. So when we go they will return. Are we going to control the whole country ? Err no -so when we go they will do what they choose. Have we installed a secure democracy ? Hardly.

Most of these soldiers appear to be dying on roads from explosive devices. Obviously their transport is not safe. They do appear to be dying in battles. We should not be requiring them to travel in an unsafe manner.

The sand of Afghanistan is not worth any more British Soldiers' blood. There is far more useful job to be done here shooting real terrorists who do bomb things in the UK.

[info]jim2509 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 06:14 pm (UTC)
These are indeed the times when we all deserve as citizens of this great nation to ask what the hell is going on?? It doesnt help when the goverment keep telling us a different story whilst our brave servicemen and lots of civilians are getting killed on a daily basis, mostly i have to say by the IED's placed by the Taliban because they've been tactically defeated on the battlefield..its not good but we have to adopt a way of operating around this as it's obvious we're entering the end game now Pakistan have finally got their act together and realised the danger the taliban & it's allies pose to it's stability. The US forthcoming deployment really is the last chance of pushing the Taliban to the negotiating table alongside forcing Karzai to get his act together. Had this goverment deployed a force in 2006 in the numbers we have in Helmand now with proper equipment we could've sorted out a lot of the problems b4 they became the problems we are now facing..politicians dithering again..pretty pitiful but not surprising looking at this lot!!
(no subject) - [info]rocket111 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 09:05 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]jim2509 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 11:10 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]jim2509 - Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 11:14 pm (UTC) Expand
Afganistan and The Defence Secretary - Rodney S. Barker
[info]rsbarker wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 06:14 pm (UTC)
Mr. Ainsworth is correct when he says that support for a continued military presence if Afghanistan has been dented by public opinion but by which such presence could not be determined. I am a big believer in democracy and the rule of law both of which are receiving a good bashing at the moment thanks to the activities of Members of Parliament. If Mr. Ainsworth feels that the general public should have no sway or influence then he should have the good grace to withdraw from politics thus avoiding the embarrassing
hypocrisy of having to ask the general public for their vote at the next election
Re: Afganistan and The Defence Secretary - Rodney S. Barker
[info]jim2509 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 06:26 pm (UTC)
Good point that last statement, wait till their representative knocks on the door at voting time wanting your vote, i personally cant wait!
Big Surprise
[info]stickytruth2 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 08:52 pm (UTC)
Let the Minister of Defense wait until the next election and his crowd will be looking for work.
Obviously the Minister has forgotten which party started two illegal wars.
Beware of the BNP.
The Culling Fields
[info]jimfred wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 08:57 pm (UTC)
"Bills pile up sky high,send that boy off to die".
"War is natures' pruning fork.
The Elite,who rule us,must be irritated at the relatively small casualty rate,as they thin out,our young male,post industrial,working class population.
A re-run of the Somme,would be more to their liking.
Buffon-of-the-week award
[info]thorntongate wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 09:27 pm (UTC)
It's a toss-up between Ainsworth and David Milipede.

Milipede told the Dacre-on-Sunday that the troops are in Afghanistan because, if they leave, the Taliban will get Pakistan's nuclear weapons.
a place to plot
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 09:29 pm (UTC)
I am told that I am stupid if I wonder why baddies cannot plot anywhere they please and that perhaps being in Afghanistan is not a sine qua non of plotting; were I going to plot some atrocity in Britain it seems to me that one place is as good as another- but then, you see Iam stupid and it is vital that our young men should be in Afghanistan, simply to prevent baddies from plotting; or am I so stupid that I fail to see the vital geographical element of plotting?

perhaps Iam relaxed about plotting a because if someone committed an atrocity where I live, no-one would notice, given the plethora of atrocities committed on us by this Zanulabour government; anyway it's the back end of beyond and no baddies will have heard of it

anyway we don't care about London round here

mind you I have a theory that it was Al Quaeda that put( in smashed)the windows of Chippenham Magistrates' Court
Get General Bonkers on the horn!
[info]yosemitejoe wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 10:04 pm (UTC)
"Bob Ainsworth defended the country's mission in Afghanistan"

Your Afghan mission, should you accept it:

1) Have mobsters fight the corruption around them.
2) Build an army of a size the host country cannot support nor afford.
3) Train local police forces, then convince them that they should stop being the villages' local racketeering & rape club.
4) Interdict opium shifting by CIA-financed glitterati.
5) Set up cargo-cult democracy through urns distributed throughout the country.
6) Pretend not to notice the 1-ton Pakistani Gorilla in the corner leering at you
7) Also, find Unicorns.




Did I miss something
[info]caurnie1 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 10:21 pm (UTC)
Did I miss something to-day at the Cenotaph? Did Gordon Brown forget to bow his head after laying his poppy wreath?
Minister? Give the Twat a Gun
[info]gregory_sallust wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 11:04 pm (UTC)
Get some in asshole.
" Failure will be a disaster for US "
[info]chipmem1 wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 11:04 pm (UTC)

Don't you mean for YOU, Mr Ainsworth, because in your previous comment
we're not included in the decision making process and actually, i'm rather
glad i'm not.

I think this about the third time, in two hundred years and we're still here,
life goes on. The taliban just got the seculars out and we lost, history repeating
it'self and even if you/we win................

Things will eventually revert back, you know it, i know it, let's hope the troops
don't realise it.

British public opinion is, " dented ", because your all, full of it.

Mj Stirrup has stated most of al-qaeda are finished so why are you talking
about another five years ? Is that how long it takes to get the gas out ?

Public's sick of your patronising lies.

Afghanistan
[info]stuarttootell wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 11:34 pm (UTC)
The sooner our boys are out of the place the better.The Americans are supporting a drug dealing corrupt regime managed by a professional liar and a thug posing as the Afghani President.

Ask why the poppy crops have not been destroyed,ask why out of the billons spent a mere 8-9 %of that money has actually been spent to benefit the local population and win hearts and minds

The only interests at stake are the American interests and those of their arms manufacturers,and of course the oil companies along with the drug dealing cartels.

The stoking of the fires of hate are destroying innocent people,all to further the aims of the vested interests of other nations and organisations both legal and illegal,covert and overt, in keeping the fires of war burning so as to prolong their war efforts and profits elswhere.

Should we be involved in another states civil war?

The Afghani's are a tribal society and can never be bought ,yes they can be rented but that is it.

All the vested interests are not concerned with body bags ,the dead are an insignificant cost in the relentless search for profit.

America has it seems not learned from Vietnam,or Korea much the same as Bliar and Clown have not learnt either.

Re: Afghanistan
[info]rocket111 wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 12:51 am (UTC)
You are echoing exactly what I have said all along. The sooner they get out of there the better. I feel stupid giving my poppy money over to these people collecting for the families of british soldiers killed in action for war crim bliar and co. why isn't the MOD helping these military families more? The Govt sent them there the govt should treat them with respect and stop using them as cannon fodder for a stupid ridiculous war that isn't to our benefit whatsoever.
A question of....
[info]thisanthat wrote:
Monday, 9 November 2009 at 03:50 am (UTC)
face and pride. And pride always comes before a fall. Can you imagine the reaction throughout all of civilisataion if the might of the worlds greatest fighting alliance (in theory) NATO and consisting of some forty two or so nations is compelled to turn turtle and scarper from a bunch of raggy arsed primative ruffians.
Meltdown comes to mind, because every rengade organisation would get the green light to shaft those odious bastards who started this campaign and claim to have the authority to do so for the everyday masses.
I note the said authorities in whitehall are trying save face and to pave the way by saying corruption in Afghanistan is the root cause of failure and hence a withdrawal will be made on this basis. What a limp dick excuse this is.
If corruption is the root cause of abject failure. Send for the keystone cops who might resolve the matter. But I suspect face will have to be saved and this campaign will drag on for an eternity.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

Most popular


Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date