Editor's Blog1 min ago
Yet another pointless death..
9 Answers
http://www.dailymail....-rifles-grenades.html
One more British soldier killed in that hell-hole of Afghanistan.
This time not by a bomb, but when his unit came under attack by rifle, rocket-propelled grenade and indirect fire from insurgents, while on patrol.
Another life loss for what?
/// The soldier was on a partnered patrol with the Afghan National Police to reassure the local population ///
To reassure the local population of what, another exercise in the 'winning hearts and flowers' it seems?
When will the powers that be put an end to these stupid pointless patrols, where it seems our troops are at most risk from the Taliban's bombs and fire-power.
Why don't we stay more or less safe in compounds that we have cleared of the Taliban, and let them come to us?
One more British soldier killed in that hell-hole of Afghanistan.
This time not by a bomb, but when his unit came under attack by rifle, rocket-propelled grenade and indirect fire from insurgents, while on patrol.
Another life loss for what?
/// The soldier was on a partnered patrol with the Afghan National Police to reassure the local population ///
To reassure the local population of what, another exercise in the 'winning hearts and flowers' it seems?
When will the powers that be put an end to these stupid pointless patrols, where it seems our troops are at most risk from the Taliban's bombs and fire-power.
Why don't we stay more or less safe in compounds that we have cleared of the Taliban, and let them come to us?
Answers
1 to 9 of 9
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
All our recent conflicts have been about securing oil supplies. Any nation at war who doesn't have oil we just leave for themselves to sort out.
Decide for yourselves which is the more humane path to follow.
August 2010
Afghanistan's Mining Ministry has announced the discovery of a huge new oil field, one that could be ten times the size of the nation's 150 million barrels of previously known reserves.
Suffice to say that America might have yet another reason to hang around:
Decide for yourselves which is the more humane path to follow.
August 2010
Afghanistan's Mining Ministry has announced the discovery of a huge new oil field, one that could be ten times the size of the nation's 150 million barrels of previously known reserves.
Suffice to say that America might have yet another reason to hang around:
Quite right, Sandy.
The notion that UK forces are helping to provide a transition to “peace and stability” in that Godforsaken country is about as sensible as suggesting that Sepp Blatter has been elected to clean up the corruption in football.
You are quite correct. As soon as foreign forces withdraw the country will sink again into full scale tribal and religious strife (which is currently only partially abated by our troops’ presence there). Our boys are out there with no particular end game in mind, living in tents and having their legs blown off. Meantime thousands of Afghans are living comfortably here in council flats because it is too dangerous for them to remain in their homeland.
There is no possibility that the war on terror will be won our troops being in Afghanistan. The venture there (which, remember, we were told would be completed “without a shot being fired”) was a knee jerk reaction by Blair at the behest of Dubya. If they are to be anywhere abroad to combat terror our troops should be in Pakistan (far too politically inexpedient) but best of all they should be in the UK, protecting our borders and helping the police and the Border Agency trace and evict those not welcome here. Of course our MPs would have to take time out from filling in their expense forms to alter the law so that those who arrive here in the back of a lorry can be swiftly removed. But we’ve all got to do our bit.
The notion that UK forces are helping to provide a transition to “peace and stability” in that Godforsaken country is about as sensible as suggesting that Sepp Blatter has been elected to clean up the corruption in football.
You are quite correct. As soon as foreign forces withdraw the country will sink again into full scale tribal and religious strife (which is currently only partially abated by our troops’ presence there). Our boys are out there with no particular end game in mind, living in tents and having their legs blown off. Meantime thousands of Afghans are living comfortably here in council flats because it is too dangerous for them to remain in their homeland.
There is no possibility that the war on terror will be won our troops being in Afghanistan. The venture there (which, remember, we were told would be completed “without a shot being fired”) was a knee jerk reaction by Blair at the behest of Dubya. If they are to be anywhere abroad to combat terror our troops should be in Pakistan (far too politically inexpedient) but best of all they should be in the UK, protecting our borders and helping the police and the Border Agency trace and evict those not welcome here. Of course our MPs would have to take time out from filling in their expense forms to alter the law so that those who arrive here in the back of a lorry can be swiftly removed. But we’ve all got to do our bit.
// we always seem to draw the short straw //
That is because we only bet to hear about British deaths. You apparently are not interested if the shot soldier is American.
For the record, casualties to date in Afghanistan are as follows:-
US = 1605
UK = 369
Other = 535
Our invasion hasn't made us safer from terrorism, it has made us more vunerable. And the situation is the same as 10 years ago. It has been good for American Corporations, who in returm make mega political donations, and so the cycle goes on. What we are doing getting involved in the first pace is a mystery.
That is because we only bet to hear about British deaths. You apparently are not interested if the shot soldier is American.
For the record, casualties to date in Afghanistan are as follows:-
US = 1605
UK = 369
Other = 535
Our invasion hasn't made us safer from terrorism, it has made us more vunerable. And the situation is the same as 10 years ago. It has been good for American Corporations, who in returm make mega political donations, and so the cycle goes on. What we are doing getting involved in the first pace is a mystery.
'Yet another poitless death' - as opposed to what?
Is there really such a concept as a soldier from any side in a conflict dying, and his loss really meaning anytying significant, except to the generals who regard these deaths as statistics which they seek to dress up by such chilling expressions as 'collatoral damage' and similar.
The death of any soldier anywhere at any time is pointless, which renders to notion of referring to any such death as 'pointless' redundant. You might as well refer to it as 'violent' - again, is there any other kind of reported death for a soldier in a conflict?
Is there really such a concept as a soldier from any side in a conflict dying, and his loss really meaning anytying significant, except to the generals who regard these deaths as statistics which they seek to dress up by such chilling expressions as 'collatoral damage' and similar.
The death of any soldier anywhere at any time is pointless, which renders to notion of referring to any such death as 'pointless' redundant. You might as well refer to it as 'violent' - again, is there any other kind of reported death for a soldier in a conflict?
I’m not so sure I agree, Andy.
If you asked people who lost loved ones during say WW2 whether they believed their deaths were pointless most of them would probably say not. (That may not be so true today as it was, say, forty years ago, but the reasons for such a change are different to those being debated here).
That is because people knew why WW2 started, what the issues were, what was needed to achieve victory and what would spell defeat. They were also well aware of the probable consequences of both those outcomes.
None of that can be said about this ridiculous foray in Afghanistan. Nobody knows what caused our erudite leaders to commit our troops there (except that Dubya told Blair that he ought to). Nobody knows with any certainty what they are there to achieve. Nobody knows what will constitute defeat or victory or how those outcomes will be identified if and when either happens. And nobody knows what the probable consequences are.
I think in this respect some deaths are more pointless than others.
If you asked people who lost loved ones during say WW2 whether they believed their deaths were pointless most of them would probably say not. (That may not be so true today as it was, say, forty years ago, but the reasons for such a change are different to those being debated here).
That is because people knew why WW2 started, what the issues were, what was needed to achieve victory and what would spell defeat. They were also well aware of the probable consequences of both those outcomes.
None of that can be said about this ridiculous foray in Afghanistan. Nobody knows what caused our erudite leaders to commit our troops there (except that Dubya told Blair that he ought to). Nobody knows with any certainty what they are there to achieve. Nobody knows what will constitute defeat or victory or how those outcomes will be identified if and when either happens. And nobody knows what the probable consequences are.
I think in this respect some deaths are more pointless than others.
I appreciate the refinement of the argument new Judge, and I entirely agree with the points you raised - elegantly argued as usual.
i would therefore like to refine my point, and suggest that all deaths in the pointless conflicts in which we find ourselves engaged are pointless, and heaven knows, all the more tragic for that.
Geroge Bush always used to talk of '..getting the job done...' and I always wondered about two specific nagging questions wehich no-one ever seemed to ask him -
What is 'the job'?
Who gave it to you?
As is the way with world leaders, he walked away wqithout answering, I don't suppose we will ever know now ...
i would therefore like to refine my point, and suggest that all deaths in the pointless conflicts in which we find ourselves engaged are pointless, and heaven knows, all the more tragic for that.
Geroge Bush always used to talk of '..getting the job done...' and I always wondered about two specific nagging questions wehich no-one ever seemed to ask him -
What is 'the job'?
Who gave it to you?
As is the way with world leaders, he walked away wqithout answering, I don't suppose we will ever know now ...
1 to 9 of 9
