Ministry of Defence Cuts (Prince Harry)

Home Forum Chat Forum Ministry of Defence Cuts (Prince Harry)

Viewing 14 posts - 121 through 134 (of 134 total)
  • Ministry of Defence Cuts (Prince Harry)
  • yossarian
    Member

    We invaded because the Taliban government refused to give up bin laden. They did offer to try him in an Islamic court, which might have saved us all a lot of trouble, but I don’t think US public opinion would have worn that at the time. We then got bogged down in a prolonged counter insurgency operation. I’m not saying it’s black and white, there are clearly a thousand shades of grey, but this mindset that the Taliban are representative of the afghan people and the big bad west is oppressing their will is very wrong in my experience.

    ok, my last observation on this because we are going round in circles. Have a read of this:

    The UN Charter is a treaty ratified by the United States and thus part of US law. Under the charter, a country can use armed force against another country only in self-defense or when the Security Council approves. Neither of those conditions was met before the United States invaded Afghanistan. The Taliban did not attack us on 9/11. Nineteen men – 15 from Saudi Arabia – did, and there was no imminent threat that Afghanistan would attack the US or another UN member country. The council did not authorize the United States or any other country to use military force against Afghanistan. The US war in Afghanistan is illegal.

    — Marjorie Cohn, professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, president of the National Lawyers Guild

    The Taliban are a RESULT of the west. Why does extremism grow? What causes it? No. 1 reason – poverty. Who causes poverty in the middle east by installing corrupt rulers, funding and supplying weapons to groups that suit their interests? How do you think an illegal invasion and occupation that results in massive civilian casaulties is viewed by people in that country and others already poor from decades of colonial exploitation?

    Stay safe out there airtragic, hope you get home soon mate.

    Berm Bandit
    Member

    Amen to that

    Junkyard
    Member

    Harry doesn’t even look like James Hewitt

    rudebwoy
    Member

    peas of a pod !

    Premier Icon jamj1974
    Subscriber

    Stay safe out there airtragic, hope you get home soon mate.

    Absolutely. Whether I agree we should be there or not – I hope you and your colleagues do get home in one piece! Take care of yourself.

    J

    rudebwoy
    Member

    in a few years time, people will reflect, what was the point of all that ? good training, equipment suppliers will be happy, but as for all the thousands killed and injured –will it have any meaningful positive effects for anyone ?

    Zulu-Eleven
    Member

    ok, my last observation on this because we are going round in circles. Have a read of this:

    So, your point is that the original invasion was of questionable legality, based upon whether you accept that it was an act in self defence.

    What you can’t argue against is the legality of the continued presence of ISAF troops in Afghanistan, which is clearly authorised under UN Security Council mandate 1386 (2001) and 1510 (2003), and recently unanimously extended under 2069.

    Which are the only ones relevant to Henry’s presence there!

    deadlydarcy
    Member

    will it have any meaningful positive effects for anyone ?

    Possibly…
    …I expect the manufacturers of the next generation of weaponry that we use to fight the next generation of “terrorists” that we’re creating to feel a very positive effect.

    In the meantime, the present generation of manufacturers need to attend to the “new frontier” that is North Africa. They must be rubbing their hands with glee as westerners are gunned down in Algeria.

    rudebwoy
    Member

    yeah DD– 1/3rd US economy is ‘defence’ reliant–and folk wonder why they love a shoot fest

    ernie_lynch
    Member

    Zulu-Eleven – Member

    What you can’t argue against is the legality of the continued presence of ISAF troops in Afghanistan, which is clearly authorised under UN Security Council mandate 1386 (2001) and 1510 (2003), and recently unanimously extended under 2069.

    Which are the only ones relevant to Henry’s presence there!

    Yep, good old ‘Enry from the Gnome Office will sort it all out.

    Jaw-jaw is always better than war-war, as Churchill once said.

    Jaw-jaw is always better than war-war, as Churchill once said.

    Awww, crap. I agree with Ernie. 😉

    Alright, old chap?

    airtragic
    Member

    Thanks for the good wishes. Happily I’m a REMF and not in any real danger! I question the illegality of the original invasion actually, law is a matter of interpretation and you could definitely argue that Al Q were proxy actors for the Taliban state (or pakistan or Saudi, but that’s a different argument) They trained and fought the northern alliance together. Incidentally, during that time thousands were massacred at places like mazar-e-sharif, with casualties way in excess of what we have seen since 2001. Millions of refugees have come back since the end of the Taliban period. If you’re going to talk about how many civilians we have killed, you need to compare it with what was going on before. I would query that the Taliban are defending their country too, about half of them aren’t even afghans. Overall I think the current situation is far from perfect, but the lesser of all the evils Afghanistan has known for the last 40 years.

    TooTall
    Member

    We’re not as bad at procurement as the press would have you believe.

    There are large areas that are far worse than the press could imagine. The excellent efforts of the minority are utterly swamped by the ineptitude and dogma of the many. Procurement is mostly pish and badly done.

    Berm Bandit
    Member

    Interesting documentary on BBC 7 tonight on this subject. Containing many contradictions, including the one about Harry not being treated differently, but unusually having a special flying arrangement to overcome the shortcomings he apparently doesn’t have, and special security, which if course is precisely like everyone else.

    Not to mention the very documentary that is simply being made to emphasise this non existent sameness.

    Very sad IMHO

Viewing 14 posts - 121 through 134 (of 134 total)

The topic ‘Ministry of Defence Cuts (Prince Harry)’ is closed to new replies.