Author Topic: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers  (Read 4277 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DiscoBerry

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
    • Has the Hadron Collider Destroyed the Earth Yet?
Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« on: March 29, 2013, 12:46:45 am »
When NATO is gone the Afghan people are so fucked. 

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc8w0IX4UQc" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc8w0IX4UQc</a>

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #1 on: March 29, 2013, 11:08:43 am »
The ANA are completely unmotivated to perform well. They are shooting at their relatives and neighbors, in many instances, so yeah. They are ignorant country boys, the foreign soldiers are occupying their home country without an invitation, from their simplistic point of view. They are probably wasting NATO ally time and resources deliberately, even possibly on orders from the very same mujahideen leaders they are Not aiming at. And texting to with their phones when off duty.

Naughty little sleepers, they *spliffffffff*ahhhhhh!*. Plus, they get paid and fed very well for fucking up; a win-win situation.

Afghanistan has been called the Graveyard of Empires for good reason.
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #2 on: March 29, 2013, 08:38:56 pm »
the foreign soldiers are occupying their home country without an invitation, from their simplistic point of view.

In stark contrast to our much more subtle foreign view, capable of completely justifying an unwanted foreign intervention in a sovereign nation.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline Dynamic Dragon

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Gender: Male
  • Punisher of the Guilty
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #3 on: March 29, 2013, 08:42:02 pm »
the foreign soldiers are occupying their home country without an invitation, from their simplistic point of view.

In stark contrast to our much more subtle foreign view, capable of completely justifying an unwanted foreign intervention in a sovereign nation.
They were harboring fucking terrorists!  What more do you need?
Learn from the past, live in the present, prepare for the future.

Offline DiscoBerry

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
    • Has the Hadron Collider Destroyed the Earth Yet?
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #4 on: March 29, 2013, 11:02:27 pm »
Quote
They were harboring fucking terrorists!  What more do you need?

My thoughts exactly.  This fierce warrior image is a load of bullshit.  They lack any loyalty and the terrain is tougher than they are.     

Offline Rabbit of Caerbannog

  • He's Got Great Big Teeth and the Holy Hand Grenade!
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2919
  • Gender: Male
  • Hit me with your best shot! Fire awaaaay!
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #5 on: March 29, 2013, 11:12:15 pm »
When NATO is gone the Afghan people are so fucked.
And they weren't before NATO got there? The places that weren't ruled directly by the fundamentalist Taliban forces were controlled by warlords and the country was not even close to being unified. Then we invaded and several years (and thousands of lost lives) later, many people in Afghanistan hadn't known why U.S. troops were patrolling the country--they hadn't even heard of the 9/11 attacks. Plus opium cultivation has been rising and heroin production is predictably booming. Actually, in many ways they're worse off because we went there. And so are we, I'd say.

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #6 on: March 29, 2013, 11:24:17 pm »
Afghanistan will probably never know peace or progress unless the government makes an honest effort to educate their young people to become geologists and mining engineers, invite investment into building the needed infrastructure for metals mining in a big way. Afghanistan is the world's richest source of both military strategic metals and industrial metals. Ever wonder why they've been invaded and/or militarily "assisted" so many times in the past century? What did the Soviets really have to gain with all the blood they shed there in the eighties? What was the real motivation for that war? And now, the NATO allies. It's not always about oil. Or just about doing the right thing, either.
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline Rabbit of Caerbannog

  • He's Got Great Big Teeth and the Holy Hand Grenade!
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2919
  • Gender: Male
  • Hit me with your best shot! Fire awaaaay!
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #7 on: March 29, 2013, 11:31:26 pm »
Ever wonder why they've been invaded and/or militarily "assisted" so many times in the past century? What did the Soviets really have to gain with all the blood they shed there in the eighties?
For opium to make them forget they were living in the U.S.S.R.?

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2013, 12:37:17 am »
Afghanistan will probably never know peace or progress unless the government makes an honest effort to educate their young people to become geologists and mining engineers, invite investment into building the needed infrastructure for metals mining in a big way. Afghanistan is the world's richest source of both military strategic metals and industrial metals. Ever wonder why they've been invaded and/or militarily "assisted" so many times in the past century? What did the Soviets really have to gain with all the blood they shed there in the eighties? What was the real motivation for that war?

Their stated justification was the same: terrorism, with a side of nation-building.

the foreign soldiers are occupying their home country without an invitation, from their simplistic point of view.

In stark contrast to our much more subtle foreign view, capable of completely justifying an unwanted foreign intervention in a sovereign nation.
They were harboring fucking terrorists!  What more do you need?

Trying to chase down every single person with violent animus against the west is a fool's game and a vast waste of money. If any other government department said- we have three thousand people dead, we might have another three thousand dead some years from now, tops. But, good news! All we need to do is spend between one trillion and fifty-seven gazillion dollars, completely rework the way diplomacy works, violate every international norm, kill millions of people including more Americans than died in the actual thing you're supposed to be preventing, rip up the constitution and shit on it and then we can maybe prevent that, perhaps.

If, like, some guy from the Department of Health told everyone 21,000 people were dying every year because resources weren't being allocated properly- they don't even need more money- they'd be ignored forever, of course.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline Dynamic Dragon

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 806
  • Gender: Male
  • Punisher of the Guilty
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #9 on: March 30, 2013, 08:43:27 am »
That's so stupid, I don't even know where to begin.  They attacked us first!  If the Afghans had just handed over bin Laden and his cronies, they wouldn't be under attack.  The ball was in their court.

Second, we're not trying to "chase down every single person with animus against the West".  We're trying to turn Afghanistan into a stable country, for the benefit of the Afghan people and the world.

Honestly, you sound like a fucking Paulbot.  Would you have used that logic after Pearl Harbor?
Learn from the past, live in the present, prepare for the future.

Offline Rabbit of Caerbannog

  • He's Got Great Big Teeth and the Holy Hand Grenade!
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2919
  • Gender: Male
  • Hit me with your best shot! Fire awaaaay!
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2013, 10:49:42 am »
Honestly, you sound like a fucking Paulbot.  Would you have used that logic after Pearl Harbor?
Though the people who attacked us on Pearl Harbor were actually members of the Japanese military and their actions were ordered by the Japanese government. Contrast that with a nebulous terrorist group that operates in several different countries and it isn't exactly a good comparison.

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: Brits fighting along side stoned Afghan Soldiers
« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2013, 12:03:13 pm »
Fred actually has some very good talking points on this issue. His stats are correct, for one (with the exception of "fifty seven gazillion dollars", but that was good sarcasm, there).

The cost of fighting terrorism Vs. the results are staggeringly unbalanced, to put it mildly, and make no sense at all, if anti-terrorism is the only aspect you view it from. Since this has gone on for a decade, cost a trillion + dollars (including Iraq in the anti terror war),  cost hundreds of thousands of lives - mostly civilian "collateral" casualties, anyone looking at it has to honestly conclude that there is a different, underlying motivation for all this blood and money spent. It ain't so much because the US and allies are altruistic holy warriors striving to remove evil fanatics from the world. Nation building is also infrastructure for industry and business building, and the implied co-goal is that the newly built nation will be cooperative and beholden to the builders.

It's about huge potential money from metals, it's about gaining geopolitical and geoeconomic power, it's about access to valuable resources that make the first world nations function and progress. 

Afghanistan is a wilderness. Most of the people are barely educated to uneducated, and semi-literate to illiterate. There are virtually no proper roads or highways, virtually no railway lines, limited communications towers, etc. etc. outside of a few small cities.

With such a rugged, mountainous terrain, the country is an extremely expensive blank slate to develop, but the pay-off for that investment of time and effort and money is potentially huge. Eventually, it will happen. Eventually, I fervently hope (with little optimism) that the Afghan people themselves will be truly sovereign and in the loop with the rest of the world. They could enjoy a prosperous and happy existence, if things went as they deserve. It is their country, those are their metals, and they fiercely love and defend it from all comers....as they have since Alexander the Great.
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.