Afghanistan

[tatsblisters 9,617]

1 minute ago, big sid said:

get used to them lads as theres one coming to live next to you soon,

Rotherham can't get any worse a couple of thousand Afghans won't make a deal of difference.

[THE STIFFMEISTER 15,840]

1 hour ago, WILF said:

 

First day back in the office of your PR firm:

”Right Janine, what you got for me?….Nothing too taxing I hope, been off on furlough for 12 months and want to ease myself back in”

”Well, the Taliban have been on the phone……”

”Oh for f**k sake !” 
 

lol  

 

[keepdiggin 9,560]

2 minutes ago, THE STIFFMEISTER said:

 

 

[Greb147 6,809]

38 minutes ago, mC HULL said:

@Greb147was daft enough to believe it

Daft enough to believe what?

I said the video was edited didn't I?

[lurcherman 887 13,120]

2 hours ago, WILF said:

Meanwhile, in Algeria largely peaceful Muslims have just tortured a young artist who went to help fight forest fires and then burned him alive because he was a stranger and they got it in their heads he may be there starting fires !!…….as you do ! 

Stupid c**t going over there 

[Daniel cain 45,269]

2 hours ago, greg64 said:

a lot is made in china but mexico have ramped up production

 

CIA and the government have to be taking bribes from them Cartelsthe money involved is mind blowing

[keepdiggin 9,560]

2 hours ago, tatsblisters said:

Rotherham can't get any worse a couple of thousand Afghans won't make a deal of difference.

Make things interesting putting them near the big Tesco with the Slovaks

[THE STIFFMEISTER 15,840]

[Jonjon79 13,358]

2 hours ago, THE STIFFMEISTER said:

That's one of the best scenes I've seen in a film in a long time - I always wanted to walk out of a work meeting shouting 'Waste of my f***ing time. Wankers'

[THE STIFFMEISTER 15,840]

11 minutes ago, Jonjon79 said:

That's one of the best scenes I've seen in a film in a long time - I always wanted to walk out of a work meeting shouting 'Waste of my f***ing time. Wankers'

 

[ChrisJones 7,975]

16 hours ago, greg64 said:

i wonder if the usa departure from afghanistan has any thing to do with the fact that the  drug fueling the opiate epedemic  now is  fentanyl a pure synthetic lab made chemical .....  funny that

Looking at the connections between Chinese fentanyl, CJNG, and the American market.

It's almost like capitalism sees the Taliban as a threat to supply as the cost of a two decade war becomes untenable. The market finds a way... funny that.

Edited August 20, 2021 by ChrisJones

[shovel leaner 7,650]

[Born Hunter 17,763]

On 17/08/2021 at 01:50, ChrisJones said:

That's a tough question, mate. Trying to find a proportionate response to something like that is a challenge.

A retaliation is inevitable, and you know how I feel about defensive measures over offensive measures with the military. I'm also wondering what a correct response would be.

How about this. Given the disastrous history of regime change, since at least the Iran coup of '53, is limited operations with the aim of 'containment' the most viable strategy?

It's certainly the direction the British government is taking with military reforms. Light, highly trained, highly equipped, highly informed, forces with short reaction times and global reach. No intention of holding ground or forcing change, just go in at a moments notice and leather them then f**k off, as and when necessary until the regime naturally collapses through internal pressure, rather than external.

Quote

"For the past 10 years, I have argued both inside and outside this Chamber, very often to the dismay of my parliamentary colleagues, that a form of containment rather than counter-insurgency is the only practical answer to international terrorist movements sheltered and sponsored by rogue regimes like the Taliban. Containment, as older colleagues will remember, was the policy that held the Soviet Union in check throughout the cold war until its empire imploded and its ideology was discredited. Islamist extremism has a subversive reach similar to that of revolutionary communism, and our task is to keep it at bay until it collapses completely or evolves into tolerant, or at least tolerable, alternative doctrines. In Afghanistan, the task of overthrowing the Taliban and driving al-Qaeda into exile was quickly accomplished in 2001, and at that point NATO arrived at a fork in the road. The option selected was, as we know, an open-ended commitment to impose a western version of democracy and protect it indefinitely in a country that had a strong sense of its own political and social culture and which was known to be politically allergic to foreign intervention.

Yet there was another option available to western strategists in response to the 9/11 attacks. Having achieved our immediate objectives of putting al-Qaeda to flight and punishing the Taliban, we should have announced that we were completely removing our forces but would promptly return by land and air to repeat the process if international terrorist groups were again detected in Afghanistan. When the Taliban regain full territorial control, they will lose their shield of invisibility. If they then choose to pose or facilitate a renewed threat—a terrorist threat—to western security, they should expect both their leadership and their military capability to be hit hard by our mobile land and air forces. That cycle would be repeated until the threat was removed, but we should not and would not allow our forces to be sucked in again.”

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-should-have-withdrawn-as-soon-as-it-defeated-taliban/

Seems a bit "cross your fingers and hope" but what's a realistic alternative?

Edited August 20, 2021 by Born Hunter

[Greb147 6,809]

12 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

How about this. Given the disastrous history of regime change, since at least the Iran coup of '53, is limited operations with the aim of 'containment' the most viable strategy?

It's certainly the direction the British government is taking with military reforms. Light, highly trained, highly equipped, highly informed, forces with short reaction times and global reach. No intention of holding ground or forcing change, just go in at a moments notice and leather them then f**k off, as a when necessary until the regime naturally collapses through internal pressure, rather than external.

Seems a bit "cross your fingers and hope" but what's a realistic alternative?

Alternatively they could call up Rambo for his swansong.

[Born Hunter 17,763]

16 minutes ago, Greb147 said:

Alternatively they could call up Rambo for his swansong.

Someone would need to give him a heads up that the mujahedeen aren't on our side this time round.... bit awkward like.