Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.


Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by pro-pilot, Dec 26, 2007.

  1. Well. The UN is living up to its expectations as usual.


  2. by george i think you're right
  3. It keeps getting better! :shock:

    So much for kicking the Taliban out!!


  4. "claims they had contact......."

    "a newspaper has reported....."

    Good solid evidence of wrong doing right there :oops:
  5. Woodward and Bernstein worked for a newspaper.....
  6. frankly I'm glad you aren't making decisions. The british are one of the few armies who have the wherewithall to defeat an insurgency.

    from the reports, if true, the British are simply following a proven methodology.

    perhaps you should do some research on the matter. :idea:
    start with the Malayan emergency.
  7. The US Government could learn a lot from that too. It amazes me that the tactics that failed to work in Korea and Vietnam are still being used in Iraq and Afghanistan and they can't work out why they're not working :roll: .
  8. Sure,

    Just like Timor, Angola, The ivory coast and northen Ireland....
    The list continues.

    Prehaps you should lecture in this topic?

    You seem to be very conformist and haven't read the history of what Churchill and his mates set up in Iraq and the middle east pre-world war II.

    Think you should do some history dude.

    Iraq was actually created by the British and Co. in 1914-1922 by installing a brutal regime and ensuring the sunni's, Kurds and shiite's were at each others throats, all to channel benefits for them.

    Sound familiar here?

    Heres some reading


    The Creation of Iraq, 1914-1922

    Reeva Spector Simon and Eleanor H. Tejirian (eds.)

    Columbia University Press

    February 2004
  9. no amount of paper referencing can hide the stupid in your post. the history of Iraq is totally irrelevant to the military tactics employed by the british in Afghanistan, and you've included it only to try make yourself appear more knowledgeable. Yes it is morally reprehensible what they did but completely irrelevant. perhaps a more relevant link would have been the Russian installation of a pro-moscow government in the country we are talking about, Afghanistan. of course the russians failed to counter the insurgency and after 13 or so years left (sure the US sponsored the insurgency but the russians didn't counter the local threat.)

    worse, you are saying that in Iraq the British & US successfully set up a regime to benefit themselves, yet that has always been the purpose in Afghanistan, it isn't some hidden agenda, it is the only purpose.
    so you are outraged that they are doing their job and have a history of doing it successfully!

    what would you have them do? "kick the Taliban out" as per your first post? out to where? who are the Taliban? are they the tribes and leaders who have aligned themselves against coalition forces because they perceive them as invaders? how do you kick out an entire rural population? Maybe the British shouldn't talk to the 'Taliban' maybe they should let the war continue indefinitely, like the Russians? because that seems to be your point. If they are successful they will install an evil dictatorship like iraq so lets hope they aren't successful.

    What the British are doing is appealing to grass roots tribal leaders, those who are aligned with the Taliban simply because they don't support the government. If the British can compromise with the tribal leaders to a point where they're satisfied with the governmental purpose, the British will have removed the insurgents popular base. which will in turn achieve their stated goal. Militarily it is a great plan. very smart, and frankly, from a local populations point of view, desirable.

    but no, you'll venture an opinion that it is outrageous that the British are talking to the Taliban, you won't actually know what you are outraged about though, because you'll be too busy quoting papers on some government that was installed in a country that is actually a fair distance away and has a resaonably different social structure but it is ok, you quoted a bunch of papers, you're safe.

    hey, maybe I should lecture on it.
  10. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Especially when we are talking mass media.
  11. Once again :roll:

    But as usual. Trust the UN and your government as they have never lied to us.

    But as usual for you russ, no amount of evidence or news is good enough.
    Keep up the good work and hope to see you lecturing our next generation of zygotes within our schools.

    History has a funny way of repeating itself.

    Afghans accuse expelled envoys of channelling money to Islamic insurgents


    A clash between the Afghan government and its western paymasters last night threatened to blow the lid on a murky world of espionage and shady middlemen.

    Officials in Kabul accused two expelled diplomats of passing funds to Islamic insurgents targeting British forces in Helmand province.

    The diplomatic row flared amid reports that MI6 agents had previously held at least six rounds of talks with Taliban commanders.

    That claim, fiercely denied in Whitehall, flew in the face of Gordon Brown's promise to MPs a fortnight ago that "we will not enter into any negotiations with these people".

    In the case of the diplomats - one British and one Irish - desperate negotiations to prevent them being expelled failed.

    The two diplomats flew out of the Afghan capital, Kabul, early this morning after two days of talks.

    In an echo of the 'Great Game' espionage battles that marked a century of western involvement in Central Asia, both officials are long-serving Afghan experts who have spent years mixing with the country's tribal populations

    They were detained on Christmas Day, accused of holding unauthorised talks with the Taliban and yesterday the crisis deepened with new allegations that they had passed cash to insurgents.

    Two senior diplomats are set to be expelled from Afghanistan amid allegations they held talks with Taliban militants

    The row left the Afghan president Hamid Karzai on collision course with the countries that provide most of his government's funding and military support.

    The pair of diplomats were told to leave by today after being accused of involvement in activities 'that were not their jobs' during a visit to Musa Qala, the rebel stronghold recaptured by British forces in fierce fighting this month.

    Acting EU mission head Michael Semple, an Irish national, and Mervyn Patterson, a senior British official with the United Nations, have years of experience in Afghanistan.

    Diplomats confirmed that the two held talks with Helmand tribal leaders with links to the Taliban but denied that they met directly with leaders of the fundamentalist insurgency waging a bloody war against British and other Nato forces.

    But an Afghan official said: "Not only did they hold talks with the Taliban, but also had given them money.

    "It is not clear whether they were supporting the insurgency or not."

    Western diplomats said it was more likely that they were talking to tribal elders or chiefs.

    Allegations about their activities in Helmand coincided with fiercely denied reports that agents of the Secret Intelligence Service have been in contact with the Taliban.

    Whitehall sources said there was nothing to suggest a link between the activities of MI6 in Afghanistan and the role of the two western diplomats.

    A UN official in New York confirmed that Mr Patterson was a British national and that he was a "key member" of the UN team in Afghanistan.

    Mr Semple is well known among the Afghan mujahideen commanders who resisted the Russians. Some of them claim he worked with the special forces.

    He is also a confidant of Britain's ambassador to Afghanistan, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles.

    Aleem Siddique, a spokesman for the UN mission in Afghanistan, described the situation as a "misunderstanding but said both men had agreed to leave the country today.

    "We see no basis for such a decision but we respect the sovereignty of the government of Afghanistan and have every intention to abide by that decision," he said.

    Mr Brown has told the Commons that the British Government will not negotiate with the Taliban.

    But the Government has also backed attempts by the Afghan government to persuade elements of the Taliban to defect as a way of reducing its strength.

    President Karzai has offered to embrace insurgents willing to renounce violence.

    Some diplomats have compared the Taliban to the IRA, saying it is an alliance of gangsters and ideologues, some of whom can be persuaded to abandon the cause.

    The UK Government accepts that it may have to talk with other tribal warlords and elders who may have links with the Taliban.

  12. mate, it is time for you to self censor yourself. When a solid argument has been presented against you, you only play the man, and forget to include any actual reasoning.

    I don't need your 'evidence' to know the the brits and the yanks will be doing their concerted best to subvert the local populace to their cause. the talks were sanctioned by one half of the afghan government and when another branch of the govt discovered it they condemned it. the afghan govt is desperately trying prove they are not a western puppet. How trustworthy is their reaction?

    you talk about UN from behind your desk and pretend I have some blind affection for it. I've got news. I don't. I am the product of an insurgent war gone bad. I lost an uncle and my father lost his best friend of 20 years, another uncle had to go into hiding for years after. We left the country after the dictator that was installed by the brits/UN ran it into the ground. We have lost friends and family as a direct result of the war and subsequent government. I have seen dead people lying on the streets, nobody to collect them, starved.
    so don't pontificate to me about being a blind follower, my family's life has been severely affected by insurgent war and western politics being unable to cope with the realities of how it works..

    There is a large difference between distrusting the UN and getting your facts wrong. The 'badness' of the UN does not detract from the intelligence of the tactics being employed by the british.

    Ironically you are quoting press releases from a government as your proof, yet in the same post you whinge about the lies of politicians.

    Your outrage is based on a tactic the British are using to end a war, but you have no other solution, you say nothing of what they should be doing. only that they are corrupt.
    whether or not the war should have occurred is irrelevant. given that they are in a war the british are using a tactic that has proven successful on a number of occasions. Without stablity the country will never develop, without development it will always be in danger of being subverted back to the taliban.

    so what is your solution? what should they be doing? given that what they are doing is so evil and corrupt?
  13. Regardless of source there is always nuggets of news and information that if you are smart enough to track and consider, paints a fairly representative picture of current affairs in the real world.

    I am providing the sources for people to view and comment or criticise. But one would expect that valid arguments are backed up with some corroborative material both in mainstream and other sourced materials.

    I am all for opinions when they contain defendable material.

    Alas you are basing your responses on emotion and ambiguity of opinion.

    Whilst I am not claiming that what is presented is the whole truth and nothing but the truth. It certainly exists somewhere in between and makes for mature and effective critical dissection.

    The tactics you speak off are nothing more that the machinations of a power network that has subverted, overthrown and assassinated heads of competitive governments and de-stabilised regions for their own gain and benefit.

    Ending the war....LOL... there is no way that the players want peace in the middle east. Profits are made from war, and there are many more spoils to be had.

    History is abundant with this proof.

    Im sure a few hours of reading will make up for this.

  14. That's all you seem to do :roll:

    Get a life! :-#
  15. since you have refused to answer 3 times now, I'll make it easy. I'll quote myself.

    my position is also not ambiguous. I believe the war was wrong. but since it exists, I believe that if the reports are true, the tactics are smart.

    The idea that the tactics are smart is defendable by loads of links that I could paste all over my posts, heck you even pasted links that proved the point. You are not well read on this subject, pasting internet links is not 'well read' and your complete ignorance as to why they would be talking to the tribal leaders is pretty good evidence of that.

    you, despite all your conspiracy theories and screams of evil corrupt western people, have no solution, have nothing better to offer.
  16. PP, what is your point? I don't mean this post, or even other posts, but your point.

    All you seem to do is get up peoples noses. Even when you make a good solid point, you tend to litter your posts with remarks that seem to do nothing but irritate. I've never seen a post where you concede a point or even accept anothers opinion. ALL you seem to do is make posts that are designed to invite debate and a response and then belittle anyone who makes a counter argument. Where the other persons argument might look good you respond with link upon link upon link and use these to then further attack the person or imply that only you seem to have done the research.

    It's really irritating, as sometimes you make good points. You helped out with Carole and provided evidence that she was in the box seat. Rather than make your post and move on, you just HAD to make a further comment that was derogatory to the previous posters. So again, another opportunity lost.

    There are lots of other books you could be reading, some of them might help you more than these endless posts do.
  17. a good start would be "how to win friends and influence people"
  18. +1 Cejay. Glad you said it.

  19. :roll:
    You've been dying to play this card.

    I have not implied a solution as all I am doing is pointing out the double standards invoked by these governments.

    On one hand telling the public that they are attempting stabalisation, whilst inflicting the opposite.

    This is not a conspiracy russ. It unfortunately goes on.
  20. As per the OP. The point of these posts is to invite debate. Unless there is a policy against this. It's not like I start a thread to blast someone.

    I come across heaps of interesting stuff and some of it receives a usual burst of accusations towards myself in the first instance.

    1. The material in the OP was not of my creating.
    2. I have highlighed a topic of discussion that I am sure is interesting for some.
    3. You can choose to read one of the 10,000 other threads instead of mine I suppose.

    If you check some of my other posts, you will see that many a person has admitted not even reading the post and still decides to flame me.

    But it keeps things interesting.