The Conflict in Afghanistan

[Arniepie]

Presumably a thread about Afghanistan which corbyn is inexplicably dragged into,doesnt constitute whataboutery.

[Arniepie]

It's strange how the last few days are seeing the invasion as some sort of success.

[Lee909]

9 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

torrent of whataboutery

 

 

[Strontium]

8 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

It’s honestly not a cult. Really it’s not. 
 

A stupid tweet by a stupid MP results in a torrent of whataboutery and the eventual inclusion of Israel. It’s very funny to watch. 

 

It's hilarious for sure, but it's also tragic and sad on another level. When political discussion seems to mainly be about scoring imaginary points against your "enemies" it comes across as little more than superficial and performative. Which it probably is. Fine when it's just a backwoods internet forum, less so when it's elected representatives with genuine pretentions towards tackling these problems in the real world.

[Bjornebye]

1 minute ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

It's hilarious for sure, but it's also tragic and sad on another level. When political discussion seems to mainly be about scoring imaginary points against your "enemies" it comes across as little more than superficial and performative. Which it probably is. Fine when it's just a backwoods internet forum, less so when it's elected representatives with genuine pretentions towards tackling these problems in the real world.

Hahahaha the hypocrisy. You tried a shitty attempt at point scoring, you got called out. You do it all the time, You get called out all the time. 

[Arniepie]

20 minutes ago, Em City said:

 

Let's be charitable and assume the Afghanistan invasion was for moral reasons. They've spent 20 years, $83 billion and thousands of lives - it's hardly been a half arsed effort. The Afghani army nominally outnumbers the Taliban five to one, they have an air force where the Taliban has none and they have billions of dollars worth of state of the art equipment and yet they still melted away in a matter of weeks. If Vietnam has shown anything, it's that a corrupt, puppet regime has no chance of resisting a determined, unified force with an ideological purpose once the superpower that supports that regime directly withdraws its manpower.

 

There's no viable exit strategy for Afghanistan, there never was. If the U.S and U.K had humanitarian goals, perhaps they should start by stop seeking arms to the Saudis or backing Israel's construction of illegal settlements.

Spot on that

[Strontium]

3 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Hahahaha the hypocrisy. You tried a shitty attempt at point scoring, you got called out. You do it all the time, You get called out all the time. 

 

By criticising Richard Burgon? If that's what you think, you're off your rocker.

[Kepler-186]

Just now, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

It's hilarious for sure, but it's also tragic and sad on another level. When political discussion seems to mainly be about scoring imaginary points against your "enemies" it comes across as little more than superficial and performative. Which it probably is. Fine when it's just a backwoods internet forum, less so when it's elected representatives with genuine pretentions towards tackling these problems in the real world.

Maybe Nick Clegg can get the Taliban banned of Facebook? Or will he bottle it like he did over tuition fees and PR? 
 

[Strontium]

Just now, Kepler-186 said:

Maybe Nick Clegg can get the Taliban banned of Facebook? Or will he bottle it like he did over tuition fees and PR? 

 

See, now that's a shitty attempt at point-scoring.

[Bjornebye]

Just now, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

By criticising Richard Burgon? If that's what you think, you're off your rocker.

You said "corbynites" to get a reaction which you got, but you knew that didn't you. You were having a pop at Corbyn and Labour. 

 

I also believe you lied about not knowing what the Lib Dem position is on this. You're telling me you don't follow Ed Davey and haven't seen his tweets the last 3/4 days about it all but have managed to see Richard Burgons? Yeah right. 

 

 

[Section_31]

23 minutes ago, Em City said:

 

Let's be charitable and assume the Afghanistan invasion was for moral reasons. They've spent 20 years, $83 billion and thousands of lives - it's hardly been a half arsed effort. The Afghani army nominally outnumbers the Taliban five to one, they have an air force where the Taliban has none and they have billions of dollars worth of state of the art equipment and yet they still melted away in a matter of weeks. If Vietnam has shown anything, it's that a corrupt, puppet regime has no chance of resisting a determined, unified force with an ideological purpose once the superpower that supports that regime directly withdraws its manpower.

 

There's no viable exit strategy for Afghanistan, there never was. If the U.S and U.K had humanitarian goals, perhaps they should start by stop seeking arms to the Saudis or backing Israel's construction of illegal settlements.

 

It's interesting on a, for want of a better word, spiritual level.

 

Basically, the West is all about money. Decisions are made for the sake of money and money motivates all actions.

 

So when the west encounters a society that isn't first and foremost motivated by money and consumerism, it doesn't know what to do.

 

It tries to demolish what was there before with tanks and bombs, then tries to colonise with McDonalds, and by paying informants, and paying people to join the police and army and civil service, but by and large the people you're trying to buy off aren't arsed about any of it. 

 

At that point you see the sparks flying out of western policy makers" heads because does not compute.

 

 

[Bjornebye]

1 hour ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

"Tell me you're a Corbynite without telling me that you're a Corbynite"

 

Honestly remarkable how they manage to avoid ever criticising the Taliban. Or any other Islamists/terror groups, for that matter.

 

You're telling me this isn't point scoring? None of it or all of it? Oh yeah, all of it. 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Criticising politicians is fine. Lying and deliberately misinterpreting what they've said isn't. 

[Kepler-186]

2 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

See, now that's a shitty attempt at point-scoring.

Why? It’s perfectly true that Liberal Democrat values are for sale, unlike the Taliban’s. 

[Section_31]

1 minute ago, Kepler-186 said:

Why? It’s perfectly true that Liberal Democrat values are for sale, unlike the Taliban’s. 

 

Gotta be a t shirt in there somewhere.

[Rico1304]

The last 20 years have been better than the previous 20 for Afghanistan women and children.  The next 20 look bleak to say the least.  At that press conference today the Taliban leader said things would be ok for women IF they stuck to sharia rules. So they are fucked. 

[Rico1304]

2 minutes ago, Nelly-Torres said:

Criticising politicians is fine. Lying and deliberately misinterpreting what they've said isn't. 

Misrepresenting Burgon? How the fuck do you get that?   It’s his words, he wrote them and posted them on his Twitter account. 

[Strontium]

2 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

You said "corbynites" to get a reaction which you got, but you knew that didn't you. You were having a pop at Corbyn and Labour. 

 

I also believe you lied about not knowing what the Lib Dem position is on this. You're telling me you don't follow Ed Davey and haven't seen his tweets the last 3/4 days about it all but have managed to see Richard Burgons? Yeah right. 

 

I was having a pop at Richard Burgon. How can I prove this? Well, I used the words "Richard" and "Burgon". And yes, against my better judgment, I described him as a Corbynite.

 

Since Corbyn isn't Labour at the moment, and since I was at pains to point out the fierce intellect of another Labour MP,  I'm really not sure how it could ever constitute a pop at Labour.

 

I definitely do follow Ed Davey, but when you follow as many people as I do, you don't see every single tweet. Take it up with Twitter and their algorithms. I saw the Burgon one because Rico posted it in this thread. I'm sure even you couldn't try to deny that.

[Strontium]

6 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

 

Gotta be a t shirt in there somewhere.

 

[Strontium]

9 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

The last 20 years have been better than the previous 20 for Afghanistan women and children.  The next 20 look bleak to say the least.  At that press conference today the Taliban leader said things would be ok for women IF they stuck to sharia rules. So they are fucked. 

 

Karim Sadjadpour pointed out that this was almost exactly what Khomeini said when he took power in Iran.

[VladimirIlyich]

1 hour ago, Bjornebye said:

Knew it would be Corbyns fault somehow. 

Yes. I remember when he was PM and ordered the invasion of Afghanistan. Do keep up.

[Bjornebye]

4 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

I was having a pop at Richard Burgon. How can I prove this? Well, I used the words "Richard" and "Burgon". And yes, against my better judgment, I described him as a Corbynite.

 

Since Corbyn isn't Labour at the moment, and since I was at pains to point out the fierce intellect of another Labour MP,  I'm really not sure how it could ever constitute a pop at Labour.

 

I definitely do follow Ed Davey, but when you follow as many people as I do, you don't see every single tweet. Take it up with Twitter and their algorithms. I saw the Burgon one because Rico posted it in this thread. I'm sure even you couldn't try to deny that.

You didn't use the word "Richard" or "Burgon" in your post ..... Yes you did describe him as a "Corbynite". It also was a pop at Labour, what with Burgon being a Labour MP and all.... 

 

The pop at Corbyn was an intentional attempt to point score at people on here and you know it. 

 

Yeah well I don't believe you haven't seen any of the leader of the Lib Dems tweets on Afghanistan over the last 3 days (you and I know the truth, neither can prove either way but we both know don't we). 

 

 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

21 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Misrepresenting Burgon? How the fuck do you get that?   It’s his words, he wrote them and posted them on his Twitter account. 

He didn't say give money to the Taliban. And you know this. Liar. Pants on fire. 

[Rico1304]

Just now, Nelly-Torres said:

He didn't say give money to the Taliban. And you know this. Liar. Pants on fire. 

Who else gets reparations?  Is it 

 

a) the government of the country

b) the government of the country 

c) the government of the country

 

at the moment thats (checks notes) the Taliban.  
 

He’s a fucking moron, unless he’s your dad why can’t you just accept he said something stupid.  

[Red74]