Afghanistan

[Banquo's Ghost]

Well you can be as harsh on your nation as you like, but don't go ahead and try to prove me wrong...

A little exercise in reading the history of Afghanistan from the 18th century onwards is all that is needed to prove you wrong.

[Incongruous]

A little exercise in reading the history of Afghanistan from the 18th century onwards is all that is needed to prove you wrong.

Uhuh...

Sorry Banqo but no, a little reading about how the U.S has run the country over the past years will allow you to realise that the U.S mission to "liberate" is bollox, how close do you think the U.S is to the scumbags who really run the country now? Very, very close.

Lets drop the guilty charges placed upon history and look at the policies which the U.S has implemented in the country. The U.S cannot wash its hands clean by pointing to an Oxford History of Afghanistan.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Uhuh...

Sorry Banqo but no, a little reading about how the U.S has run the country over the past years will allow you to realise that the U.S mission to "liberate" is bollox, how close do you think the U.S is to the scumbags who really run the country now? Very, very close.

Lets drop the guilty charges placed upon history and look at the policies which the U.S has implemented in the country. The U.S cannot wash its hands clean by pointing to an Oxford History of Afghanistan.

There is quite a difference between alleging that everything wrong with Afghanistan is America's fault (your avowed position) and washing that country's hands clean of current responsibility (the position you ascribe to me).

But complexity has ever been anathema to the pure of vision.

[Incongruous]

There is quite a difference between alleging that everything wrong with Afghanistan is America's fault (your avowed position) and washing that country's hands clean of current responsibility (the position you ascribe to me).

But complexity has ever been anathema to the pure of vision.

Yeah, umm nice of you to choose a position for me but I'm ok on my own.

Nor did I ascribe a position to you, so lets move on, and go ahead and try and refute what I actually said Banquo...

[Banquo's Ghost]

Yeah, umm nice of you to choose a position for me but I'm ok on my own.

Nor did I ascribe a position to you, so lets move on, and go ahead and try and refute what I actually said Banquo...

If I misunderstood your position, then I apologise.

However, that leaves me in a quandary, for I now don't know what your position actually is, even from re-reading your posts.

Is this the best summary of what you are arguing?

The reasosn for invading Afghanistan were many and had been in the pipes for a long time, you guys loved the Taliban while they managed to keep the prospect of a nice little pipeline open.

You were even friends of Osama, I find it increadible that you think you were justified in devastating a country for the sake of catching a man you created...

The Taliban had no way of bringing in Osama, and your government knew it, but that didn't matter because they had lost control and had outlived their use.

Oh and it has been the U.S which has facilitated the druglords, the warlords and the rapists and thugs...

[Incongruous]

Sure is, I don't think I wrote that the U.S was to blame for everything in Afghanistan, Kukri took up that argument.

[KukriKhan]

Yeah, umm nice of you to choose a position for me but I'm ok on my own.

Nor did I ascribe a position to you, so lets move on, and go ahead and try and refute what I actually said Banquo...

Poor Bopa. He wants to argue the rightness-wrongness of US FoPo since 1945 - but nobody else wants to play. We're too busy looking for a way through our involvement in Afghanistan.

Some day US & NATO will leave that place. The question is when, and how. I say: tomorrow, the original mission having been 50% accomplished, and prospects for the other half getting done looking dim. He says:

I think you have to stay

but he doesn't say why, or for how long, or to accomplish... what?