British Troops Taken Out Of Northern Ireland From Tonight

I think it's great to finally have our troops from there home. It was a job well done, but maybe they should have been taken out years ago.

 

No doubt some of them will be sent out to Afghanistan or Iraq now?

 

There will be soldiers still out there but not in the same role as before. The lads are having a hard time in Afhgan it surprises me how little the public know about it

 

I´ll bet the people of Afghanistan have harder times than the imperial troops. Taliban on one side and the imperal troops on the other

 

I still wouldn't want to be out there, mate, over stretched and under equipped, fighting a battle that isn't going to be over in a hurry.

So, criticise the war and the intentions of politicians by all means but lay off the "imperial troops" line - it's not Star Wars...

 

Would the war be more justified if they soldiers were better equiped?
i am critcising the war and yes the yankees and brits acts like an empire. I use any phrase i fecking like, to describe what US end English troops are sent out by right wing politicians to fight a war for big business. Every war is about resources so is this. USA as the only super power do what they like and act like an empire telling everyone else what to do.

 

Except for the 5000 that are staying!

 

Having troops in Afghanistan is entirely justified

So you don't think they should be in Afghanistan fighting against the Taliban then and seeking to track down Al-Qaeda

 

RE: Having troops in Afghanistan is entirely justified

well do i have to remind you about who supported them and armed them? was it Soviet.. No was it England and USA.. Yes... For what reason?
To fight a government who acctually started to give people a saying. After the Socialist took power in Afghanistan, women was allowed to go to school, the poor was given a piece of land etc. but who fecked it up. off course USA with their asslicking puppets.

And this war is not about fighting Al-Qaida, it is about oil and this war was planned years before 9/11. And that is well documented. But for someone who is capable of only thinking inside the frames given by ruling class, thats the conclusion you just came with.
"Either your with us or you are against us, if you are against us your are with the terrorists". Is it possible to be more narrowminded than that?

f.ex. those christian missionaries that is taken by Taliban. In England and in the west you whine about muslims are taking over Europe, but it is ok to send christian missionaris= That is what i call fecking hypocracy. . As long as western countries think they have some god given duty to rule and impose their way of life it will never be peace.

 

RE: Having troops in Afghanistan is entirely justified

No, what this particular discussion is about is whether British troops in Afghanistan and Iraq live the Life of Riley and and your assertion that concern about the status of British troops abroad equates to imperialism. Which it doesn't...

 

RE: Having troops in Afghanistan is entirely justified

Off course it is not imperialism when we do it... just those others.. those non-europeans... ******

 

RE: Having troops in Afghanistan is entirely justified

Read this, you might get a different view</p>

</p>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2101516,00.html</p>

 

Doesn't mean that NATO forces aren't justified in being there though nt

 

RE: Doesn't mean that NATO forces aren't justified in being there though nt

How many men, women and children have to be killed andhow many towns and villages have to be flattened by NATO jets and bombers before you stop justifying it? How many UK troops have to die before people get so concerned for their 'conditions' thatthey want to bring them home? </p>

 

RE: Doesn't mean that NATO forces aren't justified in being there though nt

If we pull out will less people die?

If we don't go into Darfur will more people die?

The history of the story is one thing, but the future is another.

 

a link from you to the graniudan never!

 

RE: Doesn't mean that NATO forces aren't justified in being there though nt

Of course there are casualties in war, both service personnel and civilian, and they are all regrettable, but unfortunately it's a necessarily evil within the "bigger picture". Or do we just allow terrorists to propagate and continue?

My comment about the forces being justified in being in Afghanistan was, regardless of personal opinion as to whether they should be or not, they are there under authority of the UN and international law with clear intentions.

 

RE: Doesn't mean that NATO forces aren't justified in being there though nt

"regrettable"

"necessary evil"

"terrorism"

My god you could be a government spokesperson with that kind of formulaic government press release answer. You're not Hazel Blears in disguise are you?

You'd have thought that the evidence of spreading terrorism in Iraq with an invasion would be enough to convince you that fighting in Afghanistan is making us more enemies and not less. Disregarding the fact that most Afghans have **** all to do with anything. If you're that bothered why not try to persuade the government to bomb or break off relations with Saudi Arabia, the country where 3/4 of all the 9/11 bombers came from. Or ask them why the US is just handing them another $30bn arms deal.........

As for their "clear intentions" did you bother to read the article I linked? If not I suggest you didn't read it carefully enough.