Cross Party Condemnation of Joe Biden, by UK Parliament, as He is Held in Contempt.

TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
There was cross party condemnation of Joe Biden in a House of Commons debate on the Afghanistan debacle today. Boris Johnson recalled Parliament, which was in recess, during which today, Joe Biden was held in contempt. Boris Johnson stated that he was now presiding over the worst foreign policy crisis in 65 years.

In my view this whole sorry episode is a disgrace, and will do long time harm to the US, and harm vital alliances. I understand that Boris Johnson strongly counseled against this course of action that was taken.

The speech by the MP for Tunbridge Wells, Tom Tugendhat, himself a veteran, who gave long service in Afghanistan, gave an emotional and excoriating speech.
 
J

Jeepers

Full Audioholic
So what would have been the solution according to the UK Parliament; stay a few years longer ?
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
So what would have been the solution according to the UK Parliament; stay a few years longer ?
I've not seen the House of Commons debate but my guess is that the condemnation is about how the withdrawal was planned and implemented.
 
J

Jeepers

Full Audioholic
I've not seen the House of Commons debate but my guess is that the condemnation is about how the withdrawal was planned and implemented.
Sure but everybody was taken by surprise how fast the Taliban took city after city. The Afghan president leaving the country and the Afghan army not really fighting did not really help and resulted in chaos.
 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Ninja
Sure but everybody was taken by surprise how fast the Taliban took city after city. The Afghan president leaving the country and the Afghan army not really fighting did not really help and resulted in chaos.
Almost like it was planned by the departing Afghan Pres. Like let me leave with the loot and you can have the city. Just to darn easy.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Sure but everybody was taken by surprise how fast the Taliban took city after city. The Afghan president leaving the country and the Afghan army not really fighting did not really help and resulted in chaos.
This means that everything the US and other countries did to train the Afghan military was wasted.

From https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-august-10-2021/

At the same time – we’ve made this point before, but – the Afghan Government, the Afghan National Security Forces, far outnumber the Taliban – 300,000 – a capable fighting force of 300,000 troops, an air force that has modern weaponry, that has been trained by the United States, that just recently was provided with additional equipment. They have special forces. They have heavy equipment. So they have a capable fighting force.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
Sure but everybody was taken by surprise how fast the Taliban took city after city. The Afghan president leaving the country and the Afghan army not really fighting did not really help and resulted in chaos.
No they were not. The UK knew that this would happen without much more careful planning.

The UK ambassador, Sir Laurie Bristow, is still at his post, and says he will not leave Kabul.

The UK are sending in thousands of paratroopers, who I understand are operating outside the airport and picking up UK citizens and Afghan allies outside of the airport perimeter. Apparently 1000 individuals were escorted yesterday and flown out by the RAF.

I think the real problem is that the US set up that corrupt puppet government, who pocketed the money and did not pay their security forces.
I think there should have been a colonial style administration modelled on the former Indian administration. And yes, it takes about a century to build a nation, not twenty years.

I know in these days of the risible cancel culture it is fashionable to vilify the British Empire, and decry the efforts of many who achieved so much.

I personally believe that the British Empire and the associated colonial administrations where on balance a great force for good in the world.
I don't mind admitting that I'm proud of my three generations of relatives who spent years of their lives in India. My father was a Royal Engineer captain in the Indian army in WW II. That brings up another point. Those Afghan forces should have been under the direct command of US and UK officers.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
This means that everything the US and other countries did to train the Afghan military was wasted.

From https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-august-10-2021/

At the same time – we’ve made this point before, but – the Afghan Government, the Afghan National Security Forces, far outnumber the Taliban – 300,000 – a capable fighting force of 300,000 troops, an air force that has modern weaponry, that has been trained by the United States, that just recently was provided with additional equipment. They have special forces. They have heavy equipment. So they have a capable fighting force.
It's not quite as simple as saying they had 300,000 men and were given lots of sophisticated equipment.
‘Please Don’t Leave Us Behind. We Will Be Great Americans.’ - The Bulwark
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
No they were not. The UK knew that this would happen without much more careful planning.

The UK ambassador, Sir Laurie Bristow, is still at his post, and says he will not leave Kabul.

The UK are sending in thousands of paratroopers, who I understand are operating outside the airport and picking up UK citizens and Afghan allies outside of the airport perimeter. Apparently 1000 individuals were escorted yesterday and flown out by the RAF.

I think the real problem is that the US set up that corrupt puppet government, who pocketed the money and did not pay their security forces.
I think there should have been a colonial style administration modelled on the former Indian administration. And yes, it takes about a century to build a nation, not twenty years.

I know in these days of the risible cancel culture it is fashionable to vilify the British Empire, and decry the efforts of many who achieved so much.

I personally believe that the British Empire and the associated colonial administrations where on balance a great force for good in the world.
I don't mind admitting that I'm proud of my three generations of relatives who spent years of their lives in India. My father was a Royal Engineer captain in the Indian army in WW II. That brings up another point. Those Afghan forces should have been under the direct command of US and UK officers.
Doc, I highly doubt that you will find many - if, indeed, any - indigenous persons in any of the territories colonized by the British over the centuries who would agree that the British Empire was a force for good in the world. I say this as someone born in England's (there was no GB/UK at the time) oldest colony.

The British Empire was never founded in order to spread good in the world. It was purely in order to take the resources from the lands colonized, as well as providing dumping grounds for unwanted "white trash" - the poor and criminals.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
I just love how the UK and EU countries are ready to blame the US for what's happening in Afghanistan.
Geography isn't my strongest suit, but last I checked Afghanistan is far closer to India/China/Russia - Each of them even independently could've easy supported Afgan's military efforts, not to mention jointly. Yes, it's is US's fault for trying to reduce our own military deaths and tax money to support a country on another side of the world that doesn't even want (not really) to be democratic and independent.

and that UK action is nothing short of epic hypocrisy.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Spartan
Well then, plenty of blame to spread around ............
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
I just love how the UK and EU countries are ready to blame the US for what's happening in Afghanistan.
Geography isn't my strongest suit, but last I checked Afghanistan is far closer to India/China/Russia - Each of them even independently could've easy supported Afgan's military efforts, not to mention jointly. Yes, it's is US's fault for trying to reduce our own military deaths and tax money to support a country on another side of the world that doesn't even want (not really) to be democratic and independent.

and that UK action is nothing short of epic hypocrisy.
India has been a major donor to Afghanistan since 2001, while China and Russia have absolutely nothing to gain in making it easier for the US.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
India has been a major donor to Afghanistan since 2001, while China and Russia have absolutely nothing to gain in making it easier for the US.
Didn't know about India, but for both China and Russia gaining druglords run neighbor would not exactly be "nothing to gain", but more of something major to lose in border security and illegal drugs to be sold on every corner cheaply.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
The other day, I read a column in the Washington Post titled "We lost the war in Afghanistan long ago", written by Fareed Zakaria.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/16/we-lost-war-afghanistan-long-ago/

I'll quote from Zakaria's article at length because many people don't subscribe to the Post and cannot open it's articles.
As we watch the tragedy unfolding in Afghanistan, let us first dispense with the fantasy that the United States was maintaining the peace there with just a few thousand troops and that this situation could have been managed with this small commitment. For the past couple of years, it looked that way to Americans because Washington had made a deal with the Taliban and, as a result, the Taliban was deliberately not attacking U.S. and coalition forces.

For the Afghans themselves, the war was intensifying. In the summer of 2019, the Afghan Army and police force suffered their worst casualties in the two decades of fighting. It was also the worst period for Afghan civilian casualties in a decade. In 2018, when the United States had four times as many troops as this year, the fighting was so brutal that 282,000 Afghan civilians were displaced from their homes in the countryside. … …

You have heard people suggest that the withdrawal should have been a year or two later. Consider this news report in the Guardian in 2016: “Afghan Forces Lose Ground to Taliban Despite Delayed U.S. Troop Withdrawal.” The story pointed out that the U.S. military had persuaded Barack Obama to delay the troop withdrawals he had already delayed a year earlier, but despite having robust U.S. forces and significant air power, the central government’s control dropped to only about 65% of the country’s districts.

Some of the data I have cited comes from a powerful new book, “The American War in Afghanistan,” by Carter Malkasian, who served as a civilian officer in Helmand province and rose to become senior advisor to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Drawing his conclusions from the book in a Politico essay, he begins by noting, “there can be little doubt that we lost the war.” The United States spent 20 years, $2 trillion, commanded at their peak 130,000 coalition troops, built up an Afghan security force of 300,000 (at least on paper), and used the world’s most sophisticated and lethal air power. Still, it was unable to defeat an ill-equipped Taliban force of perhaps 75,000. Why?
Zakaria's article continues at length trying to answer why.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
Didn't know about India, but for both China and Russia gaining druglords run neighbor would not exactly be "nothing to gain", but more of something major to lose in border security and illegal drugs to be sold on every corner cheaply.
Absolutely. China and Russia were watching and chowing down on popcorn for years...right up until a few days ago. Now they're like...uh-oh!
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
It’s worth repeating this part of Zakaria's column:
The United States spent 20 years, $2 trillion, commanded at their peak 130,000 coalition troops, built up an Afghan security force of 300,000 (at least on paper), and used the world’s most sophisticated and lethal air power. Still, it was unable to defeat an ill-equipped Taliban force of perhaps 75,000.
The USA wasn't the first to try that. England (1830-1914), and the USSR (1980-90) tried and failed at that. If you go back in history far enough you'll find others (Alexander the Great) who had similar bad experience in that part of the world.

Others in this thread have suggested that the USA failed to succeed at nation building in Afghanistan, citing the long British colonial experience in India as an example where it was successful. It ignores nearly a century that England spent trying to occupy Afghanistan. Their first effort ended in disaster in 1842. Afterwards, subsequent governments in London realized their real goal was not military conquest of Afghanistan, but to defend their Indian colony from expanding Imperial Russia. So they set up a friendlier king in Afghanistan, and paid him to block Russian expansion. That effort succeeded, but didn't really end until the lead up to WW1.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Spartan
Even when your country loses, you still win. Look at Mitsubishi, Kawasaki, Mercedes, BMW, Fiat, etc.
I stated that in another thread and 'Trell the troll' accused me of more fake news, so tread lightly ! ;)
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top