A British mini-Civil War in Afghanistan? [Archive]

XV277

1st Mar 2009, 16:48

At the risk of getting flamed...what is the difference between these British Muslims going over there to kick out a foreign invader and the International Brigades going over to Spain in the civil war? They probably think they are doing right. Time will tell.

The International Brigades were not, in general, fighting their own countrymen.

Which, in some ways, is the heart of the current situation. An philosophy in whch the allegiance to faith is stronger than that to country.

pr00ne

1st Mar 2009, 16:50

My country right or wrong eh XV277?

Good job you weren't in Germany in 1939...............

davejb

1st Mar 2009, 17:05

Proone,
fighting your own countrymen, when they have been sent overseas to fight by a duly elected government (whether you agree with that or not) is treason, whether you can be nabbed for it or not. If the muslims in question are not British citizens then of course that wouldn't be so...what you personally believe in is not a defence. (Just as the squaddies can't say 'I don't believe we ought to go to Afghanistan, so I'll sit this one out').

You have also seriously misrepresented and insulted XV277, which is a common tactic of those who can't form a cogent argument.

(Edit to correct a spelling)

Double Zero

1st Mar 2009, 17:15

Afghanistan from an objective point of view...

I admit first of all that I haven't been there, so my judgement is based upon what I've read, seen on TV ( Ross Kemp etc ) and been told.

It's notable that in reading the autobiographies of serious war journalists - John Simpson, Michael Buerk etc ) they got away with a lifetime of hair-raising jobs, and both end end up saying " THEN we went to Afghanistan "

No-one to be trusted, everyone a friend one second, enemy the next.

As for ' British residents' caught fighting or indeed speaking for the Taliban, they are NOT British except for convenience; if truly British, I'm sure they'll be happy to obey British laws and be 'done' for treason.

If that makes me a racist in your eyes, you really ought to think about why you're in the UK, and how you or I might be treated for even daring to speak our minds in muslim countries; I must be an infidel, I even - gasp - taught a girlfriend to drive !

It seems to punters in comfy chairs like me that we are wasting our guys out there ( if the Russians with their decidedly non-P.C. methods couldn't knobble them, we're not going to ) , and should pull our guys out pronto while leaning very heavily on Pakistan and sorting out how to screw up the poppy / opium crops - I know the CIA etc have tried this, well try harder !

Fg Off Max Stout

1st Mar 2009, 17:21

pr00ne

Hard to reconcile fighting for what you believe in as treason

There are unfortunately a great number who have achieved British citizenship ad enjoy its many perqs but simultaneously hate Britain and aspire to change it into some dark ages caliphate. Abu Hamza and his ilk are prime examples. If 'what you believe in' is to take up arms against the country of which you are a subject, that in my book is treason. I would shed no tears if all such homegrown terrorists travelled to Afghanistan and died for their jihad.

If these people believe in fundamentalist beligerent Islam so strongly, and hate Western freedom, values and people so much, then perhaps they could p*ss of to the Middle Eastern sh*thole of their choice and not come back.

I have no issue with British Muslims who show some respect for indigenous culture and values and contribute positively to society. It's those who despise our society that I have a problem with.

ASRAAM

1st Mar 2009, 19:05

Max and DaveJb,

I agree with your sentiments but technically I believe Treason is:

'Waging war on her majesty within her realm'

There was however some anti mercenary legislation passed a while ago which requires Brits bearing arms abroad to have government permission so if we do catch any Brits with guns abroad they should be easy to bang up under that. Indeed thats the tack I would have taken with the Brits detained in Guantanamo when the Americans released them, assuming of course they were armed when originally picked up.

pr00ne

1st Mar 2009, 19:11

Mr Max Stout,

Hard to argue with a thing you have written there. I DO regard someone who; wants to deny women not only their most basic human rights but also to deny them health care, who is prepared to behead or burn alive anyone caught educating or caring for women, who wishes to ban any form of recreation or entertainment and insist that only THEIR form of religion is to be tolerated as my enemy.
As I am a democrat I have to accept that if a group of people themselves decide that is how they wish to live their lives, then that is none of my business. The second that they try to impose their wishes on a single unwilling person, let alone the rest of us, then that is where I have to take issue with them.

We are currently 'taking issue' with these people in Afghanistan, we are NOT fighting the Afghan people, we are fighting the Taliban and the various religious factions that call themselves al Queda. Where these people come from is irrelevant.

00,

I simply do NOT know what you are on about????????

green granite

1st Mar 2009, 19:15

'Waging war on her majesty within her realm'

Lord Haw Haw (William Joyce) did it from Germany. He was hanged.

Double Zero

1st Mar 2009, 19:30

Proone,

- If I may say, an arrogant title to take - having said that, I'm keen to put a 'Dastardly & Muttley's car - the Double zero - on my caption so people don't think I'm some sort of James Bond wannabee ...

I'm sorry if I was unclear, which bit confuses you ?

'British' - either shopping, making, fighting etc for Britain.

Shooting -or trying to shoot / blow up British people - be they shoppers in London or soldiers abroad = treason, if officiailly a British Citizen, with severe penalties but not as severe as in countries such terrorists support ( some while living in comfy Britain ).

Next question ?

DZ

Training Risky

1st Mar 2009, 20:04

Where these people come from is irrelevant.

Ignorant claptrap!!!!! (See what I did there?)

If British Citizens, along with other foreign fighters, are participating in an illegal terrorist campaign against the Afghan people and ISAF by flying to Pakistan and travelling across the border into Afghan....they are terrorists and should be executed after a bit of interrogation (if there is time.)

True Britons, even devout Muslims, have no place in AQ/Taliban. (Actually nobody should be in either organisation, but this discussion is about Brits)Religious beliefs are NOT a get-out-of-Gitmo free card!

I would trust Fg Off Max's opinion as he, like myself, has actually served in the sandpit...unlike some 'shysters' posting here regularly.

(Waiting with baited breath for some oh so witty reposte referring to how many Op tours were flown over the badlands of West Germany compared to mine...)

(What you up to these days Max?)

pr00ne

1st Mar 2009, 20:15

Training failure,

"...should be executed after a bit of interrogation (if there is time.)"

Sorry pal but after that you have no credibility left, murder is murder.

As to True Britons (what on earth are they?) having no place in AQ/Taliban, who the hell are you to make such a statement. I happen to agree with you that no reasonable individual would want ANYTHING to do with either organisation but if that is how they want to live their lives then fair enough. When they try to impose it upon others is when I think they are wrong. Which is surely what Afghanistan is all about?

Training Risky

1st Mar 2009, 20:26

Oh ha ha - excellent banter m'learned friend. :rolleyes:

Murder? I'm sure you have got a few of your rich clients off murder charges in the past - OK when it's in court and making you money is it? Come and talk to me about 'murder' and credibility when you've actually been shot at - not boozed your way through the 70's and 80's on Aunty Betty's shilling.

"If that's how they want to live their live then fair enough"??? WTF!

So joining a terrorist organisation is OK then is it? Love to see your face if you were ever affected by such handiwork on the London Transport network. Well see my point above: where there's money to be made, morals go out the window eh?

Blacksheep

1st Mar 2009, 20:37

Seeing as how these British chaps are in Afghanistan, (presumably without a visa) they are a matter for the Afghanistan government to deal with. Perhaps our Afghan comrades could persuade these chaps to tell us where they were given their indoctrination and by whom? Then we could close the offending premises, arrest those who indoctrinated the young adventurers and deal with them under British Law. As to what subsequently happens to the illegal immigrants under Afghanistan's justice system, that is no concern of ours. Since these chaps travelled over there of their own volition and by their own means, the question of "rendition" does not arise.

While working in Brunei one could not help but notice the local government's methods of dealing with foreign Islamic teachers whose preaching was considered "deviationist" by the Ministry of Religious Affairs. They were expelled without ceremony on the first available flight out of the country. The human rights of the local population were considered too important for them to be jeopardised by unorthodox foreign pollution. Local citizens who were found to have been influenced by deviationist teachings were sent to a re-education centre where they learned the error of their ways and were released only after they passed the exit examinations.

Britain has much to learn from Islamic governments and the major centres of Islamic orthodoxy and learning. Instead of standing back and allowing local mosques to bring in unlearned "Imams" from tribal homelands, it is time British Islamic religious practices were brought under official orthodox control. We might then see fewer young British men led astray by deviationist preachers.

Jackonicko

1st Mar 2009, 20:57

Green Granite,

Not a great example, as hanging Joyce (undertaken in the heat of victory) was of dubious legality, and as he was one of the last two people to be hanged for a crime other than murder in the United Kingdom.

Of dubious legality because Joyce was American-born, and of Irish citizenship before gaining a UK passport (which he did by mis-stating his nationality to get it, and which had expired by the time of his supposed 'treason') he was a naturalised German citizen at the time of his propaganda broadcasts, so he was effectively an alien, being tried for offences committed in a foreign country. So arguably not treason, certainly not high treason and arguably not Britain's jurisdiction.

Nor was his risible propaganda damaging to the UK and its interests - indeed most who heard it would agree that it was a great boost to morale.

Comparing him with the filth we are talking about minimises the seriousness of their crimes. They are UK citizens, who were born here and have enjoyed the benefits of citizenship, and who do owe this country alleigance, but who have then directly attacked and attempted to kill HM forces personnel.

I hesitate to criticise multi-culturalism (it tends to be something attacked by racists) and I recognise that Britain benefits hugely from being multi-ethnic, and by absorbing elements of incoming cultures. However, I increasingly think that the continuing health of our own core culture and society demands that it remains pre-eminent, and that a degree of integration and acceptance of our core values by immigrant communities is essential, and that some 'foreign' views, customs and beliefs that are not compatible with our way of life must be discarded by anyone who wants to live in our society.

The kind of attitudes condemned by Proone, are, I'd submit, detrimental to the continuing health of our society, and are thus incompatible with British citizenship. I'd argue that it is our business, and I think that I'd ban the burka/chadri/niqab - our traditions require that the face is not covered (some find it intimidating to face a masked face) in just the way that Western women may not dress 'immodestly' in Islamic countries, and I would discourage ghettoism and separatism in all their forms, including separate education, etc.

davejb

1st Mar 2009, 21:18

ASRAAM,
actually, as I'm not a lawyer (thank heavens) I'm relying on a collection of dictionaries for this one, eg

(the crime of) lack of loyalty to your country, especially by helping its enemies or attempting to defeat its government:

The common thread in them being aid to an enemy, operating against own forces, and it's not limited to offences committed in the realm of which you are a citizen.

Captured terrorists of UK origin should be treated as POW, but subsequently tried in court - that court could be a British court, on returning them to the UK, or an Afghan court perhaps as they are also waging war against the elected Afghan government.

If you bend over backwards far enough to see the other chaps point of view, Proone, you eventually disappear up your own orifice.

Double Zero

1st Mar 2009, 21:55

Training Risky,

That is probably the most stupid post / reply I've ever seen on Pprune - quite a record !

Congratulations,

DZ

pr00ne

1st Mar 2009, 22:44

Training failure,

"Murder? I'm sure you have got a few of your rich clients off murder charges in the past"

Hhhmm...............

Whilst I have never got ANY of my clients, rich or otherwise, OFF a murder charge (everyone has a legal right to a defence however, though you probably have a problem with that) I HAVE successfully brought cases of liable and slander against certain individuals on behalf of a range of clients who were subject to rather similar libellous statements. :)

As to terrorist organisations, terrorism is a tactic, not a philosophy, and I do NOT support anything that the Taliban do, odd that you should think I do.

As to the London comment, be very careful, you are straying into territory you know nothing about and could be about to make a rather large fool of yourself.

Thelma Viaduct

1st Mar 2009, 23:43

The army should send more Lancastrians over to afghan, they'll have the yorkies sorted out in no time. :ok:

Wiley

2nd Mar 2009, 02:09

As someone has already said, my guess would be that if they ever capture a Brummie Taliban, we'll probably never hear about it.

If the capture of any such person is made public, if the David Hicks debacle in Australia is anything to go by, he'll become a celebrity - or at least a cause celebre for the huggy fluffs - get himself a high profile lawyer (or a trying to establish himself as a high profile lawyer) and get off on a technicality ("the British Army infringed his civil rights in detaining him in Afghanistan using unnecessary armed force" or some such specious legal argument), and then he'll make a fortune from the book deal after every publishing house in Britain has fallen over each other in a bidding war to publish his book.

West Coast

2nd Mar 2009, 03:42

You can't be hanged for treason any more

Noooo, but an angry soldier or Marine...

parabellum

2nd Mar 2009, 04:24

It has happened before and it will happen again, "Shot whilst trying to escape". Case closed.

green granite

2nd Mar 2009, 06:39

Jackonicko I was merely using him as proof that you could be charged with treason for crimes committed aboard.

I agree that his case was a bit unusual.

hunterboy

2nd Mar 2009, 07:13

Would most posters agree that the West isn't going to win in Afghanistan unless we change our strategy? At the risk of cliche, the West has to fight smarter not harder. We certainly aren't going to be able to put more firepower onto the ground than the Soviets in the 80's, and we know that didn't work.
By "fight", I don't just mean using violent means to achieve the Wests' objectives out there. Do we even know what they are? Is it getting rid of the Taliban or is it an narcotics war? Perhaps a destabilised Pakistan and Afghanistan suits America's aims in the Middle East? It certainly makes the House of Saud more fearful and dependent on American help.
What is the UK doing to stop fellow Brits from being indoctrinated and travelling to Pakistan and Afghanistan?
Maybe MI5/6 are on the case in the UK and abroad, and with no disrespect intended to them, how many native speakers do we have working for the security services? Judging by the pubs around Vauxhall Cross, not many. From what i can understand, the security services are full of ex public school boys. Great if you want to protect against an invasion of St Trinian school girls, but less able to understand the mindset of the UK's present enemies.
Recent events demonstrate this.
So what is the answer? I don't know. If I did, I would have joined the services, and not an airline. However, I do believe that a bit of lateral thinking would be more useful than more combat troops on the ground.
"Hearts and Minds" seems to be the buzzword.

Wiley

2nd Mar 2009, 08:59

From what little I've read about the Brit. effort in Afghanistan, they've mostly turned a blind eye to the poppy crops to keep the locals more or less on side, as the crop is their only real chance of an income. The Americans (shades of Vietnam!) are taking tough about destroying the poppy crops and showing the Brits how a "real army" fights a war.

I've read a book by a Brit (ex?)para who was sent in to Afghanistan by the spooks in the very early days of the Soviet war to bring back pieces of a Hind. It had the ring of truth to it, as there were precious few histronics and lots of frustrations and hard slogging in his story. If what he said about the effectiveness of mujahadeen before they were trained up by the CIA (and others), and what they're like now, methinks, if things go the way I suspect they'll go - unless there's a major shift in policy - the Americans are going to be wishing they'd let the Russians win that one.

I have to agree with hunterboy. What seems to be missing - to a huge degree - is the first item in the rules of war, Selection and Maintenance of the Aim. What is the aim? Stopping the drug trade would seem to me to in many ways to be at odds with destroying - or even weakening - the Taliban.

Spray your average Afghan farmer's poppy crop and you've created another Taliban.

davejb

2nd Mar 2009, 16:06

...but you've removed part of the money financing them in the process...

The Helpful Stacker

2nd Mar 2009, 16:27

..but you've removed part of the money financing them in the process...

There are plenty of other revenue streams other than the poppy harvest for the AQ/Taliban, what with it being a war against the west by proxy to some nation states.

Destroying the poppy harvest on the other hand does put locals with good knowledge of the local terrain out of work and looking for other sources of income, such as working directly for AQ/Taliban rather than mealy tolerating them.

Training Risky

3rd Mar 2009, 17:16

There are moves in place to replace the poppy fields with rape seed and other crops - this represents a good chance to normalise the agriculture of Afghan while not alienating the farmers. I think it's obvious now that a strategic solution is required, encompassing NGOs, regional powers; civil-military coordination etc...

...but back to the pi$$ing contest: if I was to be a pedant, I would say that in no part of my posts did I address an individual by username...so who can prove what in a court of law? Who was I addressing? I'm sure some shyster who posts here can tell me - may help with my insomnia:} (Oh by the way, insulting posters by twisting their usernames which are meant to be a stab at self-deprecating humour, just makes one look like a tw@ instead.)

I stand by my comments on AQ/TB, the British legal profession and court system....currently sitting here shaking in my boots at the thought of a libel action over what I posted on an internet forum...literally shaking with fear!:p (Don't you just love overly-litigious ambulance chasers!)

Anyway back to this interesting debate with well-informed posters.

Ta ta.

foldingwings

3rd Mar 2009, 20:15

pr00ne,

Plt Off Max Stout

Mr Max Stout

Training failure

How desperately childish you seem to be. This is hardly the effort of an educated man and pours self-imposed scorn immediately upon your seemingly worthy points raised.

I trust that you don't use these childish and belittling tactics in the courtroom and certainly you wouldn't last long if you ever tried it in mine:=.

Foldie

Fg Off Max Stout

3rd Mar 2009, 22:01

I hadn't even registered that as a dig - I just assumed he typed in haste with either a poor short-term memory or a lack of attention to detail. If it is a 'tactic' it's a pretty weak one. I may have been a Fg Off in 2002 when I registered (only adding the rank because some lurker had nabbed 'Max Stout') but haven't been one for many years now. Water off a duck's back my friend.

pr00ne

3rd Mar 2009, 23:42

folding wings,

My you are a pious one aren't you?

Hardly a dig, in my day in Aunty Bettys flying club we called it banter, you know, a sense of humour, irony, that sort of thing, I'm sure you must have heard of it?

MarkD

4th Mar 2009, 02:11

I can't see how UK would make Islam a national religion and enforce orthodoxy on it. I mean, wouldn't it be a better idea to cast out the heretics from the official religion it already has? :E :=

Tigger_Too

4th Mar 2009, 07:08

I HAVE successfully brought cases of liable

Liable: legally bound; under an obligation; subject to; etc.

Libel: a published false statement damaging to a person's reputation.

Credibility? Not!

barnstormer1968

4th Mar 2009, 08:16

As for your above post:
Congratulations on your subsequent:
promotion/demotion/leaving the service (delete as appropriate):E

I just thought I'd join in with the ignoring of the actual thread topic:}

To be serious, I have always thought it would a good idea to destroy all the poppy fields (by burning them), and replace the crops (at British expense/logistics) with a suitable grain crop. This will rid the world of some of the drug trade, thus saving vast amounts of money on the home front drugs war. The new grain crop will generate an income for Afghan farmers (with crops bought by Europe at European prices).
Even if the Taliban receive some of the money from these crops, we not be in a worse position as they already get money from the poppy crops.

I somehow suspect the cost of re-planting a farmers fields, and then buying his crop (send the grain to a famine area or something) is far less than trying to track the original heroin movement through the UK, or of flying sorties above the poppy fields to do a show of force the the Taliban hanging around at the moment.
As a secondary point, it must weaken the Taliban credibility if they end up harvesting crops for the allies rather than in whatever name they do it now.

Non of my above ideas would be my favourite resolution for this war, and the level of RAF aircraft present in theatre (due to my government, not the RAF) seems a bit like we are trying to do a re-run of the RAF's original deployment to Afghanistan.
I don't wish to be too much of an armchair general, but I suspect if the original RAF deployment had been succesful then we would not be here (again) now.

(Yes I know it was successful in it's intent, but I am trying to point out that this is not even the first or second failed attempt by foreign powers to dominate Afghanistan)

cornish-stormrider

4th Mar 2009, 08:45

Here is a novel idea, there is a worldwide shortage of medical morphine......

Buy up all the poppy crop, legitamete (sp) like, we kill off the drug trade, encourage the farmers to turn back to farming. make a load of morphine and sell to medical institutions at a reasonable and fair price, the farmer at the end makes more money than when he was supplying the drug trade, we look like winners in the hearts and minds and then we can use a bit of profit to buy some new shiny shiny trucks and toys for the troops.

You will note at no point did I mention the UK treasury or HMG. this plan is an improvised, adapted and overcoming solution to part of the problem.

Now who do I see about my consultancy fee......?

How many innocent Brits are over there i.e. not working to help??
And all that are working to help are either in a Mil Base or have registered as some sort of NGO somewhere??
I mean it is not very likely someone has travelled over there to visit aunty Gladys now is it. Oh and they were captured while engaging the forces in a battle. QED they are Foreign Taleban and I think prison would be the kindest thing, you have yet to see my design of prison though.

Bed - hard and cold, just like the issued one.
shower - communal like the ones in the field.
Accom - tents, like the 12 x 12
Facilities - Like we get issued in the field ( square root of F$$k all)
Work - lots, like every serving member on ops

If they wish to pray, let them, their place of worship could be a bigger tent.

pr00ne

4th Mar 2009, 09:26

Tigger_TWO,

Why thankyou, I had NO idea they were different things........................

Typing quickly near midnight, must stop that lest my CREDIBILITY in chambers is ruined.

Geesh!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tigger_Too

4th Mar 2009, 12:15

Attention to detail pr00ne. Not only did you fail to spot your mistake when posting, neither did you review/correct it at a more civilised hour. A basic mistake for which even a legal clerk would be chastised, and rightfully so. Your profession requires accuracy, and I for one will not take your arguments seriously if you cannot adhere to simple standards. Neither will the bench.

8331ashmo

4th Mar 2009, 15:59

Max
how can you justify stating that current rules of engagement are bringing justice, when i have to take a few incoming rounds before i can slot the lot of them. i believe that current ROE's are outragous and i should be allowed to shoot on site of the enemy.

pr00ne

4th Mar 2009, 16:02

Tigger_tw000,

My, your piousness knows no limits.

Thanks for your advice about attention to detail, as for you not taking my argument seriously.........................................

The bench? Thanks again, the fact I was only called to the bar 20 years ago will tell you how much I need that advice.

My profession requires accuracy? Why do you think we HAVE legal execs and legal clerks?

Reasoned argument, intellect and the power of persuasion have always been a little more of use to me.

I think you and I differ widely on what we interpret as "standards".

Fg Off Max Stout

4th Mar 2009, 16:17

8331ashmo

I wasn't being particularly profound nor do I think particularly cryptic. My point was simply that you can't shoot these b@stards in Birmingham or Bradford or the Finsbury Park Mosque, but if they choose to put themselves in a war zone playing the part of the enemy then they're fair game and deserve what they get. I know the ROEs are little more complex than that but the legal technical details of the ROEs were not the point of my post and are generally not for public domain discussion.

I have in the past been the top cover man, standing through the roof hatch of a Land Rover driving through Al Amarah with a lot of unfriendly locals around. I was all too aware that by the time I'd been able to work out if the ROEs allowed me to shoot someone without ending up in court, I'd have already taken a few rounds myself. A very uncomfortable feeling, so I know where you're coming from.

foldingwings

4th Mar 2009, 16:29

pr00ne

Hardly a dig, in my day in Aunty Bettys flying club we called it banter, you know, a sense of humour, irony, that sort of thing, I'm sure you must have heard of it?

Heard of it! I invented it, but having looked at many of your posts on this website I just didn't recognise it off your pen.

So, as I said to the youth before me today, time to grow up now, eh pr00ne:*!

foldingwings

Biggus

4th Mar 2009, 18:07

pr00ne,

It strikes me as a classic example of the case where, when you have a dig at someone your arguement to anything they may say in reply is...

"It's banter old chap, can't you take it/appreciate it/recognize it*"

*delete as appropriate

But if someone has the nerve to say anything less than complimentary about yourself we get the 5 minute closing arguement for the defence in reply!

Standing by to be the recipient of your wit/legal skills/abuse, etc*