Afghanistan Fighting

etom · 11 Jul 2009 at 20:06

i would rather they remove the whole of nhs then military. at least if nhs is gone you can get private health insurance, gl trying get a private army to stop whatever lunatics are around in 100 years taking us over.

Missing.String · 11 Jul 2009 at 20:23

etom said:
i would rather they remove the whole of nhs then military. at least if nhs is gone you can get private health insurance, gl trying get a private army to stop whatever lunatics are around in 100 years taking us over.

Private health insurance for those who can afford it.

meghatronic · 11 Jul 2009 at 20:44

Missing.String said:
Private health insurance for those who can afford it.

That doesn't really detract from his point.

cheets64 · 11 Jul 2009 at 20:46

The Russians couldn't defeat them, no way we can unless we send over a lot of troops/ammo and kit.

^^Gord^^ · 11 Jul 2009 at 20:57

Missing.String said:
Private health insurance for those who can afford it.

The NHS costs about £1700 per person. Private health insurance is a lot less than that per person.

fadetoblack · 11 Jul 2009 at 21:31

^^Gord^^ said:
The NHS costs about £1700 per person. Private health insurance is a lot less than that per person.

Correct mate a lot of people on here are so anti armed forces. Maybe they should stop being muppets all the time and start backing are brave armed forces. Anyway back on money subject how much do the gov waste on the chavs who do not want to work? ?

Missing.String · 11 Jul 2009 at 21:34

fadetoblack said:
Correct mate a lot of people on here are so anti armed forces. Maybe they should stop being muppets all the time and start backing are brave armed forces.

I wouldn't consider myself anti-armed forces; we just need to fix our own problems before we start running halfway across the world and allegedly "fixing" things.

fadetoblack · 11 Jul 2009 at 21:43

Missing.String said:
I wouldn't consider myself anti-armed forces; we just need to fix our own problems before we start running halfway across the world and allegedly "fixing" things.

Tube bombings, drugs coming from afgan not really are problem

durruti · 11 Jul 2009 at 21:46

fadetoblack said:
Correct mate a lot of people on here are so anti armed forces. Maybe they should stop being muppets all the time and start backing are brave armed forces. Anyway back on money subject how much do the gov waste on the chavs who do not want to work? ?

I think no one is condemning the soldiers themselves, but the cause behind it and the wests foreign policy.

Missing.String · 11 Jul 2009 at 21:47

fadetoblack said:
Tube bombings, drugs coming from afgan not really are problem

Drugs are hardly the most threatening thing to society, and I'm sure there's plenty more sources of them out there. And the bombings, yeah, some civilians died. I bet a lot more have died in Afghanistan.

EDIT: Good post above.

slambo69 · 11 Jul 2009 at 21:49

Missing.String said:
Drugs are hardly the most threatening thing to society, and I'm sure there's plenty more sources of them out there. And the bombings, yeah, some civilians died. I bet a lot more have died in Afghanistan.

EDIT: Good post above.

Yes, but twhat do they spend the drugs money on? much of the money would go on things that would harm us.

fadetoblack · 11 Jul 2009 at 22:07

Drugs = money = weapons = death

yer so not really a problem is it missing string?
How many afgans are killed by the ragheads? ( teachers , lawyers , police ,)

Chimerical · 11 Jul 2009 at 22:10

fadetoblack said:
Tube bombings, drugs coming from afgan not really are problem

I thought the 7/7 bombings were because of our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, no?

fadetoblack said:
Drugs = money = weapons = death

yer so not really a problem is it missing string?
How many afgans are killed by the ragheads? ( teachers , lawyers , police ,)

Drugs aren't a reason to invade a country and you know it, otherwise we'd be in Columbia right now.

Missing.String · 11 Jul 2009 at 22:15

fadetoblack said:
Drugs = money = weapons = death

yer so not really a problem is it missing string?
How many afgans are killed by the ragheads? ( teachers , lawyers , police ,)

any industry whatsoever = money = weapons = death

In case you haven't noticed, we sell stuff and buy weapons to kill people too.

^^Gord^^ · 11 Jul 2009 at 22:25

Missing.String said:
Drugs are hardly the most threatening thing to society, and I'm sure there's plenty more sources of them out there. And the bombings, yeah, some civilians died. I bet a lot more have died in Afghanistan.

EDIT: Good post above.

We're not talking class C drugs here. 90% of the world's heroin comes from Afghanistan and I think it's fair to say that most heroin addicts will be funding their habbit with crime.

Having said that, the forces in Afghanistan aren't stopping the growing or harvest of the poppy. It's the only income for many. Stop them being able to feed their families and you force them to join the Taliban.

The idea is to get a stable country first and then get the farmers growing other product.

More dead in Afghanistan than from Heroin worldwide? Maybe. Would be interested to see figures on that.

Missing.String said:
I wouldn't consider myself anti-armed forces; we just need to fix our own problems before we start running halfway across the world and allegedly "fixing" things.

Then you should be aiming your comments at Labour and not at the good people of our armed services.

durruti · 11 Jul 2009 at 22:27

fadetoblack said:
Tube bombings, drugs coming from afgan not really are problem

Ye, so true, because one bombing from a dissident faction within a foreign country equals the invasion of an entire country, just like Ireland ey? Just like Nicaragua did to the US ey? As far as i know, we have increased the production of drugs in Afghanistan.

edit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7201085.stm

Missing.String · 11 Jul 2009 at 22:33

^^Gord^^ said:
Then you should be aiming your comments at Labour and not at the good people of our armed services.

I'm sorry if that's how I've made myself appear; I hold nothing against these people. I'm all for blaming the decision makers and not the people who were merely following orders (though perhaps a greater degree of independent thought could be applied, meh).

moremoney · 11 Jul 2009 at 22:35

^^Gord^^ said:
The defence spending has been cut as far as it can and I think the NHS is already funded well.

The defence budget is about £33bn and the NHS about £103bn.

They don't need more money, they need to be more effecient!

This.

moremoney · 11 Jul 2009 at 22:37

Missing.String said:
I'm sorry if that's how I've made myself appear; I hold nothing against these people. I'm all for blaming the decision makers and not the people who were merely following orders (though perhaps a greater degree of independent thought could be applied, meh).

What good is independant thought to somone in the forces?

They can't take independant action.

^^Gord^^ · 11 Jul 2009 at 22:37

durruti said:
Ye, so true, because one bombing from a dissident faction within a foreign country equals the invasion of an entire country, just like Ireland ey? Just like Nicaragua did to the US ey? As far as i know, we have increased the production of drugs in Afghanistan.

edit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7201085.stm

The July 7th bombings happened in 2005 and the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. It's fairly obvious that the bombings didn't have anything to do with the decision to invade.

The invasion was about denying a safe haven to al-Qaeda.