You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Listen to the Dan snow podcast up there, implies that Ghani never stood a chance as he was the wrong guy for the job.
Thousands of years ago China has already connected all the rivers from that region to to Shanghai.
Really?
The Chinese ambassador was quoted saying that the transfer of power to the Taliban was less bloody than the transfer of power in Washington DC
Oof.
Wonder if there ever is going to be any any audit on any senior gov officials when they land in their chosen place of exile? That has by pure random chance, such a welcoming policy towards their counterparts from around the world.
Slightly related. I used to work with a Vietnamese American guy. Nice bloke, very American, life revolved around Work and Church.
He was 14 when Saigon fell. One of his older brothers was a helicopter pilot. His brother took a helicopter, picked up as much of his family as he could and flew to a US aircraft carrier. They all ended up in the US and became citizens.
His uncle was in the army, stayed behind and was sent to a re-education camp. My friend said "sent to a re-education camp to die". He survived.
It's now more than 30 years later. His daughter has been back to Vietnam as part of her degree. Vietnam is now thriving.
Hopefully it won't take another 30 years for Afghanistan.
I don't think this has been shared before, but
"This Is What Winning Looks Like" is a disturbing new documentary about the ineptitude, drug abuse, sexual misconduct, and corruption of the Afghan security forces as well as the reduced role of US Marines due to the troop withdrawal.
It's 8 years old, but it doesn't look like things got much better since it was recorded.
It’s now more than 30 years later. His daughter has been back to Vietnam as part of her degree. Vietnam is now thriving.
Hopefully it won’t take another 30 years for Afghanistan.
Can't see the same happening in Afghanistan by any stretch.
Good video from a US soldier's point of view. The narrator is trying not to cry all the way through.
The Tory press this morning:
https://twitter.com/BrexitClock/status/1428112234430013444?s=20
Edit: @kelvin - I just added in that Mail one as I'd only just seen it. But these are usually Tory cheerleaders. On Radio 4 just now a Tory MP used the term 'asleep at the wheel' about Raab and Johnson too
Even the Mail goes in on Raab (Johnson gets a free pass though, perhaps he’s just expected by them to be on Holiday whenever the PM role gets heavy).
https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1428105160920866824?s=21
https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1428245637783592962?s=21
Yet another minister exposed as being completely unfit for the office they inexplicably hold. Now the hallmark of this government.
Its being reported from Kabul on radio 4 that it's too late now to get these people anywhere near the airport to get them out of Afghanistan. So it's safe to presume that through his laziness and incompetence Raab has just effectively signed their death warrants. Senior military people had been pleading to get them out for weeks now
What a shower of ****s this lot really are. And why would anyone in their right mind ally themselves with this country after this debacle, watching these people abandoned to their fate
The weak puppetry of the UK government has been used to support a failed US mission to once again introduce western philosophy in world far away from its own arrogance of enforcement. We have been used for our troops and finances, and dismissed once the failure has occurred with our politicians yet again exposed for the greed they take from their positions and the inability to show any ability to live up to the job description.
Our “leaders” are nothing more than greedy incompetent employees of the state that cannot be counted upon for anything other than bumbling badly between responses to media headlines.
once the failure has occurred
The invasion of Afghanistan had nothing to do with providing education for girls or democracy for the people, I'm surprised how many people think it was.
Obviously the plight of women and the lack of democracy under Taliban rule was used extensively as an excuse by people such as Tony Blair.
But if the need for societal changes was the driving motivation for an invasion which cost billions of pounds, hundreds of UK lives, and tens of thousands of Afghan lives, the question which needs to be asked is why was Afghanistan almost uniquely singled out?
The lack of democracy in Saudi Arabia or the appalling lack of educational opportunities for girls in sub-Saharan Africa has not resulted in Brits laying down their lives or UK taxpayers pumping billions.
Afghanistan does represent a Western failure, but only because in the post-Soviet world the invasion was supposed to assert the power of US global dominance.
What it has in fact done is proved is that despite fighting its longest ever war, in one of the poorest countries on earth, helped by many of the most advanced nations in the world, the United States is limited in its global ambitions.
The military attack and invasion of Iran by the US now looks less likely than ever before. I have no doubt that the situation would be drastically different if the US had had resounding successes in attacking and invading Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.
It is about US wealth and access to natural resources, not fighting poverty and illiteracy.
We invaded Afghanistan because that was where Al Queda training bases were?
I see the Times and the Telegraph are making Biden the bad guy and ignoring our own failures.
A better headline would have been
"WE SHALL FIGHT THEM FROM THE BEACHES"
That vice documentary was astonishing, watching it you have to constantly remind yourself that it was made 8 years ago, not 8 weeks ago.
It is about US wealth and access to natural resources, not fighting poverty and illiteracy.
It's certainly not about poverty and illiteracy, but the Afghan occupation is one of the few major wars that wasn't about natural resources. Afghanistan has some mineral assets but nothing spectacular or easy to access, and the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline could have been built with the Taliban were it necessary or practical, but it wasn't.
It is about US wealth and access to natural resources
What natural resources has the US extracted from Afghanistan?
We invaded Afghanistan because that was where Al Queda training bases were?
We invaded Afghanistan because it was seen as the poorest and weakest country in the link. Invading Saudi Arabia a friend and ally would have made no sense.
The Saudis who carried out 9/11 did not need to use the training camps built by the United States in Afghanistan to learn how to fly large civilian aircrafts, or to purchase Stanley knives, the only tools used in the Twin Towers attack.
"Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated."
George Bush
The War on Terror was supposed to continue indefinitely, only the unexpected military setbacks has changed its aims.
The invasion of Afghanistan had nothing to do with providing education for girls or democracy for the people, I’m surprised how many people think it was.
Nothing to do with it, at all? Would your world-weary cynicism allow you to accept that to a degree these things were in fact achieved though? That people, including women, were given a free vote to elect their government, and that girls were provided with education in large numbers that had been denied to them before
And that surely it was an infinitely preferable outcome than living under a medieval barbarism enforced by a brutal death cult?
What natural resources has the US extracted from Afghanistan?
Are you really asking that question Nick?
Obviously Afghanistan was chosen as the launch for the War on Terror not because of its natural resources (it has plenty btw) but because it was seen as incredibly weak.
Going straight for Iran would have been ridiculous, and all the more so in hindsight.
Afghanistan has an estimated $1-3 trillion of untapped mineral reserves…including copper/lithium etc etc. Hardly insignificant??
Are you really asking that question Nick?
Yes, sorry. I'm only asking as while I'm pretty sure the occupation has enriched the US Technology/military/industrial concerns to the tune of millions (perhaps billions) of dollars but a quick google has thrown up lots and lots of stories (from places like Al-Jeezera, so hardly toe-ing the US media line) about why Afghanistan's mineral wealth isn't being extracted, and I can't find any stories suggesting the US firms are extracting it anywhere in Afghanistan.
so yeah, happy to be educated
Hardly insignificant??
Yeah but it was never about Afghanistan's natural resources. It was about this :
Edit : btw Iraq was a secular country with very highly educated women, so the aims of the War on Terror were obviously changed to suit the circumstances.
And the poverty caused, including the deaths of countless children, was directly linked to the crippling US led sanctions against Iraq.
It's just daft to suggest that these wars which have caused hundreds of thousands of death were motivated by humanitarian concerns.
We invaded Afghanistan because it was seen as the poorest and weakest country in the link. Invading Saudi Arabia a friend and ally would have made no sense.
Osama bin Laden was in Afghanistan as a guest of the Taliban. He wasn't in Saudi Arabian because he would have been arrested and probably executed. The original reason for invading was to destroy Al Qaeda, which required kicking out the Taliban. The humanitarian stuff came later, once it became obvious that the Taliban would just take over again as soon as foreign troops left.
Osama bin Laden was in Afghanistan as a guest of the Taliban.
Well he went to Afghanistan on a mission for the United States. It all went horribly wrong. As is often the case when you interfere with the internal affairs of another country.
But Osama bin Laden didn't train anyone on how to fly a plane, nor did he supply anyone with Stanley knives, as far as I'm aware.
Edit : Osama bin Laden was sheltering in ****stan, ****stan created the Taliban, ****stan has not even been threatened with attack and invasion from the United States.
It's probably best to avoid looking at the excuses and spend more time looking at the reasons.
Given that it is said that the Taliban we're allegedly prepared to give up Al-Qaida if it meant not being invaded it can't be said that it was just about removing Bin Laden. I've mentioned mission creep before but the kernel of the idea that two birds could be killed with one stone was seeded from the very beginning.
If you're going to deny there was a strong element of humanitarianism then go and tell that to one of the millions of Afghan women who have received an education, found employment or enjoyed a modicum of human rights. You could also ask that question of a fair few soldiers that spent time out there as well.
Yet another minister exposed as being completely unfit for the office they inexplicably hold.
You would think that Tony Blair would have something to say on the matter, he is after all enormously generous when it comes to giving his opinions, and advice, on a whole range of important issues, from his opinion of Jeremy Corbyn to the handling of the pandemic.
How come his silence on the crisis in Afghanistan? Is it an issue which doesn't really interest him? Or is he merely spending a lot of time thinking about it first, perhaps he's on holiday?
Edit : Osama bin Laden was sheltering in ****stan, ****stan created the Taliban, ****stan has not even been threatened with attack and invasion from the United States.
I can't for the life of me think why the nuclear armed power ****stan wasn't threatened with attack from the US. Can you?
If you’re going to deny there was a strong element of humanitarianism then go and tell that to one of the millions of Afghan women who have received an education, found employment or enjoyed a modicum of human rights.
Don't be daft. It can't possibly be acknowledged that the US, or by extension the UK under Blair could ever do anything that wasn't corrupt, exploitative, self-serving and evil
Everyone knows that
Plenty of senior bods in the US military leave their roles and take up high ranking positions in the weapons manufacturing firms solely to lobby the Gov into creating wars that keep them in business. No matter which way the US Administration turn, they're confronted with people lecturing them on the need to invest in defence/weapons/tech more and more as well as deploy it.
Once the dust has settled over Afghanistan, the US will find someone else to bully.
Getting back to the point in question (ie: NOT TONY ****ING BLAIR AGAIN!), they were interviewing a regional expert on five live this morning. He was saying that initial reports coming in from around Afghanistan would, somewhat unsurprisingly, completely contradict the slick new PR-friendly Taliban presented at their press conference the other day
The initial reports are saying that they are occupying places in an even more brutal manner than in the 90's. The main difference is that now they're using rape as an active tactic, with girls as young as 12 being dragged out of houses. Apparently despite treating women as nothing more than property last time around, they weren't systematically doing this. The younger Taliban fighters now are as a new weapon of war and occupation. I'm uncertain as to which bit of Islamic theology says that this is ok?
Somewhat incredibly, it now looks like being female in Afghanistan might be even worse than it was 20 years ago. Quite some benchmark. An utterly depressing one.
Edit : Osama bin Laden was sheltering in ****stan
Eventually. In 1996 he was being kicked out of Sudan and chose to relocate to Jalalabad in Afghanistan under the "protection" of Mullah Omar
nuclear armed power ****stan
As far as I am aware ****stan's nuclear weapons are not deployable, they are in bits in various locations, the strategy being that they could be deployed if tensions arose and a serious threat started to appear. I think it was an international brokered agreement, but things might have changed.
But yes good point pointing out that the most important consideration is how weak a country is, and why of course Iran should get its arse in gear and develop WMDs.
As far as I am aware ****stan’s nuclear weapons are not deployable
It'd be something of a high risk strategy to find out though, wouldn't it?
and why of course Iran should get its arse in gear and develop WMDs
They're doing their best. Bless 'em
Getting back to the point in question (ie: NOT TONY ****ING BLAIR AGAIN!), they were interviewing a regional expert on five live this morning.
Isn't Tony Blair a regional expert?
The media are hugely interested in Tony Blair's musings on current topical issues these days.
I'm certainly interested in what he's got to say, I can't be the only one.
Perhaps he's on holiday.
It’d be something of a high risk strategy to find out though, wouldn’t it?
I think you'll find that international agreements concerning nuclear proliferation are subject to international inspections.
We can construct out own narratives as to how intentions and actions over the last 20, 40 or 100 years factor into this but the moment Afghanistan finds itself in is due to a decision to negotiate for a withdrawal unconditionally. (i.e. not a negotiation at all, just surrendering)
This is on Trump, Biden and our own PM. The UK has never looked weaker on the world stage. Both the present and the previous US administrations have shown contempt for the UK and Johnston has played the role of poodle to perfection,
I think you’ll find that international agreements concerning nuclear proliferation are subject to international inspections.
Oh... erm... ok. Just remind when was the last time Israel had theirs inspected?
I'm sure everyone else rigidly adheres to those protocols equally as vigorously
This is on Trump, Biden and our own PM.
It's mostly on Bush.
I think you’ll find that international agreements concerning nuclear proliferation are subject to international inspections.
Problem there is you need to agree to those international agreements.
Which ****stan, Israel and India never have.
North Korea did but then binned it.
Even for those countries signed up the information provided is generally more about the the manufacturing of the weapons rather than the deployment of them. I am pretty certain for example the US dont list where all their weapons are and in what state since that would make them vulnerable to a first strike. UK you can take a reasonable guess minus the deployed sub.
"It’s mostly on Bush."
That's too simple an answer. Blaming Bush does not exonerate those who have made dreadfull decisions and lied profusely since Dubya departed, in particular those who have failed to negotiate a withdrawal and instead chosen to surrender.
The mess we're in right now is the mess we're in right now.
Given that it is said that the Taliban we’re allegedly prepared to give up Al-Qaida if it meant not being invaded it can’t be said that it was just about removing Bin Laden.
This was widely reported at the time. The Taliban "offer" to extradite Bin Laden was heavily conditional and you'd have to be silly to accept it (not least because it would have required a whole new legal regime to be created while a war was on).
It was not definitely not just about Bin Laden - again, no-one ever said it was at the time. It was (at least partially) about destroying Al Qaeda as a force and about preventing Afghanistan becoming a platform for future terrorist attacks.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5
https://h2o.law.harvard.edu/text_blocks/8398
when was the last time Israel had theirs inspected?
Israel in the only country which has a "nuclear deterrent" based on not admitting to having nuclear weapons, all other countries openly flaunt their nuclear capabilities.
Obviously it is too ridiculous for Israel to deny having them. It is widely accepted that Israel's nuclear weapons exist as a weapon of last resort rather as a deterrent. It's the only country in the world to appear to have that policy.
Whilst ****stan is not signature to nuclear non-proliferation treaties it does have nuclear agreements with the United States, and it serves US interests, otherwise it would be subject to crippling US sanctions.
During the Bush administration, the United States spent as much as $100 million on a highly classified program to help secure the country’s nuclear arsenal, helping with physical security and the training of ****stani security personnel. Those efforts continued in the Obama years, with State Department, Energy Department and intelligence officials meeting secretly, in locales around the world, with senior ****stani officials from the Strategic Plans Division, which controls the arsenal.
The problem with Afghanistan is it's stuck in the dark ages. So when you go in and arm and half arse train one side to fight the other, and pretend it's some kinda goodies and baddies conflict. You are gubbed before you start.
Afghanistan needs infrastructure, jobs, industry, education and literacy, if you wanted to build a nation.
Can we really say the latter was prioritised over the former?
Blaming Bush does not exonerate those who have made dreadfull decisions and lied profusely since Dubya departed, in particular those who have failed to negotiate a withdrawal and instead chosen to surrender.
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1428338919800819721
Anyhow, as i've said it before, but while we're all pontificating about the rights and wrongs of whatever, the country is probably going to descend in to some serious humanitarian crisis. Cause the money has dried up(I'd imagine inflation has already begun). Which means food will dry up.
If we just leave them to it here. It will also be shameful.
like it or not, governments need to engage with the taliban.
You could do a lot worse than read this blog by Adam Curtis on some of the intervention by the US in the 20th Century
It appears it true that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce.
thols2 if only that wasn't true of the internet 😂
Rory Stewart speaking with expertise and authority, as he always does.
The best Prime Minister we will never have (if you can forgive the fact that he is still a Tory)
https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1428320935464120328?s=20
the Raab defense.... it's Ok to be an Idle incompetent lazy **** wit as it would have made no difference anyway.
No, it’s okay to be that way because his boss is publicly and blatantly the same, but still has huge support from the electorate.
They're sociopaths, the pair of them.
The idea that you could potentially save the lives of desperate people who have put themselves in danger to help this country and to then think "nah... I can't be arsed with that. I think I'll just have another cocktail"
And what does it say about the nature of this bunch of shysters that they thought the answer to this was to get in their photographer/propagandist and blatantly stage a photoshoot to try and counter things, days after the event. Like a sort of comedic, incompetent North Korea...
Look at me. I'm on the phone, being really important and doing really important stuff...
What a ****!
Kelvin nails it. It doesn’t matter what Lammy, May, Starmer or the rest of the house says, because the electorate supports the “entitled arch clown”.
The UK government and perhaps our country itself is nothing but the Worlds circus; you come inside to be amazed at the Lion Tamers and skilled acrobats you’ve heard about only to find yourself laughing at the clowns and clapping sea lions.
So now it seems that Zac Goldsmith never made the call that Raab couldn't be arsed to do himself. Maybe he was on holiday too, like the rest of the ****ers.
^
According to what I read he did try to set up the call, but the Afghan minister wouldn't take it because it wasn't at his level. Which sounds bad on his part but part of working in the foreign office is understanding the political subtleties of rank and importance. So in the end there was no call.
"We've got a major incident unfolding in your country concerning our citizens, which we need you to sort for us. I'll get one of my minions to call you because I'm 'too busy' on this sun lounger'
Nice flag Raab has there. That makes it all ok.
Only the one though? And no picture of the queen? Thats almost treasonous
they thought the answer to this was to get in their photographer/propagandist and blatantly stage a photoshoot to try and counter things, days after the event. Like a sort of comedic, incompetent North Korea…
Worked last time...
But the most important element of that particular photo isn't Little Gavin/Frank Spencer doing his best serious face, it's the whip (subtle!) and the conspicuously placed 'Book of Indiscretions' in the foreground, which given the proclivities of Tory MP's contains god only knows what.
Dom hasn't got one of those
Adam Curtis film on the subject, as described by someone above...
I think 'The Power of Nightmares' would probably be worth a timely revisit too
Rory Stewart looking genuinely pissed off, unlike most of the front bench who just seem to want to look upset.
Just read some of that excellent Adam Curtis blog posted previously, fascinating stuff - will check out Bitter Lake, thanks for sharing.
Bitter Lake is good but by God it's full of crap too. It's less documentary and more A level art project.
May have already been mentioned, but a huge amount of the US ‘reconstruction’ money went to the like of Halliburton / KBR and the like and straight back to the pockets of US contractors. Even the UK was paying millions to security contractors and reconstruction - people were being paid £1,000/day. I met a serving Afghan Army officer - he would get suitcases of $$ every month to pay for wages, fuel and ammunition - it was just a big gravy train and when the money stopped, they all went home.
To be fair I would want at least £1k a day to work there
Bitter Lake is good but by God it’s full of crap too. It’s less documentary and more A level art project.
Yep its about an hour too long
Handily someone had done an abridged version and stuck it on youtube
Meta EDIT, the edit just removes sections without dialogue, so no moody shots of Blackhawks landing through smoke clouds and less Nine Inch Nails
Bitter Lake is good but by God it’s full of crap too. It’s less documentary and more A level art project.
Alastair Campbell getting eaten alive by Zarah Sultana on twitter.
Ian Dunt tying himself in contradictory knots.
Centre generally getting themselves in a mess for being on the wrong side of most arguments.
Really? Fascinating.
Cheers for keeping us all updated on the really important, relevant stuff
Do we know what Jeremy Corbyn thinks?
less Nine Inch Nails
So, ruined then. I always enjoy Curtis’ music choices. They elevate the documentaries significantly, for me.
Will the Mail ever treat Johnson this way? Plenty of quotes from his time at the FCO along these lines if they care to stop treating him as untouchable…
https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1428619710707474433?s=21
the Afghan minister wouldn’t take it because it wasn’t at his level
TBF I expect he might have had one or two other things in his diary that week
Raab can swim in a pïss ditch for all I care, but this phone call business is a side show. It's the pretext upon which Raab (the keeper of the "book of indiscretions") can be framed as the scapegoat while his sociopath boss stays in office.