Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Real heroes: soldier refuses to return to Afghanistan Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diagoras)
    There is something unbecomming about the letter. I thought the soldiers were fighting Taliban, not the Afghan people. So if the soldier was impressed by Taliban's ''humour'', which I doubt they have, ''robustness'' built upon delusion, irrational ''determination'' to fight & ''unwillingness'' to change their unsound standpoints, and thus he decided not to fight them, it would have been something I could understand.
    I think he is talking about the Afghan people rather than the Taleban.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FiveFiveSix)
    Surely if you've been 'out there', the nation you're serving is, within reason, immaterial?
    Of course, I said it in jest because aeolus said you're never going to fight.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    He won't get paid when he is in jail will he??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    I think he is talking about the Afghan people rather than the Taleban.
    I understand that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hey...
    how about when the guy signed up for war he was lead to believe we were going in there to save the people, but when he touched down in foreign soil, realised we're in it for the money...
    did he agree to that as well?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Personally I believe it is his choice, he knows he will probably go to prison for this choice, and I am sure he knows he is letting his friends down, which probably hurts more than the prospect of prison.

    Short story he has made his choice and unfortunately for him this will lead to him going to prison.
    I'm a soldier and I know this is the way things must be.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    the armed forces are no place for people who don't wish to enforce the will of her majesty.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _Hayko)
    Hey...
    how about when the guy signed up for war he was lead to believe we were going in there to save the people, but when he touched down in foreign soil, realised we're in it for the money...
    did he agree to that as well?
    Oh yes because Afghanistan is so rich in raw materials :rolleyes:

    How do you expect Afghanistan to provide the UK with more money than the UK is spending by fighting in the country??

    Even Iraq was not for money. You could say it was for oil, but the UK would use that oil as fuel - so even that is not for money.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)

    Even Iraq was not for money. You could say it was for oil, but the UK would use that oil as fuel - so even that is not for money.

    Iraq was invaded for petrodollars, plain and simple.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by T=RC)
    the armed forces are no place for people who don't wish to enforce the will of her majesty.
    lol, good one. :rolleyes:

    (Original post by Neo Con)
    Of course, I said it in jest because aeolus said you're never going to fight.
    All this jesting is doing my head in :p:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    Iraq was invaded for petrodollars, plain and simple.
    Not really because that term was established to describe the result of OPEC countries selling their petroleum. Even though the US probably has an excellent deal with the Iraqi government for the price of Iraqi petroleum, the US is not technically earning any money from selling petroleum. There could also be an argument to say that the strategic value of having a source of fuel is more important to the US than the money the US is making from Petroleum, after all no country can touch the US economy - I am not saying that I agree with it.

    But whatever one thinks about Iraq, Afghanistan was for Al Qaeda plain and simple.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    Oh yes because Afghanistan is so rich in raw materials :rolleyes:

    How do you expect Afghanistan to provide the UK with more money than the UK is spending by fighting in the country??

    Even Iraq was not for money. You could say it was for oil, but the UK would use that oil as fuel - so even that is not for money.
    So our government is so dumb, no actually the word would be retarded, that they are willing to flush billions of pounds down the toilet without any plan to recoup a single penny? Yeah right :rolleyes:
    They have been sooo transparent with their motives and interests from day one that every single citizen of the UK has been able to make balanced judgement when voting for our current government...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    Not really because that term was established to describe the result of OPEC countries selling their petroleum. Even though the US probably has an excellent deal with the Iraqi government for the price of Iraqi petroleum, the US is not technically earning any money from selling petroleum. There could also be an argument to say that the strategic value of having a source of fuel is more important to the US than the money the US is making from Petroleum, after all no country can touch the US economy - I am not saying that I agree with it.

    But whatever one thinks about Iraq, Afghanistan was for Al Qaeda plain and simple.
    What i meant was that America invaded Iraq after Saddam began selling oil in Euros, it happened in Venezuela aswell, after which a threat was made against the life of Chavez. More recently Iran has been considering selling it's oil in Euros, hence aggressive posturing from the states. They would rather keep the dollar as the sole currency oil is traded in.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pads)
    That is so disrespectful to soldiers who have died out there that I am quite shocked you even said it!

    To be considered a hero you need to do something heroic. These soldiers are given the false title of hero for just being soldiers who are fighting a rag tag geurilla force.

    I guess if you call them heros it makes you feel good. However they are anything but heroes. Just stupid propaganda the slower members of our society can eat up (thats you).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If only the German/Austro-Hungarian/Finnish/Japanese/Italian soldiers did the same...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    What i meant was that America invaded Iraq after Saddam began selling oil in Euros, it happened in Venezuela aswell, after which a threat was made against the life of Chavez. More recently Iran has been considering selling it's oil in Euros, hence aggressive posturing from the states. They would rather keep the dollar as the sole currency oil is traded in.
    To be honest I bet the States would like to keep the Dollar as the dominant currency (but no matter what currency Iran, Iraq and Venezuela may choose to sell their petroleum in the Dollar is still the main global currency).

    I am not sure about the threat against Chavez's life, I could only find this article on the matter http://www.workers.org/world/2005/venezuela-0310/. Although the Stratfor article I read states convincingly that such claims have been used to strengthen Chavez's political hold. Anyway that is not the main point I am trying to send out, basically in Venezuela's case changing the currency to Euro would be a purely an anti-US political move because the US buys something like 90% of Venezuelan oil.

    To be honest I believe that the US is more concerned about Iran's nuclear threat than Iran's petrocurency. The US has had special forces soldiers operating in Iran for years, evidenced by the fact that Bush vetoed an Israeli attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities with the promise that the US would share information with Israel on Iran's nuclear program.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _Hayko)
    So our government is so dumb, no actually the word would be retarded, that they are willing to flush billions of pounds down the toilet without any plan to recoup a single penny? Yeah right :rolleyes:
    They have been sooo transparent with their motives and interests from day one that every single citizen of the UK has been able to make balanced judgement when voting for our current government...
    Ok Iraq I can see an argument, after all the First Gulf War was for oil, but Afghanistan? The only economic motive for going into Helmand would be to strengthen political ties with the United States, which would eventually lead to economic rewards as US companies have more exposure to the UK economy. But the fact the US and the UK have had such strong relations for the past 90 years would mean that any UK involvement in Helmand would only have marginal benefits, for example most major Banks and Law firms had already established offices in the UK before British soldiers moved into Helmand.

    In contrast the strategic benefits of defeating the Taliban, and more importantly capturing or killing Osama bin Laden are much more evident - deterring future terrorism through a show of force being just one benefit.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    There could also be an argument to say that the strategic value of having a source of fuel is more important to the US than the money the US is making from Petroleum, after all no country can touch the US economy - I am not saying that I agree with it..
    I would agree, the primary goal of the war was surely gaining control of the oil, the US don't really need it for themselves to use, as there are plenty of other sources on the market.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    Ok Iraq I can see an argument, after all the First Gulf War was for oil, but Afghanistan? The only economic motive for going into Helmand would be to strengthen political ties with the United States, which would eventually lead to economic rewards as US companies have more exposure to the UK economy. But the fact the US and the UK have had such strong relations for the past 90 years would mean that any UK involvement in Helmand would only have marginal benefits, for example most major Banks and Law firms had already established offices in the UK before British soldiers moved into Helmand.

    In contrast the strategic benefits of defeating the Taliban, and more importantly capturing or killing Osama bin Laden are much more evident - deterring future terrorism through a show of force being just one benefit.

    One word and its not oil...


    GAS.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheJudge)
    One word and its not oil...


    GAS.
    The US is the 4th largest gas producer in the world. I think that a more important reason than Gas would be for the USA to assert itself in Central Asia - particularly because Russia has tried to reassert its old control over the region.

    The number one goal of US foreign policy is to deter any future competitor super-power. The US probably still fears Russia and so the Afghanistan occupation could assert US dominance in the region - as well as to attempt to wipe out the largest terrorist threat to the US.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.