Bolitics The New Condem Government

[Richard]

Ahhh so hope rather than expectation.

[avfc89]

Do you believe this kind of horrendous behaviour will be eradicated?

Yes. With enough support and training, the ANA and ANP will hopefully be in a position to monopolise violence- the corner stone of any successful state.

I'm skeptical, I think we are causing more resentment in these places which will give the Taliban more support.

[avfc89]

Ahhh so hope rather than expectation.

Yes, but I don't want us there or agree with the war. Do you agree with the spending cuts?

[Awol]

I think there's more profound reasons why we're in this Country.

The reason we went into Afghanistan in 2001 was to attack the AQ network and assist in toppling the Taliban.

The reason we moved south to Helmand in 2006and seriously increased the size of our presence was to curry favour and influence in Washington and Brussels and give us a reason to quit Iraq. There is, sadly, nothing more profound about it than that.

[Awol]

I think we are causing more resentment in these places which will give the Taliban more support.

The vast majority of Afghans do not support the Taliban but they do fear them. Best not to confuse the two if you want to get your analysis straight, mate.

[avfc89]

I think there's more profound reasons why we're in this Country.

The reason we went into Afghanistan in 2001 was to attack the AQ network and assist in toppling the Taliban.

The reason we moved south to Helmand in 2006and seriously increased the size of our presence was to curry favour and influence in Washington and Brussels and give us a reason to quit Iraq. There is, sadly, nothing more profound about it than that.

You aren't going to beat the Taliban through warfare, it's going to take time, a lot of time.

[avfc89]

I think we are causing more resentment in these places which will give the Taliban more support.

The vast majority of Afghans do not support the Taliban but they do fear them. Best not to confuse the two if you want to get your analysis straight, mate.

There is still support for the Taliban, believe me.

[drat01]

Even I don't get those sort of figures

well of course you wouldn't after all they made your argument look rather silly ..and false

so let's see what else we can hide

indeed ... on an unrelated matter what ever did happen to Jo Moore author of that shameful memo on Sept 12th

now what was the word that you like to use rather a lot ...... Hypocrisy

No you didn't Tony - you quote some massive figure for Gvmt - the point I made earlier was Downing Street - i.e. supporting Cameron - a massive difference. Not my fault if you don't read the post.

See you did not read the post at all and went off trying to point score - and failing massively. The issue is still there, Cameron has more SA's and considering the outrage that you and the fellow Tory hordes made out of people like Campbell, the hypocrisy is there as said before like a shining beacon. The rule of VT, is seemingly now all of the outrage and upset that was spouted before can be swept under the carpet now that Cameron is in power and seemingly following the same, if not more excessive policies.

Yes Jo Moore did that, and typified what is wrong in politics. Are you now saying that is OK? Or again are you showing the hypocrisy that is oozing out of the ConDem's?

The simple facts are that all of the rubbish spouted before when the Tory party and their friends in the media is being shown up to be lies and bollox. But as said a lot of politicians are born liars it seems, and despite their smug silliness the truth eventually comes out and it just depends how much they have feathered their own nests both in real terms and in the minds of the people.

It's a real shame because nothing is changing and politics is now being shown to be rotten to the core.

[Awol]

I think there's more profound reasons why we're in this Country.

The reason we went into Afghanistan in 2001 was to attack the AQ network and assist in toppling the Taliban.

The reason we moved south to Helmand in 2006 and seriously increased the size of our presence was to curry favour and influence in Washington and Brussels and give us a reason to quit Iraq. There is, sadly, nothing more profound about it than that.

You aren't going to beat the Taliban through warfare, it's going to take time, a lot of time.

I didn't say we were and don't believe we will. I was replying to your comment that there were more profound reasons for being in Afghan with an explaination of why we are actually there.

The new government are viewing this mess now in the context of our national interest rather than the international willy waving favoured by Mr Blair. Fox was very candid - probably too candid - on his recent visit to Kabul and although Hague tried to row back later, the cat was out of the bag in terms of what the government really think.

We are not going to be cosying up to the Americans quite so blindly in future unless it is in our direct interest to do so (imo), particularly given Barry O's barely veiled hostility to anything British.

[Ads]

We are not going to be cosying up to the Americans quite so blindly in future unless it is in our direct interest to do so (imo), particularly given Barry O's barely veiled hostility to anything British.

Damn right Awol. When we consider Obama’s stance on British interests, like the Falklands, we shouldn’t be.

[drat01]

We are not going to be cosying up to the Americans quite so blindly in future unless it is in our direct interest to do so (imo), particularly given Barry O's barely veiled hostility to anything British.

Strange comment Jon. Obama's big push at the moment is with a very big problem they have and the BP Oil leak, nothing to do with the forces. Noticeable that Cameron is hiding from that issue completely and preferring to grab newspaper headlines and pictures jogging with troops. Maybe these PR SA's he has paid - oops we are paying for - have advised him to do that? The BP is significant for many reasons, the ecological issue, the financial one etc. Ducking and diving the issue is not good leadership and a visit to Afghanistan could have easily been put back or delegated.

The right wing media are not happy with Cameron, nor seemingly are the far right of his old part of the party. Even his newest best chum Clegg has joined the debate.

[Ads]

Cameron has said he will aid in any way possible today.

Obama calling BP British Petroleum, when they changed their name to BP in 2001, when they have 30,000 US employees and 40% of the share capital is owned by US institutions doesn’t help anybody.

Honestly Drat, if you keep up your level of daily outrage you’ll end up with a stomach ulcer before the Summers finished!

[drat01]

What are you talking about?

The media is full still of anti-Cameron statements about the way he is handling, or not as the case may be. The fact that his own party members and allies in the media are stating this, is damning and I appreciate with your stance on the Tory party that must irk somewhat, but the facts are there. Personally I don;t care two shits if his own party shows him up, because it only confirms what many say about the man that he has not got a clue. i suspect we will see a U turn from him in a very short time, that is his style after all said and done

Calling BP, British Petroleum - oh dear we are clutching at big straws here to try and prove that Obama is some sort of anti-British despot aren't we?

Daily Outrage - :-) - just loving the hypocrisy from certain VT'ers and the media now that the new ConDem lot are showing themselves to be basically following all the same rules as the last Gvmt.

[tonyh29]

Not my fault if you don't read the post.

Shhhhh Snowy think's he is the chosen one

Honestly Drat, if you keep up your level of daily outrage you’ll end up with a stomach ulcer before the Summers finished!

at this rate i'd say before it begins ..poxy weather

[drat01]

at this rate i'd say before it begins ..poxy weather

Sunny up North :-)

[Awol]

We are not going to be cosying up to the Americans quite so blindly in future unless it is in our direct interest to do so (imo), particularly given Barry O's barely veiled hostility to anything British.

Strange comment Jon.

Not really. We've had his frankly disgraceful antics of refusing to back us over the Falklands when the Argies started sounding off recently which is unbelieveable given our support for them in Iraq and Afghanistan, followed as Ad's has said by his resurection of "British Petroleum" in order to try and give xenophobic rednecks something to focus their anger on.

No mention from him that Transocean the rig operator is American, the oil services provider is Halliburton (American) and the blowout-preventer manufacturer - that failed and caused the spill - is Cameron International(American). Much easier to blame those dastardly **** at "British Petroleum". Also worth noting that all personnel working in the Gulf of Mexico have to be American citizens and all personnel employed by BP in the US are also American citizens.

Noticeable that Cameron is hiding from that issue completely and preferring to grab newspaper headlines and pictures jogging with troops.

It's a commercial matter and not the responsibility of the British Government, although it may soon be given that Obama's vicious rhetoric in the US media including an announcement that they will try to prevent BP paying it's dividends is destroying the income for millions of private pensions in Britain. One pound in every seven in UK pension pots comes from BP dividends and his constant near hysterical attacks have wiped half of the companies value on the stock exchange.

Obama is no friend of this country and make no mistake about it.

visit to Afghanistan could have easily been put back or delegated.

On what basis?

[Ads]

Calling BP, British Petroleum - oh dear we are clutching at big straws here to try and prove that Obama is some sort of anti-British despot aren't we?

Daily Outrage - :-) - just loving the hypocrisy from certain VT'ers and the media now that the new ConDem lot are showing themselves to be basically following all the same rules as the last Gvmt.

Why is he calling BP by an old name, if not to emphasise "British?" I couple this with his stance over the Falklands and see Obama as being no lover of Britain. I also fail to see what A British Government can really do about an American problem.

You throw the word hypocrisy around so often that its lost all meaning.

[drat01]

Jon, what Obama said on the Falklands recently what fair considering that as the president of the USA he has also a right of duty to protect his country's interests with South American countries. You talk previously about how you though Blair blindly followed the US and condemn it, but then you expect Obama to do likewise with the UK. You say no mention of the other country interests in the whole BP saga, but again is that true? The Obama gvmt are seemingly talking with all parties who are involved in this. The facts are that BP, which the UK has a massive investment in are at fault here and rightly so that is being discussed.

You say its a commercial matter and no interest to the UK gvmt, but that is not true. Because as you say BP is a large financial influencer in many parts of the UK economy and at this time we are supposed to "be in this together" - or again is this something that ConDem's can pick and chose where to apply?

As for his trip to Afghanistan, was it necessary? What would have the impact been if he had said, I am staying here to try and broker a solution to the BP issue and if we have to send anyone to Afghanistan maybe Clegg or Ashdown can go. The fact that publicity was seemingly behind some of the media reporting shows the motives out.

Bottom line is that Cameron is floundering on this one. No one knows what is happening, there are conflicting stories coming from the ConDem's, their biggest supporters are questioning what is happening and Cameron in particular. Osborne is like a little boy lost and interestingly people like Johnson making waves. Doesn't exactly fill you with confidence given that we may well face bigger issues in the coming months

[Ads]

Bottom line is that Cameron is floundering on this one. No one knows what is happening, there are conflicting stories coming from the ConDem's, their biggest supporters are questioning what is happening and Cameron in particular. Osborne is like a little boy lost and interestingly people like Johnson making waves. Doesn't exactly fill you with confidence given that we may well face bigger issues in the coming months

What is he supposed to do?

Obama is the guy that has talked the BP shares down, threatening US pensions. How is Cameron supposed to stabilise it? Why shouldn’t he have gone to Afghanistan?

[drat01]

Calling BP, British Petroleum - oh dear we are clutching at big straws here to try and prove that Obama is some sort of anti-British despot aren't we?

Daily Outrage - :-) - just loving the hypocrisy from certain VT'ers and the media now that the new ConDem lot are showing themselves to be basically following all the same rules as the last Gvmt.

Why is he calling BP by an old name, if not to emphasise "British?" I couple this with his stance over the Falklands and see Obama as being no lover of Britain. I also fail to see what A British Government can really do about an American problem.

You throw the word hypocrisy around so often that its lost all meaning.

. So what he used the word British? I bet if you asked most of the UK population what the B in BP stood for they would do the same. Do all of these people have anti-British feeling?

The Falklands thing is again hypocrisy - and yes it is a fair word. As said you and many Tory followers often accuse Blair of blindly following the US stance but are seemingly happy to demand that Obama does likewise re the Falklands. Obama has stated that the US is neutral, a stance that Regan had in the days prior to the war if you remember, but of course he was a right wing President so subject to different rules maybe?

The UK Gvmt can do a lot to try and help - or is now your stance that we only try and help things that occur in the British Isles?