When we live in the UK with an ever deepening financial crisis should we as a nation continue to waste more money supporting the *war on terror* in Iraq and Afghanistan in particular.

If we cant get more countries from the UN to support the effort and as a direct result share the financial burden then I think that enough is enough. If Iraq didnt have the oil reserves then we would never have been there in the first place! Afghanistan is slightly more complex due to it being a country directly responsible for training and assisting terrorists and their compaigns against the west.

I would ,however, also reiterate that the troops who have been on various tours to these countries have in the main done us proud and none of the extremity of the predicament that we are in is down to them!!

<Edited for the poster, and so it'll make sense to first time readers!>

Edited by forum moderator 1_eye, at 10:42 Sun 23/03/08 (GMT)

When we live in the UK with an ever deepening financial crisis should we as a continue to waste more money supporting the *war on terror* in Iraq and Afghanistan in particular.

As a what?

Maybe asking for feedback would got you a response Grae.

Im not up on *war on terror* etc etc so no comment from me. Just posted cos loads have looked but not left a response.


~Paula~

Simple answer, no. Although we said no all them years ago..... I'll sit on the bench.

sorry "as a nation continue" I should have put in origial post, I retyped a large section and forgot to add nation back in!

War on terror? No such thing man!

Conspiracy lives amoungst this subject. Like the fact that Saddam Hussain USED to be allies with America.

My theory is: Americas main oil substance was/is the middle east. Middle east refused to sell to America, So George decided to take it. Fufilling the commands of his daddy.

I mean...why were owners of American oil firms invited to a meeting which would determine if they went to war with Iraq?
Invading Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism.


ADDITION: This is only my perspective. Not to be perceived as wrong/right.

Edited at 13:57 Sun 23/03/08 (GMT)

Totally agree that it was only for oil.

What I dont understand is that 5 yrs has gone, adn the UK hasnt pulled out?

Why are WE still helping a nation fight a war that isnt getting anywhere??

If I was PM I would pull out now...

whether it was for oil or not would it not be worse to pull out now and leave the country in disarray than finish the job of building a democratic society-
or am i getting confused with afganhistan?

I doubt you'll ever build a democracy in those regions....... I don't think democracy can rule in any country that takes religion above anything else, but that's just my western perspective!

Afghanistan is a sorry state. Children and women are mis-treated and have very little in life. But if we're over there, then we should be helping Africa too, look at the state that place is in!

Hang on...

Whats in it for us by helping the Americano's?

Exactly.

africa seems to be on the bottom of the list of global affairs and is the most important it's a shame

I agree, we're spending all this money on killing people...and not spending it wisely.

You seem to forget, Afghanistan does need our help! Iraq does need our help! However it doesn't take a genius to see what's in Iraq, Afghanistan is a totally different issue.

I'm sure if we had the money and troops Africa would get help. Don't forget Africa needs to help itself, it's a continent run by corruption and greed.........

IM in America and i agree with you mr Mcquiston in all but africa sending troops i believe that USA did not deserve the bombing we took but we should noot have fought back

i can't belive its been 5 years since it all started!! i dont think we should be there but aslong as we are i think we should all support the troops!!

You're right there da_chump - there is a big difference between supporting the troops and supporting the "war".

I also believe "we" should finish what was started, unlike the US did in Afganistan (refer to "Charlie Wilson's War" - i can't post the actual quote here)

What is most terrifying about the "war on terror" is the US goverments decision that suspected terrorists are not covered by the geneva convention (its only a "war" when it suits, apparently)

It's equally amazing, given the quantity of excellent documentaries and books (not to mention smaller articles on the net etc) that more people don't react.

If you get a chance, watch "Taxi to the Dark Side" and "The War on Democracy"

http://www.taxitothedarkside.com/

http://www.warondemocracy.net/

And to bring my post back on topic, despite not being directly involved in the corruption as such, the UK is so deeply in debt to the US, it has no choice but to stay on their side by sending troops and hardware when asked.

Which of course costs a fortune, thus ensuring we remain in debt....

Simple?

dave- that sums it up perfectly- support the troops even if you know your right about the war- they didnt decide to go to war

It's all about the money!

Why do you think America stayed in Vietnam so long? Look at the figures; I don't mean death toll either.

I could bang on all day about war - what it means and what it doesn't! All depends which aspect you look at it I suppose.

As for the American Goverments refusal to give suspected terrorists their human rights - let that be a cloud over their heads! Let them learn the lessons of making martyrs out of sick individuals. Let them learn the lessons of treating innocent people as sub-human!

And very true, Mike and, Dave! I got a phone call from my brother the other day, he's now out of immediate danger, back in camp now, be back in Britain by the end of the of the week.