Harry in Afghanistan.

[scotthayes]

Firstly I've searched the forum and can't find a post on this.


Prince Harry has been serving in Afghanistan. The whole of the British media and press have known but kept to an agreement not to tell the story until he has finished frontline service. BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7269743.stm)

Now this is going to raise some issues about the freedom of the press. But the way I see it, when the press has freedom they also have a duty to act in a responsible way, and the British press has acted with a great deal of responsibility in keeping the story under wraps. Such a pity the Drudge Report has once again failed to show responsible reporting.

As for Harry serving (and doing his job), good on him.

[Phil A.]

This is one of the rare occasions where I agree with keeping a story under wraps - leaking it has put not only Prince Harry but all his comrades under even greater threat than before.
I'm not a fan of the Royal Family, but I have to say he's earned my respect by serving his country in this way

[YeahIKnow]

It's good to see the not so smart prince restoring some prestige to the Royals. There's no questioning the bravery of anyone willing to serve in that part of the world, even if you do have the SAS watching your back. The thing is the British media are making him out to be something of a war hero with long news segments glorifying his duties. Royalty has forever been a hindrence to the military. The Soldiers there get too little credit as it is and definitely don't deserve having Harry as their new ambassador.

[Jaffa Cake]

Fair dues to him for wanting to go out their and do his bit, and equally so to our normally rabid press for showing some uncharacteristic restraint and not leaking the story themselves. However...

It's been reported for a while now that many British troops serving in hotspots like Afghanistan are been sent out woefully ill-equipped (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7245533.stm) – for example, sent into night-time combat situations without any night vision equipment.

I wonder if His Royal Highness was lacking any essential equipment when he went out on patrol, or if he and his comrades were fully kitted out to deal with anything that happened to come their way?

[Queso]

When do they send Ewan Blair then?

[Fuzzy14]

Damn Johnny foreigner ruining our interweb!
The news story leaked on non-UK websites, so the UK press thought that was the go-ahead to publicise. I get the impression that BBC report was filmed a couple of weeks ago just waiting for the story to leak.

Apparently "Front Line" means a couple of miles back in a tent talking on the phone to the RAF. Still, hats off to all the boys out there, I've never really understood the non-Navy.:rolleyes:

I see his fellow squadies have nick-named him "Bullet Magnet" :D Lovely British humor!

[EricNau]

Such a pity the Drudge Report has once again failed to show responsible reporting.
To be fair, according to MSNBC, "The news embargo was broken, however, after reports of the prince’s deployment were leaked by an Australian magazine and a German newspaper, and then reported on a U.S. Web site, the Drudge Report." link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23391374/)

[Abstract]

I'm not a fan of the Royal Family, but I have to say he's earned my respect by serving his country in this way

Me too. It sounds like he's doing a good job, too. Good for him.

To be fair, according to MSNBC, "The news embargo was broken, however, after reports of the prince’s deployment were leaked by an Australian magazine and a German newspaper, and then reported on a U.S. Web site, the Drudge Report." link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23391374/)

Well then they're all guilty o irresponsible reporting. :p

They weren't the first, but they're still at the level of the lowest common denominator in this case.

[brad.c]

My first reaction: seems foolish to have him there in the first place. How could they realistically have expected this to have remained under wraps for an entire 6 month posting? And once the news is out, there is greater incentive than ever to target British troops.

That said, as a member of the Greater Commonwealth with innumerable recitations of god Save the Queen under my belt, I find it refreshing to see active participation of the Royals in conflict. Curious how a family born to royalty and it's privileged class, can sometimes better espouse the values of the people they rule better than those we choose to represent us.

[Hankster]

Good for him. Great to see people with integrity in this world. Hope he does his job and returns safely.

[displaced]

That said, as a member of the Greater Commonwealth with innumerable recitations of god Save the Queen under my belt, I find it refreshing to see active participation of the Royals in conflict. Curious how a family born to royalty and it's privileged class, can sometimes better espouse the values of the people they rule better than those we choose to represent us.

This isn't really a new concept though. Off the top of my head, I believe every generation of the Royal Family have served in some capacity ... well, forever.

IIRC, Prince Andrew was a helicopter pilot in the Falklands War. I imagine there's essentially been an unbroken continuation of mediaeval practices where royalty/nobility led the country into war -- and not from the comfy seat of government.

[edesignuk]

Good on him for getting stuck in, it's such an awful shame that the media swoop in yet again to ruin it.

[jimN]

I really don't see why people are attacking our press for not reporting this. It doesn't affect my life in any way and I see no issue with us not being told. That said I have known this for a while now but was in two minds about telling anyone - didn't see the point other than trying to boast that I knew something others didn't!

[angelneo]

Latest update, he has been pulled out of Afghanistan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7270743.stm

I guess it's what best for him and the people serving under/with him, now that the news have been so well circulated.

[Queso]

That's a shame, but does highlight why the Army is such a bad choice for a Royal. Joining the Navy, even as a Marine, would have allowed him to continue any deployment even after the story broke.

[MacRumorUser]

Oh well it's all over the news like a rash now.

"Hey aren't you the ginger one... ? " :D

http://www.thewe.cc/thewei/_/images10/afghanistan/us_special_forces_afghan_boy.jpe

[brad.c]

This isn't really a new concept though. Off the top of my head, I believe every generation of the Royal Family have served in some capacity ... well, forever.

IIRC, Prince Andrew was a helicopter pilot in the Falklands War. I imagine there's essentially been an unbroken continuation of mediaeval practices where royalty/nobility led the country into war -- and not from the comfy seat of government.

No, it's not new, but it's become news at any rate. I don't remember a great fuss made about P. Andrew back in the early 80s, but I also don't remember his rank in the succession back then, either. Was it 2nd or 3rd?

Curiously, when the media made the same reference to serving in the Falklands War, it was the first I've heard about Andrew since he and Fergie split.

[Queso]

No, it's not new, but it's become news at any rate. I don't remember a great fuss made about P. Andrew back in the early 80s, but I also don't remember his rank in the succession back then, either. Was it 2nd or 3rd?
It's a lot easier to remain anonymous and maintain your distance from the front line whilst still being involved when you're in the Navy or Air Force. Prince Andrew was never really in great danger of being captured and held to ransom or for media attention in the same way that Harry is. Yeah, Andrew could have been killed, but the outcome of him becoming a long-term hostage was never a real possibility.

[garybUK]

HRH QE2 served as a military driver in WW2, Prince Andrew flew helicopters in the falklands and even in history Harold II served and got a arrow in the eye ....

As the monarch is the commander in chief they should serve at least some time in the military, it's character building :)

[dmw007]

As for Harry serving (and doing his job), good on him.


I agree, I have much respect for Harry for his current service in the military. :)

[Abstract]

Yeah, while is brother Will is looking quite slack now compared to his brother.

[Galapp]

I think that the press did something that if I was running Britain, I would send secret services to kill the moron that published that Harry was in afghanistan... I mean, seriously, what are they thinking?! if Britain wouldn't immidiately react (and take harry out) he would have died or been captured 100%... what a STUPID thing to publish...

[scotthayes]

I know the story leaked in a small way in Australia in January but typical of the Drudge Report, they don't think of the consequence of the story. So yes may be we should send MI6 over there and point a few things out to them.

[StealthRider]

So yes may be we should send MI6 over there and point a few things out to them.

On what grounds? Last I checked, Drudge, though he is a royal prick and a douchebag, isn't subject to your Official Secrets Act, and is subject to that whole "Freedom of the Press" thing that we have going on.

Also, while it'd be nice if they were responsible, they don't have the responsibility to be responsible in their reporting. It is, for better or worse, the way the press works in the US.

But yes, feel free to send MI6 over, commit an act of war, and take out a well-known journalist. Great plan.

[scotthayes]

On what grounds? Last I checked, Drudge, though he is a royal prick and a douchebag, isn't subject to your Official Secrets Act, and is subject to that whole "Freedom of the Press" thing that we have going on.

Also, while it'd be nice if they were responsible, they don't have the responsibility to be responsible in their reporting. It is, for better or worse, the way the press works in the US.

But yes, feel free to send MI6 over, commit an act of war, and take out a well-known journalist. Great plan.

1. My statement about MI6 was meant as a joke.

2. Yes they do have a responsibility in their reporting, how would America have acted if it was one of the Bush twins who were fighting on the frontline and the British press published the story?

3. Are you sure as an American you want to lecture the world on committing and Act Of War on another sovereign state :rolleyes: And now the thread takes a whole different route.

[StealthRider]

1. My statement about MI6 was meant as a joke.

2. Yes they do have a responsibility in their reporting, how would America have acted if it was one of the Bush twins who were fighting on the frontline and the British press published the story?

3. Are you sure as an American you want to lecture the world on committing and Act Of War on another sovereign state :rolleyes: And now the thread takes a whole different route.

I was messing around too. Sorry how that works on the Internet...we need sarcasm tags.

And if they got the Bush twins killed...well, I'd better stop talking. ;)

[scotthayes]

I was messing around too. Sorry how that works on the Internet...we need sarcasm tags.

And if they got the Bush twins killed...well, I'd better stop talking. ;)

Think we need a little funny face to show sarcasm (think this one is about the best for it :p )


Understand on the Bush twins ;)

[Blue Velvet]

The biggest publicity stunt for the royals in the last few months.

Harry, well-known party boy and Nazi uniform-wearing toff and public schoolboy, shows he's just one of the lads, putting other's lives at risk. Blows that pathetic current Diana court case off the front pages and makes him look like a hero...

A completely empty gesture, especially given the Royal's income and status, and the reported failure of the government to ensure adequate medical and financial support is given to injured returning servicemen and women.

I'm with Max Clifford on this; leaks don't make it into a German paper and then to Drudge without a nod and wink.

[Much Ado]

Caught in two minds here...

Firstly, there was no media blackout. There was a media postponement, with the BBC etc. allowed to follow him around in Afghanistan and at home, and film away to their hearts' contents. So on their part at least, this was a nice little earner, and nothing to do with national pride protecting a royal.

As for Harry, I don't know. Was it a stunt? Or did he genuinely want to give something for his country? Or both? Hard to say. It does need bravery to go out there, but I would have liked to see him go without the army of reporters ready to document every move, and then we could talk about unconditional bravery.

[Applespider]

Yeah, Andrew could have been killed, but the outcome of him becoming a long-term hostage was never a real possibility.

While everyone is saying well done to the British press, I do wonder what would have happened had he been captured or killed out there. Would there then be mass outcry at the fact that no-one had told the British public?

Surely those who read the gossip mags must have realised something was up. After all, he used to be pictured on a weekly basis coming out of Boujis club. Their takings must have plummeted.

As for Harry, I don't know. Was it a stunt? Or did he genuinely want to give something for his country? Or both?

Probably a bit of both. But I'd suspect that a bigger part is the desire to work with the people that you trained with and are friends with.

I'm not sure about the country bit after the BBC reported that in his interview after the news came out he said that he didn't much like England. Struck me as somewhat odd!

I'm not sure I'm quite as cynical as BV but not far off.

[Smoogz]

I think it was smart that the media didnt leak the information beforehand... being who he is would make him a target.

Im an American Soldier in Iraq. Ive been here since July of last year. The British are one the largest helps that we have in this war. (I beleive they have more troops apart of the Multi-Lateral National Forces) To have Harry in Afghanistan(which is just as dangerouse as Iraq) is an honor, at least to me. It shows a great deal about his character and the character of all the British forces out here.

[combatcolin]

1. My statement about MI6 was meant as a joke.

2. Yes they do have a responsibility in their reporting, how would America have acted if it was one of the Bush twins who were fighting on the frontline and the British press published the story?

3. Are you sure as an American you want to lecture the world on committing and Act Of War on another sovereign state :rolleyes: And now the thread takes a whole different route.

Agree.

Britain, and the Commonwealth can be justly round of Prince Harry.

[MrSmith]

If he was in the thick of it on the front line, as we're led to believe, how come he enthuses about what a great time it was? Since when is armed combat fun? No way he was ever in any danger. Actually, he sounds more like he was completing his Duke of Edinburgh's Award.

[Blue Velvet]

It also masks the real issue: just exactly how well are things going over there?

[skunk]

If he was in the thick of it on the front line, as we're led to believe, how come he enthuses about what a great time it was? Since when is armed combat fun? No way he was ever in any danger. Actually, he sounds more like he was completing his Duke of Edinburgh's Award.Oh, come on, whatever the politics of it, volunteer soldiers are perfectly entitled to feel enthused by doing what they've been trained for, among their colleagues, in the belief that they're doing something useful, possibly even noble. Adrenaline and camaraderie can be quite a buzz.

[Much Ado]

It also masks the real issue: just exactly how well are things going over there?

If our troops were properly supplied it would be a lot easier for them, that's for sure.

[skunk]

It also masks the real issue: just exactly how well are things going over there?I doubt we'll know until we've lost...

[sushi]

I doubt we'll know until we've lost...
Or won.

[MrSmith]

Oh, come on, whatever the politics of it, volunteer soldiers are perfectly entitled to feel enthused by doing what they've been trained for, among their colleagues, in the belief that they're doing something useful, possibly even noble. Adrenaline and camaraderie can be quite a buzz.
Yes, but I meant to imply that he was never in any danger because it was little more than a stunt. I still don't think most soldiers who really saw action would come back and describe it as one of the best times of their life, camaraderie or not.

[Abstract]

Oh, come on, whatever the politics of it, volunteer soldiers are perfectly entitled to feel enthused by doing what they've been trained for, among their colleagues, in the belief that they're doing something useful, possibly even noble. Adrenaline and camaraderie can be quite a buzz.

And he was out of the media spotlight for a long time, and allowed to actually do things (that you and I wouldn't really think twice about), and allowed to NOT do things. He's usually so well looked after, he was even enthused about wearing the same clothes for a week. Not showering for 4 days was as normal as it was ever going to get for him. Those were his words. I'm sure he's going to look back on his stint in Afghanistan fondly, and with real pride later in his life. Why? It'll probably be because he'll be pampered again, longing for the days he was in Afghanistan, hanging around with real people who actually treat him like a real person. It's sad to say it, but he doesn't get that like you or I do.

I know there are always doubters, but come on. Give the guy a break. He's a Prince, didn't have to do this, and it sounds like he had a real job to do, not paperwork.

[Much Ado]

And he was out of the media spotlight for a long time, and allowed to actually do things

Was he? I was under the impression the media were there with him, as part of the blackout agreement.

[Queso]

The biggest publicity stunt for the royals in the last few months.
Yep, but at least it should finally end all the "poor little princes" perception the Palace PR machine has been foisting on us since 1997. All this whinging about the leak is ridiculous. There was no other way that his first deployment was going to end other than the foreign media announcing it and a quick flight back to the UK for a press conference on how wonderful it made him feel. He would have been told all this before leaving for Afghanistan in the first place, the only random factor being how long it would be before that all occurred.

His second deployment will be longer, and by the third one nobody will care enough anymore to notice. To be honest I'm quite glad he's at least doing something useful, even if it has cost us all a bit in surrounding him with SAS troops for the past 10 weeks (I've no link for that, but will be very surprised if it hadn't happened).

[skunk]

Or won.That's the point. We can't "win", because the Taleban aren't going to "surrender". The Taleban are Afghans: they aren't going anywhere.

[Abstract]

Was he? I was under the impression the media were there with him, as part of the blackout agreement.

One camera-man, and around 4 interviews with main media sources when the action died down (for him).........to the Prince, I guess that constitutes a break. ;)


Actually, I'm guessing on the "one" camera-man, but I doubt an entire squad of camera-men were chasing him around. Talk about painting a bulls-eye on a soldier.

[miniConvert]

I flicked on News 24 the other day to watch Click, but instead it was Harry getting off that plane on an endless loop. The commentator had run out of comments to such an extent that he was, with much stuttering, suggesting that now Harry has been fighting in Afghanistan his life is at risk because terrorists will now try and kill him.

I flicked over to Sky News and it was exactly the same crap. So, I switched off the TV.

[Much Ado]

Actually, I'm guessing on the "one" camera-man, but I doubt an entire squad of camera-men were chasing him around. Talk about painting a bulls-eye on a soldier.

BBC, ITV and Sky news have all been filming with Harry. So that's at least 3, I'd imagine. We'll see.

[Abstract]

Are you sure they're not just sharing the video shots? Anyway, I guess that's not so bad. During a war, there are a lot more camera-people around the action than the general public probably realizes.

[Markleshark]

Good on him for getting stuck in, it's such an awful shame that the media swoop in yet again to ruin it.

I agree, in fact, I find it utterly disgusting. I don't care if the lad was out there for 10 weeks or 10 minutes, it takes big brass balls. Big brass balls that I don't have, so good on him. 110% respect for him from me.

Utterly disgusting that the press should leak it (or 'leak' it, if you'd prefer), as far as I'm concerned. If it takes a media blackout to get him out there, then that should be honored.

As far as the press having a responsibility to report it, and the general public having a right to know... what a load of utter bollocks. We have the right to know who the rapists are that could be living in the house next to us, or the murders around the corner, but unless a soilder wants to be honored we have the right to nothing at all to do with him or her.

It's reassuring to know that a good, fully trained solider will now be cleaning rifles at the barracks. :rolleyes:

[ezekielrage_99]

This is one of the rare occasions where I agree with keeping a story under wraps - leaking it has put not only Prince Harry but all his comrades under even greater threat than before.
I'm not a fan of the Royal Family, but I have to say he's earned my respect by serving his country in this way

I totally agree he may be a royal however he is still in the Army and therefore be given the same respect the other serving troops have been given. If the most people think it would be just Harry being a target, they are wrong it also puts at risk the other troops and officers who are serving with him as well.

[solvs]

It also masks the real issue: just exactly how well are things going over there?
According to everything I've been hearing and reading, not so good.

Or won.
Had we not pulled so many resources to go to Iraq while still attempting to deal with the 'stans, we might have. Now, it's less and less likely. If you'd like, I can post several links noting "those on the field" Bush claims to be listening to but actually isn't.

[sushi]

Had we not pulled so many resources to go to Iraq while still attempting to deal with the 'stans, we might have. Now, it's less and less likely. If you'd like, I can post several links noting "those on the field" Bush claims to be listening to but actually isn't.
Appreciate the offer.

However, no need. My info comes directly from those who have been there -- good and bad.

[MrSmith]

Appreciate the offer.

However, no need. My info comes directly from those who have been there -- good and bad.Good and bad what?

[saltyzoo]

2. Yes they do have a responsibility in their reporting, how would America have acted if it was one of the Bush twins who were fighting on the frontline and the British press published the story?
You say this as if it wouldn't happen. I'm confident, someone in the "British press" would leak that story if it existed. No doubt about it.

It's been a decade or more since the "press" took responsibility in their reporting. On this we can agree. Where we probably disagree is your assertion that this problem is limited only to American press that happens to be conservative. There is a whole lot of garbage out there being printed that should have been held until a more appropriate time. In days gone by, the press was much more positive because rather than instantly splashing whatever tripe they had they would actually work for positive change. Now it's just about being first to push it out on every media they can. Every day the news is more and more about the press than it is about the things they are covering.

The press is definitely out of control, and anyone that breaks silence on ANY secret military event of their country or an ally is plain disgusting. Even if it is about a "celebrity". :rolleyes:

3. Are you sure as an American you want to lecture the world on committing and Act Of War on another sovereign state :rolleyes: And now the thread takes a whole different route.

This is hilariously ironic considering Englands military history.

[MrSmith]

...
The press is definitely out of control, and anyone that breaks silence on ANY secret military event of their country or an ally is plain disgusting. Even if it is about a "celebrity". :rolleyes:
This boils down to the question of what the media is about. Are they telling me what is going on, or what someone else has deemed it appropriate for me to know.

...This is hilariously ironic considering Englands military history.
We taught you well.

[saltyzoo]

This boils down to the question of what the media is about. Are they telling me what is going on, or what someone else has deemed it appropriate for me to know.


Yes, however, when it was more difficult to become "press" due to the difficulties in distributing your content, those that managed to do so tended to have a much better regard for what is appropriate. Now that any shmuck can publish to thousands of people in instants, there is no filter whatsoever. Of course, having a filter is an issue as the filter could be suspect.

But there is no way anyone can ever win a war in an environment when your own press is telling the enemy what you are doing. Especially when they do so for no good reason other than to "be first to press". I'm sorry, but knowing Harry's whereabouts was not "appropriate" nor necessary and revealing them served no purpose that is honorable or patriotic. This is true about many of the things that are printed in regards to military actions.

The terrorists certainly understand our press and can certainly use it to their advantage. That has been proven time and time again.

[Henri Gaudier]

All that wealth and privilege, the finest education and he wants to join the army like some poorly educated no hoper off an estate. Genius. While there's people stupid enough to join the army there are going to be those behind the scenes itching to give "the lads" something to do. It's an unjust war being fought for by misguided people who have been lied to.

Equally, I'm sure that this isn't a precedent and so what else have the media colluded with the government on? The real reason for the war is one I'd suggest.

[Much Ado]

It's an unjust war being fought for by misguided people who have been lied to.

You are aware this war is being fought in Afghanistan? Our reasons for being there are certainly more just than if you look across in the direction of Basra.

[skunk]

All that wealth and privilege, the finest education and he wants to join the army like some poorly educated no hoper off an estate. Sandhurst is not populated by and large with "poorly educated no hopers". They may have lived on an estate, though not the kind you are thinking of. There is a centuries-long tradition of the younger sons of noble families joining the armed forces, and every son of a monarch usually enrols at some point. Charles, Anne and Andrew all did (though Edward didn't really take to the Marines very successfully). They are, after all, "Her Majesty's Armed Forces". I'm certainly happier that he was in Afghanistan rather than participating in the clusterf*ck that is Iraq.

[Henri Gaudier]

Sandhurst is not populated by and large with "poorly educated no hopers". They may have lived on an estate, though not the kind you are thinking of. There is a centuries-long tradition of the younger sons of noble families joining the armed forces, and every son of a monarch usually enrols at some point. Charles, Anne and Andrew all did (though Edward didn't really take to the Marines very successfully). They are, after all, "Her Majesty's Armed Forces". I'm certainly happier that he was in Afghanistan rather than participating in the clusterf*ck that is Iraq.

Everything you say is true it's that I'm a bit surprised that he hasn't encountered someone along the way that hasn't ignited in him a spark to do something else. Especially as he is the son of Diana who campaigned for humanitarian causes like ridding the world of anti-personnel devices. It isn't too far fetched to think that he may be asked to set them rather than clear them. With this presence in his life which is "pro life" it seem odd to have chosen a career which is "anti -life"

[Henri Gaudier]

You are aware this war is being fought in Afghanistan? Our reasons for being there are certainly more just than if you look across in the direction of Basra.

Could you summarise why Tony Bliar decided to take the UK to war with Afghanistan? What occurred to make him decide that a particular action by an Afghani meant war had to be declared and the situation could not be resolved by any other means?

[skunk]

Everything you say is true it's that I'm a bit surprised that he hasn't encountered someone along the way that hasn't ignited in him a spark to do something else. Especially as he is the son of Diana who campaigned for humanitarian causes like ridding the world of anti-personnel devices. It isn't too far fetched to think that he may be asked to set them rather than clear them. With this presence in his life which is "pro life" it seem odd to have chosen a career which is "anti -life"Unlike the US, the UK has unequivocally renounced the use of landmines:
The government has announced an immediate total ban on the use of landmines by British troops.


BBC Defence Correspondent Mark Laity: "Early ban will be widely welcomed"
Defence Secretary George Robertson, in a Commons written reply, said instructions to that effect had been issued to all headquarters and training establishments.

The announcement ends an exemption which would have allowed the use of landmines in "exceptional circumstances".

"We intend this to be an international example to others," Mr Robertson said.

Tribute to Diana

The move means the ban is in place in good time for the anniversary next month of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, who played a major role in the campaign to outlaw the weapons under the Ottawa convention.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/142807.stm

[saltyzoo]

Everything you say is true it's that I'm a bit surprised that he hasn't encountered someone along the way that hasn't ignited in him a spark to do something else. Especially as he is the son of Diana who campaigned for humanitarian causes like ridding the world of anti-personnel devices. It isn't too far fetched to think that he may be asked to set them rather than clear them. With this presence in his life which is "pro life" it seem odd to have chosen a career which is "anti -life"

Some people actually understand that sometimes you have to be aggressive in order to be successful in your defense. Those that don't are purged from society eventually.

I really have nothing against pacifists. Unfortunately, much like vegetarians, they can't seem to be happy only with the fact that they are doing what they think is right, but so many feel the need to close their minds to the possibility that someone doing something else might be doing what is right as well and that they are the only ones that "really" know what's going on. Close minded, know-it-all, bossy, holier-than-thou, unrealistic, naive, and ill-informed platitudes, impress me not.

Moving along.

[Henri Gaudier]

Good. I hadn't heard of that. But the essence is still the same ... it's a destructive path he's chosen.

[Much Ado]

Could you summarise why Tony Bliar decided to take the UK to war with Afghanistan? What occurred to make him decide that a particular action by an Afghani meant war had to be declared and the situation could not be resolved by any other means?

His reasoning may not convince you, but at least the Taleban were/are actually operating in Afghanistan.

[skunk]

Some people actually understand that sometimes you have to be aggressive in order to be successful in your defense.Ultimately, however, war reflects a failure of diplomacy and a failure of imagination.

I really have nothing against pacifists....as long as they don't stand in your line of fire, eh?
Unfortunately, much like vegetarians, they can't seem to be happy only with the fact that they are doing what they think is right, but so many feel the need to close their minds to the possibility that someone doing something else might be doing what is right as wellWell, they can't both be right, can they? In either case.
Close minded, know-it-all, bossy, holier-than-thou, unrealistic, naive, and ill-informed You have nothing against pacifists, did you say? :confused:

[Henri Gaudier]

Saltyzoo I think it's you who are the one with the bunkered mind. I've asked questions, haven't been insulting and have kept my tone on an even keel.

Much Ado ... the Taliban exists is your sole purpose for war? The Taliban that the SAS trained and the Americans gave billions in aid, training and weapons to illegally? The same Taliban that the US government and UNOCAL and Enron tried to do business with for oil?

[sushi]

Good and bad what?
Many good things are happening that unfortunately, the press does not report.

Also, there are some (not many) shortcomings that are not reported. It seems the press around the world focuses on the negative rather than the positive. Just look at your evening news channel.

Anyhow, Iraq & Afghanistan are large countries. Unfortunately, we do not see all that goes on in either place.

[stevegmu]

The same Taliban that the US government and UNOCAL and Enron tried to do business with for oil?

There is no notable amount of oil in Afghanistan.

[solvs]

My info comes directly from those who have been there -- good and bad.
I have anecdotal evidence from family and friends who've been there as well. I just figured verifiable proof from those commanders on the ground Bush keeps saying he's listening to even though he isn't would be better. We pulled resources from the 'stans where the real enemies were to create more chaos in Iraq. I keep reading articles about how we're dropping the ball in Afghanistan, and how Bin Laden is still out there, and wondering why my cousin and best friend had to be sent to Iraq before we finished what we started in Afghanistan.

All the good we're supposedly doing doesn't change how badly we've screwed up in the 'stans, and how bad things are in Iraq.