Absolutely brilliant analysis, Dave.

Agree every word.

This tragedy is one which the Liberal Left have brought upon this country through their successful championing of practically uncontrolled immigration.

Let me try to explain.

You says that “The perpetrators of Islamist attacks on London and Glasgow hailed from Leeds and Aylesbury, not Kandahar or Mazar-e Sharif”. Absolutely, the Islamist security threat to this country does indeed come from “home-grown” terrorists. But in case you hadn’t noticed, these people go abroad for training. The aim of Western engagement in Afghanistan is to deny terrorists further training grounds. This aim may or may not be realistic.

But if we did not have a large Muslim community in this country we would not have to worry about radicalized individuals going abroad to be trained as terrorists, and our young men and women would not have to die in an attempt to prevent this from happening.

Of course this is a hard thing for the Government to be explicit about because of the damage it would cause to community relations, which is one reason why their justification for our being in Afghanistan seems so thin.

Dave, 2010 :“Finally, the very idea that it is possible to graft a liberal democracy onto an ethnically-splintered tribal society is manifestly preposterous”.

Laban, 2005 : “I was never a fan of the project to democratise Afghanistan. The politics and culture of that fascinating nation are nearer to those of fourteenth-century England than to modern America.”

Liam Fox, 2010 : “We are not in Afghanistan for the sake of the education policy in a broken 13th- century country.”

I’ve been reading through several of the articles on this site.

They are well written.

however, one alost detetcts a cynicism and an agenda in ripping things to pieces, often saying what has been said elsewhere (although you do it more eloquently than most) but not very much in the way of constructive suggestions, or solutions…

E.G.

“The trouble is, Afghanistan is so badly broken that it is difficult to see what could possibly fix it.”

Regarding the Taleban and Afghanistan, a great deal of their fighters are ‘foreign’ used here to mean non-Afghani. Many come in from Chechnya, some from Pakistand and, regrettably, some from our own country, who seem to think the whole things is some sort of extended hunting holiday.

In so far as denying the enemy freedom of movement, we are succeeding at that, at least. For them to fight they have to come in from Pakistan, and that country’s gov’t isn’t exactly pro-Taleban.

Perhaps one of the issues here is that people are expecting an instant, or at least faster than current fix. Remember that getting to the current situation in N. Ireland (another topic entirely, but more or less “at peace”) has taken decades.

Be under no illusions that Afghanistan will be quick, or easy.

On a parting note (I appreciate I haven’t addressed all your points, but it is late here and I am very sleepy and I can’t do your entire piece justice), there are several countries than can be classed as having “an ethnically split tribal society”…indeed one could make an argument for saying that is something of the norm, not the exception (isn’t our own country ethnically split…and tribal?) but several have functioning democracies.

In brief, thankyou for reiterating what any one with a brain has worked out, that Afghanistan isn’t easy, and the problem isn;t going away any time soon, but please before you write more, dare I say negative articles, think up some solutions.

Last last note, I promise:The army is currently over-manned, if you didn’t know, and has become highly selective over who is allowed into the ranks, and from within the ranks who is allowed on operations.

Dave

I guess I have two responses to the article you have written.

Firstly, given the overhwhelming popularity of the war when it happened, I’d quite like you to provide some evidence that most people on the left were against the invasion.

I say this because I simply don’t believe that’s true, and genuinely believe that opinions have changed on the left and right because people foolishly did thing it would be an easy win. (Also, lets not forget, it would be hypocritical of the left not to back multilateral action endorsed by international law when that was of course the basis for rightly opposing the Iraq war)

But more imporantly the other response is this.

Is it really right, that having achieved our aim of removing the Taleban and their Al Qaeda colleagues from the security of power, to then walk away and not give a damn about Afghanistan?

I don’t think it is. I think that although it is hard, and although developing a democracy as rich world understands democracy is implausible, we can still do a great deal to improve the lives of those living there.

I do not think that declaring that since our security is no longer directly impacted, and since we can’t achieve a perfect democracy there, we should just let them all rot.

“. But in case you hadn’t noticed, these people go abroad for training.”

I seem to recall them training in the lake district.Several of those jailed for plotting acts did so without leaving the country, downloading material on bomb making and plotting within their own homes. Indeed potential terrorists now avoid visits to Pakistan, as it attracts suspicion from the authorities.

@2 Jules Whacket

Wow.. that’s quite a conflation of right wing hobby horses in one post! I assume the whacket in your profile refers to what happened to your head in infancy?

So… let me get this straight… the whole fiasco is the fault of the loonie lefties for letting coffee coloured people in? If it weren’t so intellectually outlandish, it would almost be worth laughing….

The nationality or residence of the people who fly planes into buildings, plant roadside bombs, blow themselves up in public places isn’t the issue. Movements like the Taliban and Al Quaeda can’t be reasoned with. They can only be combatted, and hopefully rendered relatively harmless if not actually liquidated, in much the same way as Fascism, Nazism and Japanese Nationalism were 60 years ago. Destroying the power and influence of such ideas requires both force and persuasion.

Do you seriously believe Islamic extremism wouldn’t be a threat if there had been no muslim minority in the UK? My recollection is that one of the 7/7 bombers was an Afro-Carribean muslim convert.. I doubt the liberal left were responsible for letting him or his forebears into the country. Similarly, the 9/11 bombers were Saudis.. their attack had sod all to do with US immigration policy.

The justification for being in Afghanistan can only be regarded as thin if you think leaving the Afghan people to their fate is acceptable. Perhaps you’d have felt the same about people in Germany under the Nazi regime before the war…. that was nothing to do with us, right?

Of course our service personnel aren’t JUST there to prevent dissafected British Muslims from using Afghan training grounds (although it’s a reasonable enough aim).

You either have a poor grasp of history, or no moral compass – or perhaps both?

You can’t try to explain or justify your bogus linkage of the fallacious “unrestricted immigration” meme, with the deaths of 300 service personnel… because it simply isn’t true.

I’ve only just come back to this so, Galen 10, if you are still following it, here is my comment on your comment on my comment.

Yes I’m right-wing. I thought it might not show, so well done for spotting that. Award yourself a peanut.

Buried among your blathering is the following counter-argument – place of residence has nothing to do with whether someone is an Islamist terrorist/in any case it’s illogical to blame mass-immigration on the left/there is no link between mass immigration and the deaths of soldiers in Afghanistan.

Consider the following.

It makes operational sense for Al Qaeda to use people who are based in the west. That explains why three of the four 7 July bombers were Brits of Pakistani heritage. They, and, if you like, the resources necessary to convert the fourth member, would not have been present had this country not experienced mass immigration.

I’m not saying all Muslims are terrorists although it is fairly common ground that the Muslim communities provide a hinterland of sympathy with them, without which they would be less likely to commit acts of terrorism.

There is the following link between mass immigration and the deaths of service personnel in Afghanistan. The obvious first line for policing the terrorist threat which as you say does not originate in this country, is at our borders; that is after all what they’re there for. Unfortunately we cannot now do this because there are 2.4 million Muslims living in this country. This presents a massive security challenge, notwithstanding that the majority are more-or-less decent and law-biding etc. And it’s a double-edged challenge because of the need to act in a way that minimizes the damage to what is known as community relations. But it must be done because another 7/7 is unthinkable. So part of the response is to try to deprive terrorists of training grounds abroad.

I’m not blaming mass immigration entirely on the Liberal Left, but they have some responsibility. It’s a point worth making when they start wringing their hands over Afghanistan.

this war, and endless other warts on human society, is the natural consequence of the structure of society. if you want a different outcome, you need a different system.

i recommend democracy. one consequence will be that the the people who vote for war will have to pay for it, in [their own] gold and [their own] blood. peace is likely to break out.

it is difficult for british people to envision democratic society, never having had any, but subsidized bus tours to switzerland will help. in the mean time, clegg’s demand for a referendum on voting process should be appreciated for what it is: the first flower of democracy demanding to be born.