Strength, not kindness, will win Afghan hearts & minds

Mensur Cehic says:

10:58am | 06/06/11

Gregg,

Jason just likes to write this non-sense for the sake of sounding like he’s been to Ghan and he’s hung out with very “important” people from Russell Offices and equivalent.

He likes using some of that terminology and thepunch.com.au staffers think they are impressing the readers with somebody who can give them an “angle” on this issue with the right kind of JARGON. Unfortunately, he’s got the wrong kind of logic.

There are better ways to disagree with Kilcullen than on the point “being nice”. He’s definitely right about that. And you, given your “knowledge” in “counter-terrorism”, are looking like an amateur disagreeing with the primary factor of counter-insurgency warfare. [I am trying really hard to keep my language clean on how stupid that makes you look].
Ask yourself, did the fight against the Malayan insurgency involve “strength” or “being nice” to the local population. For those who don’t know, it was the last successful counterinsurgency. Why? Because they were definitely not trying to play “strong” in another man’s land.

To the general readers:
The reason Jason Thomas is not advocating “being nice” is because if NATO-ISAF were indeed more mindful, they’d be home before 2003. But that would minimize defence spending and contracts which now run in HOW MANY trillions?? Jason Thomas is not dumb. But he is part of that game - and “being nice” would end that game quite quickly.

Having said that, David Kicullen himself is very biased in his “Conflict Ecosystem” diagram. See if you can see any of the MAIN factors we are there represented at all. And if so, see if they are represented accordingly/accurately..
http://webcoherence.org/featured-stories/italiban/

Regards,

M

Banicks says:

11:41am | 06/06/11

Gregg, no mate, just no. You’ve been reading too much greenie propaganda and bias reports.

Jason, for the first time in my new reading life I have read a thoughtful article with research in regards to Afghanistan. You have not taken sides, displayed bias, or taken a governmental agenda.

Thank you. I just hope your sensibility sinks into the people who are intent on wasting 10 years of our Army’s time, and many lives both Australian and allied.

I will put forward my bias, we need to be there, we need to be strong, we need to finish the job in a manner that will inspire the foundations of a complete and secure Afghanistan. Not an unstable future that will be easily swayed by a minority of religious fanatics.

If we pull out now, we have lost and all will have been for nothing.

Zaf says:

12:03pm | 06/06/11

Actually, the Malaysian counter-insurgency was comprehensively brutal and effective.  A significant segment of the population was relocated to security villages, where they were essentially only let out in a controlled way to work the land, and where the movements (and support to the insurgents) was controlled.  The significance of the Communists being basically an ethnic Chinese party, and the impact this had on Malay perception of the counter-insurgency, can’t be overstated.

Walter E. Kurtz Jr. says:

12:44pm | 06/06/11

@Zaf,

Non-sense. Ask yourself why the population co-operated.. “Brutal”?? I don’t think so.

mel says:

01:32pm | 06/06/11

@Zaf   Mistake to start a post with…...“Actually…..”  -  not because it’s pompous, but there’s just going to be other redundant/meaningless qualifiers along the way,  and there they be! ..... the twins -  essentially and basically.      (True about the Malaysian counter-insurgency)

Gregg says:

07:27am | 07/06/11

@Mensur Cehic,
@Banick,
Jason, Kilcullen and yourselves are free to have your views and I’ll have mine.
Use all the terminology you like and feel free to meander around counter insurgency talk and I know of one word - Vietnam - yes the US had half a million plus on the ground and were quite brutal in their operations.
Might have been a different war, different reasons, certainly different terrain but think Vietnamese and Pashtun for a similarity, Vietcong and Taliban for another.

The French gave up in Vietnam after about thirty years and WW2 in between, only for the US to give it a try before leaving another twenty years later with about 50,000 dead was it and who knows how many Vietnamese.

I doubt that a real lot has changed in Afghanistan in the past ten years other than Osama and a few others being knocked off and so now the US reckon they ought to run their Kill or Capture campaign which is even being condemmed by the Afghan government so that alone will throw more support to the Taliban.

Another ten years or so might just show who are the stupid ones Mensur.
And yes Bannicks, Vietnam is very green but reading Greens stuff is furtherest from my mind.

Tom says:

08:05am | 07/06/11

Without actually seeing the state of Afghanistan firsthand, I can only base my comments on what I have read and seen on TV, in books and the internet.

Reversing roles and placing the Afghan people as the invaders of Australia, I can see that I would be quickly regarded as a “terrorist”.

If anybody, regardless of their reasons was to invade Australia, I along with my friends and family would take up arms defending Australia (each driven by our own personal beliefs).

I know for a fact that there would be bitter resentment right up until the occupying force had left the country.

Now think about the Afghan people. If we have the conceit that we can win the war by adopting some of their customs that they have practiced for many generations; throw in some military training along with restoration of some infrastructure, we are seriously mistaken.

This is another Vietnam War. History yet again is repeating itself. Driven by political reasons, the declining support of the public and the economic downfall, the war is bound to end sooner or later unsuccessfully.

Is it true that America has occupied Iraq and Afghanistan for its resources? I think so! Is it true that America still remains so that it can utilise these resources whilst at the same time denying the Chinese full access to the resources? I’m not sure (perhaps someone can answer this).

I believe in the Australian soldiers and I support the individuals that are working in Afghanistan and Iraq. I like to think that we as a nation can try and restore some of what has been lost for the Afghan and Iraqi people. Unfortunately, I don’t believe in the false ideals that have been sold to us by the American government. America is capable of doing good things but unfortunately Afghanistan and Iraq is not a prime example.

lol says:

09:55am | 07/06/11

“If we pull out now, we have lost and all will have been for nothing. “

as opposed to pulling out in 1, 2, 5 or 10 years time? just LOL why are we even in Afghanistan again ? oh that’s right the Taliban, who attacked the US on Sept 11that was the reason given at the time wasn’t it ? ,the Taliban who will still be around when we do eventually pull out , and we will pull out not IF but when , and the taliban will still be there

Steve says:

12:42pm | 06/06/11

Well, I disagree with you CJ, The first thing that has to happen in any COIN Ops/wars are that the political objectives must be aligned with the military operations.  Pulling out by 2015 and having a Afghan Government is not enough at this time.  What are the tangible political goals of the coalition?
Having been involved in COIN or anti terrorist operations myself, to go in hard or soft is depending on the people and the situation and what they measure as values.  As a military force it is important to show strength and compassion at the same time - this is difficult and as soldiers we did not always get it right.  WRT Malaysia there were many mistakes and is some cases agression that would not be tolorted today was sapplied when needed.  The immediate press coverage was not there -  this did not happen untill Vietnam, where in fact our American Cousins never lost a battle - they lost the Media war.  The problem is today that every action by a Tom is under scrutiny from millions of armchair warriors who know how to do it better and they are hinderd from getting on with the job.  The best way to understand it is to live it.  Finally if it could be achived peacfully, the police would be able to handle it, there would be no need for Military action…. If you need a 14lb hammer to get a job done, well its gonna be heavy and loud

Bob Stewart says:

07:09pm | 17/06/11

It is not wise for the Christian white,
To hustle the Asian brown.
The Christian riles,
The Asian smiles,
It weareth the Christian down.
The end in sight
A tombstone white
With the name of the late deceased,
The epitaph drear,
A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East
(attributed to Kipling)

BMJ says:

09:27am | 06/06/11

Do you honestly have an expectation that you will find Australian values the norm in a country like Afghanistan? It’s not a realistic expectation and if you set the bar there you will continuously be left disappointed.

Also how do you expect the Afghans to grasp our “jocular sense of personal humour”? Maybe we should start handing out Crocodile Dundee DVD’s to help in this respect.

There are people that live in Australia for decades and still don’t enjoy Australian humour. What’s the problem?

fml says:

09:51am | 06/06/11

Yup in Australia we use jocular humor to degrade, mainly in the pub,
thats when the one hit deaths, glassings and fights happen, but thats ok, because its our culture.

So by Jocular humor you mean insult? How dare they, i mean, really, you go to their country, insult them, and you are upset that they get insulted.

“Australian values of charity, grace, good manners or a care for one another” really? some might, but judging by the comments usually on this forum id say those values dont exist, you just get shot down for being too “PC”.

So the Afghans in Afghanistan dont understand Australian sense of humor, those b@st@rds.

malohi says:

10:16am | 06/06/11

Fml I agree.
Jockular humour. In school it is called bullying. People being dickheads at the expense others.
Anyone who has ever worked in a pub would know the ramifications of this type of humor and the bogans who subscribe to it

Steve M says:

10:44am | 06/06/11

fml, then maybe you should stay out of pubs until you develop a sense of humour? Or a slightly thicker skin perhaps petal?

Tom says:

10:50am | 06/06/11

BMJ, FML and Malohi, you are trolling around for the sake of argument putting up disgreement where none exists.

Bob Stewart is saying that the harsh situation and culture in Afghanistan is miles apart from our own and it is naive to think that niceties, humour or softness that work in our Aussie situation and culture could work over there.

We are in their country. However much we market ourselves with western Mary Poppins B/S, they are not going to like us.

fml says:

11:01am | 06/06/11

Steve,

I go to the pub to have a drink, not to go to get my head kicked in, would it be too much to ask to leave that sort of “humor” in the boxing ring?

Is it too much to ask to be left alone with your mates when you are having a drink? and not to be set upon by some drunked up goons looking for a laugh?

TracyH says:

11:02am | 06/06/11

It appears comments to this post just didn’t get what the OP intended…maybe cos it’s Monday.

fml says:

11:36am | 06/06/11

tom, traceyh

Im not here to guess what Bob was “intending” to say. He is agreeing with the article, whose premise is, We are great, humble, benevolent invaders, and those humorless afghans just dont understand that we are killing them for their own good!

I dislike the arrogance displayed when commenters like Bob, use their fluffed up sense of piety, based on general human values to differentiate between Australians and Afghans and use this as justification for the war.

I dislike the fact that their differing sense of humor is justification enough for invading their country and the growing casualty rate (Both of our soldiers and afghan civilians), and is used as a sick rationalisation aiding in the absolution of guilt. Differing styles of humor is never justification for war, they should stick to removing the taliban from Afghanistan, Its pure propaganda, winning the hearts of the people at home by telling us they are different than us. We are great and they dont understand humor, ethics, friendship and honor therefore they deserve to die.

Tom says:

01:07pm | 06/06/11

fml, no-one said you had to ‘guess what Bob was “intending” to say’. You need to understand what he did say. Why don’t you work harder on your comprehension.

It is clear from your second blog, you have difficulties interacting on an adult level and would prefer to take umbrage and misunderstand. Perhaps that is why you have trouble at pubs.

fml says:

01:22pm | 06/06/11

tom,

Ahhh, just because i dont agree with you, i must be incapable of understanding you!, if i understood what bob is saying then i must surely agree with him. Rubbish.

then the quip about not being able to converse at an adult level, marvelous.

He is saying the afghans do not believe in charity, grace, good manners or care about everyones general welfare. let me quote.

“After living and working for 2 years in the region the lifestyle does not fit Australian values of charity, grace, good manners or a care for one another. There are no smiles for our jocular sense of personal humor,”

I fit in pubs very well actually, because i keep to my group of mates, i dont start fights or begin insulting strangers. If that means i dont fit in to the pubs you frequent, fair play, i will stay well away from them.

Tom says:

01:41pm | 06/06/11

@fml, Bob Stewart did not say anything like “differing sense of humor is justification enough for invading their country”.

No-one said, if you understood what Bob Stewart said then you would have to agree.

Your comprehension is pathetic.

fml says:

02:38pm | 06/06/11

You did Tom,

By saying that my “comprehension is pathetic” and that i purposely mis-understand the post. You say i am trolling because i am creating disagreement where none exists.

Hence, i wouldnt be creating disagreement (in a topic where there is nothing to disagree about apparently) if i understood the post, whose stance is the same as yours.

“Bob Stewart did not say anything like “differing sense of humor is justification enough for invading their country”.” This whole article is about winning the hearts and minds of what we are doing in afghanistan by creating a “Us versus Them” Mentality. Its entire premise is the justification, with the use of violence as the opposed to the Mary Poppins BS as you so put it. We will not win over their minds by bombing them into the floor, i dont think you win friends by shooting at them, you only create fear and enemies.

Tom says:

03:39pm | 06/06/11

@fml. Yes or No, did Bob Stewart say “differing sense of humor is justification enough for invading their country”?

No evasion, fml, Yes or No?

fml says:

04:18pm | 06/06/11

Tom,

“Inference is the act of drawing a conclusion by deductive reasoning from given facts.”

Fact is, the article states “In many ways the broader commentaries have lost sight that people and ideas are the essence of not only why wars are fought, but how”, which to me exemplifies the essence of the article.

Bob’s first word is, “Exactly”. Suggesting he agrees with the sentiment.
Generally posts after making an introduction go on to prove the introduction i.e. “Exactly” with points, his points being ...
That they don’t understand our Jocular sense of humor.

So, no, he did not come out and say it exactly, it was inferred by his backing of the Author’s theme, then used the Humor statement as a point to back up his stand.

Also notice, i didnt not quote that line, meaning that its not a direct quote from Bob himself, but rather an inference he made (look first paragraph), which is perfectly acceptable..

fml says:

04:48pm | 06/06/11

* didnt

Not a double negative.

Tom says:

07:58pm | 06/06/11

@fml, stop jiving. Did he say it? Yes or No?

Bob Stewart says:

08:36pm | 17/06/11

@BMJ I have never found the values we teach to our children are similar anywhere through the Middle East or Greater Asia. We might as adults call a long time friend, “G’Day you old bastard” which is a trigger to “loss of face"of the most dangerous kind when addressed to a long time associate in those regions Not only in the Middle East but also in the Philippine South.

I mentioned the values that I was taught as a child are not the values that are taught to ME children and our own exceptions are as noted here by several contributors..

There is a larger dimension to those values however in respect to the asylums from the Middle East and more particularly Afghanistan.

I have long been an advocate for families with children and unattached
children younger than 18 be processed smartly and removed from detention. I have expressed the hope too, that the Minister will take greater care to establish whether the unattached older males who appear to have no respect for anything, even in their own country are escaping an ideology of life and death that does not fit Australia.

.....or bringing it with them.

We do not kill our sisters and daughters who run away from cruelty in a relationship forced upon them, or cut off their noses and ears for family honour,or in Afghanistan, watch as many have set fire to themselves (NY Times 9/11/2010) after being scolded in public by their husbands relatives. Nor do we keep our females uneducated barefoot and pregnant or mutilate their genitals to deny any pleasure in the act of procreation, reserving that only for the male

While in Libya 73-74 Australia is most respected and indeed sought out to engage in conversation with men who were children during the African Campaign eager to discuss their war experiences with our troops. My older brother is buried at Tobruk and so we shared a common ground.

But I was shocked as a guest at the celebration of the buying of a young girl about 12 in a transaction between the old men for marriage and then the long time practice of a public showing of proof that she was a virgin

Indeed, are the asylums escaping an ideology of life and death? or bringing it with them

Harquebus says:

01:09pm | 06/06/11

Originating from voices heard is someone’s head. Today, we call it schizophrenia.

fml says:

09:13am | 06/06/11

You base your knowledge on an anecdote from a from a friend? who works someplace who might have met an afghan?

*cough*armchairexpert*cough*

Tony of Poorakistan says:

09:16am | 06/06/11

Absolutely agree. Most of the refugee advocates haven’t been outside Australia. I’ve travelled in Syria, Iran, Lebanon and other places and I can tell you that they simply do not think the same way we do or hold to the same notion of honour, friendship or ethics.

fml says:

09:45am | 06/06/11

Tony,

thats BS, I have Iranian friends, and they are the kindest warmest people.

On what do you base this on? Ridiculous. 

Is rubbishing the people of three nations on the internet somehow a sign of honour and ethics?

Steve M says:

10:42am | 06/06/11

fml, yeah, armchair expert, just the phrase i was thinking of… about your posts. Oh wait, youy have some Iranian friends. Can i nominate you for the ambassador job?

fml says:

11:05am | 06/06/11

Steve,

If you want, I really dont see the sense in judging a group of people who i have never met, seems like you and tony like to, maybe you should start a group.

You really think you can say a whole country of people have no concept of friendship, ethics and honor and expect to be taken seriously?  Says much more about you than it does the people you claim to know.

DS says:

01:04pm | 06/06/11

Poorakistan, you have no basis on which to generalise about entire peoples, regardless whether you have traveled there. I can easily say, than based on people like you, Australians are intolerant bigots, however that too would be a generalisation. Oh, BTW, if you had any ‘notion of honour, friendship or ethics’, you would be a refugee advocate.

Harquebus says:

01:06pm | 06/06/11

A common view held in Asia as well.

Tom says:

01:58pm | 06/06/11

fml, ... “a friend” - no, CIMG said a “relative. ... “someplace” - no, CIMG said “Christmas Island”. ... “Might have met an Afghan” no, CIMG said “working on Christmas Island “

ICT (I Call Troll)

@Harquebus, care to explain why they come here?

fml says:

02:46pm | 06/06/11

Tom,

Troll?? 

“In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion”

So asking not to incorrectly generalise the afghans and do gooders is an inflammatory remark, intent on provoking an emotive response?? as opposed to what Cry in my gin said, which was vilifying Afghans because his “relative” met one and “do gooders” who apparently have no clue about afghan culture?

And its my comprehension your having a go at? the nerve!

Harquebus says:

09:44pm | 06/06/11

@Tom. We are “weak and willing to be exploited.”

Tom says:

09:31am | 07/06/11

@Harquebus, I’ve got it now, thanks.

AdamC says:

09:07am | 06/06/11

I would argue that we are in Afghanistan because it is better to fight ones enemies where they live than where you do.

Bruno says:

12:15pm | 06/06/11

@AdamC - anytime you’re ready an independent thought would be nice. And how would our enemies get here, on leaky boats, at least that rules out surprise attacks. Apparently there are already terrorists living amongst us too, so really what you said makes no sense at all. Unless of course its simply an excuse to hide darker emotives.

Mensur Cehic says:

12:20pm | 06/06/11

AdamC,

most of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.

In Saudi Arabia, there was a peaceful, non-violent, non-religious Revolution - which was quelled by a Western-backed absolute monarchy. The Revolutionaries wanted democracy.

Are you sure you know your friends from foes?

Harquebus says:

01:15pm | 06/06/11

George had Tony and John where there hearts were forced to follow. Eh Donny?

Dan says:

01:27pm | 06/06/11

AdamC, since when were the Taliban going to fight us here?

John says:

01:54pm | 06/06/11

AdamC Seems to think we are war with Islam, which he thinks want to take over the world. Adam! Islamic extremists, has been marketed by the west in order to manipulate/swindle the western people into sending their troops to such regions. The way i see it. The west has become so corrupt that it’s become a harlot to the highest bidder. The bidder says 100 trillion! and then the national serves the bidder to commit moral defilement, by invading, bombing and occupying other people’s nations. The west is falling into viscous moral decay by being involved in these wars. As a Christian I’m utterly ashamed of my west.

AAAdam says:

02:30pm | 06/06/11

“Why are we there?”

Not sure if this is a serious question, however, here is the answer I gave someone the other day who asked a similar question.

Afghanistan was invaded in 2001. Australia had almost no part in this (I believe they may have provided a couple of air to air refuellers but that’s about it. No significant troop commitment).

In about 2006 the democratically elected Afghan Government and its people requested the assistance of Australia for rebuilding efforts, to promote stability and to promote prosperity. Australia agreed and sent a large commitment of armed forces personnel to the country as part of the UN mandated international security assistance force. Part of this stabilisation effort was to ensure international terror groups were denied safe haven in the country as well as preventing the Taliban from once again oppressing the people, killing govt officials, etc. It was also to assist in training their police and military.

We are there, at their invitation, on a UN mandated mission, helping them. Furthermore, they currently have a police and military force of approx 300,000 (3:1 to Americans and 200:1 to Aussies). If they didn’t want us there, they’d easily have the force required to remove the 1500 or so ADF personnel in Afghanistan. But they do want us there, helping them with training and to weed out the Taliban and terrorists who plague their country.

John says:

03:28pm | 06/06/11

adam…
“In about 2006 the democratically elected Afghan Government and its people requested the assistance of Australia for rebuilding efforts, to promote stability and to promote prosperity. “

You mean the corrupt government, that have looted millions of dollars from US tax payers to build their masons. It seems more like to provide security for the corrupt puppet government of Afghanistan and to aid the American’s with their hidden military agenda.

AAAdam says:

04:35pm | 06/06/11

No John, I meant what I said. Far from being a puppet government, the Aghan Govt is a democratically elected government similar to our own. The Afghan people voted them into power and they represent the Afghan population. It is this government that asked for our help. I don’t deny they have problems with corruption, however, what government doesn’t? If they were perfect they wouldn’t be asking for our help.

Personally, I think you just want to pretend Afghanistan and its people don’t want or need our help. That way you can feign ignorance when your Christian God asks you why you didn’t help them and, worse yet, why you tried to stop others braver than yourself from helping them.

AdamC says:

04:38pm | 06/06/11

Yikes,

@Bruno, anytime you can write a paragraph that doesn’t contain a series of silly cliches would be nice. It is extremely naive to believe (if, indeed, you actually do) that pulling out of Afghanistan will not again facilitate its use as a base to launch attacks against the west.

@Mensur Cehic, I am aware of the nationality of most of the 9/11 hijakers. I don’t see this as particularly relevant to this discussion. And I am not sure which revolution you are talking about. I obviously would not support intervention in support of the Saudi monarchy was it threatened by a popular, democratic uprising.

@John, you have built a castle of assumptions. I doubt I will be able to scale its ramparts. However, I will point out that I don’t believe that we are at war with the entirety of the ummah - that is an over-simplification.

@AAAdam, that is an important point to make. (Talk about the voice of reason!) Of course, it is wrong to believe our motives are in Afghanistan are purely altruistic. Rather, it is a case of enlightened self-interest.

AAAdam says:

10:27pm | 06/06/11

Adam C - Yep, I agree. Though I don’t see our interests and their own as being mutually exclusive. So while we might not be there for purely altruistic reasons, we are not there out of purely selfish reasons either. Rather, they asked for help, we are giving it them and both countries will ultimately walk away having gained something from the partnership.

Harquebus says:

01:11pm | 06/06/11

Philosophy used at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.

Sheedy's Left Foot says:

10:41am | 06/06/11

If only you had managed to weave Israel in there and terms such as Zionist plot. It would have been a perfect conspiracy theory.

Harquebus says:

01:19pm | 06/06/11

The U.S. financial system is on life support. Nothing can save it. Peak oil mate, peak oil.

TheRealDave says:

01:38pm | 06/06/11

I agree, needs more ZIONISTS! More INTERNATIONAL JEWRY, more JEWISH BANKERS and maybe a touch of ILLUMINATI or MAJESTIC 12

and yes…in CAPS…so people know its important…..

I mean come on, its basic internet conspiracy theory John, you should know better!

John says:

03:17pm | 06/06/11

...Harquebus

More like peak debt. This is what happens when government is controlled by the bankers, they keep on encouraging the government to support foreign and internal policy’s to benefit their financial interests. At the end of the day, the people are left with nothing but a pile of debt. This is why i dislike internationalism, the free market, made in china or made where ever. At the end of this all, the nations that went with this model, will be in billions and trillions dollars in debt to international banks that are not accountable to any nation, economy’s will be grounding to an entire halt, with huge massive loss’s. The grand Internationalist ponzi scheme. Buy now, pay later, will then be naked for all to see.

LizardMan says:

03:19pm | 06/06/11

Dont forget the Reptilians either!

Harquebus says:

09:51pm | 06/06/11

@John. Always a pleasure to meet someone who knows what’s going on. Most of the others have already left.

fml says:

10:07am | 06/06/11

Yep, because the righties shock and awe, and smoking gun has worked fantastically, The US has been fighting since WW2 and it hasnt really worked has it?

Shame on us for wanting to try a new approach.

Steve M says:

10:47am | 06/06/11

no, you’re right fml. Big hugs and warm milo for everyone! Perhaps a group singalong?

John says:

10:51am | 06/06/11

The left and the right are controlled by the upper party. EG
Blair, Brown, Cameron and Bush, Obama and Sarkozy and Khan.
Can’t you see it? Democracy is nothing by theater, Democracy is illusion! The last 100 years of western society has been a a dictatorial society not a democratic one. Where Bankers, Cooperation’s, Media Barron’s control their puppets the western politicians to do their bidding. These arguments between the so called left and right are nothing but a play acting show. Their foreign, economical and cultural policy’s are all the same. The upper party rules western society! You don’t even know it or do you even know they exist.

Colonel Parker says:

03:14pm | 06/06/11

John, go to the mirror. Look up your left nostril. Yes, its Elvis, he is in there. He loves you John. He has been calling you for a long time and wants to talk with you.

TheRealDave says:

07:31pm | 06/06/11

Johnno, tin foil is in aisle three mate.

BMJ says:

10:20am | 06/06/11

Do you have a car?

Think about it.

Mensur Cehic says:

11:01am | 06/06/11

Just to clarify point 5) - by “piss off” I mean collateral damage for a lousy medium value bad guy.

John says:

11:07am | 06/06/11

It’s utterly amazing that western society is theorizing why their troops are in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. It goes to show how much trust we westerner’s have in the media and the government.

Harquebus says:

01:21pm | 06/06/11

The U.S. soldier who has had the most kills in Afghanistan, goes home to his wife and kids every night.

John the Zombie says:

10:37pm | 06/06/11

Leto, Harquebus and John, do some research before opening your mouth. More people have died by Islamic terrorist bombings and mass killings then the US.and the allied forces.

Osama sent young men and children to die while he sat at home with his family. Even his elder son was there in the compound. Why wasnt he out fighting Jihad.

Why talk to some ppl in India and ask them if AQ and terrorism exsists and who the main culprits are. I recon you will get the same responce

Are you going to now tell me that Mumbai attacks were done by the American govt.

fml says:

09:50am | 07/06/11

Mr Zombie.

“More people have died by Islamic terrorist bombings and mass killings then the US.and the allied forces.”

Not true at all. I think you are the one that needs to do some research

been there says:

11:23am | 06/06/11

well said buddy!

Steve says:

01:04pm | 06/06/11

Agree mate…....

Harquebus says:

01:32pm | 06/06/11

I’ll gob off anytime I like so, what is your job exactly?

Leto says:

01:48pm | 06/06/11

Overseas deployments mean actually getting to do the things you trained to do. It means a nice little gong on the chest, money just accumulates as there is nowhere to spend it. It’s an adventure, the risk isn’t _that_ great that you are going to be the one hit. A little scar would probably be cool right?

And then you wrap all these truths in the bullshit of “I’m defending Australia”, “We are there to help the people of Afghanistan” and “It has nothing to do with natural resources and strategic positioning”. You cling to it, because without a moral argument, you are just a mercenary.

When you are older and less stupid, you will realise that you made no difference there. You will realise that you never had to go anywhere near Afghanistan to know you shouldn’t be there. And you will remember the ones who didn’t get to learn that lesson, because they didn’t come home alive. Then you will weep for the futility of war.

c says:

02:34pm | 06/06/11

You are the one that is blind and stupid, if that iis what you really think.  Academics and soldiers can see the excuse your giving yourself to take certain sides.

Harquebus says:

01:26pm | 06/06/11

Most returned diggers didn’t and don’t think much of warfare and rightly so. Religion is the enemy which, is difficult to fight with guns unless, you’re going to do a complete job. I use ridicule and I ain’t afraid of no fatwa.

Jon says:

06:33pm | 06/06/11

Dan@ Why would you be offended by Ibn Warraq’s book? You should watch his interviews he makes rational and intelligence critique of Mohammedism. He respects the Mohammedan’s civilisation but not so the Koran or Mohammed.

Dan says:

11:58pm | 06/06/11

“Why would you be offended by Ibn Warraq’s book?”

Gee, I wonder. Why would any decent person be offended by such a disgusting book? Oh, I forget, you aren’t decent.

“he makes rational and intelligence critique of Mohammedism.”

Do you hear yourself? The religion is ISLAM you Islamophobic, paranoid fool!!! As for rational and intelligence, you don’t even know what those words mean!

As for watching his interviews, you would watch David Irving get interviewed as long as he villified ISLAM.

“He respects the Mohammedan’s civilisation”

The religion is NOT called Mohammedism and Muslims are not Mohammedans! You are disgusting!!!

BTW, if he did respect their civilisation, he wouldn’t write that book would he?

“but not so the Koran or Mohammed.”

He respects them far more than I respect the opinions of someone like you!

Jon says:

04:35pm | 07/06/11

Dan@ Sometimes the truth is offensive and that’s your problem not mine.

Regarding Mohammedism for example, the followers of Christ are Christian’s, the followers of Buddha are Buddhist’s and the followers of Mohammed are Mohammedan’s etc. This is the correct English word and it has been in use for centuries it’s just that the other words are easier to spell and are shorter.

Name calling never wins a debate!

Dan says:

03:24am | 08/06/11

“Sometimes the truth is offensive and that’s your problem not mine.”

What truth? What truth?!!!

It’s not my problem that you wouldn’t know what the truth was if it punched you in the face.

” Regarding Mohammedism for example, the followers of Christ are Christian’s, the followers of Buddha are Buddhist’s and the followers of Mohammed are Mohammedan’s etc.”

Muslims worship God. They do not worship Mohammad, and to call them Mohammedans, when they are Muslims, is not only ignorant but incredibly offensive!!!

“This is the correct English word and it has been in use for centuries”

No, it’s not the correct English word. It has never been the correct English word. The only people who persist in using it are bigots and Islamophobes.

I might point out that no English-speaking Muslim would ever use such a bigoted word, but then I hadn’t realized you were the world’s authority on Islam. You are an intellectual disgrace!

“it’s just that the other words are easier to spell and are shorter.”

LOL.

The other words are used because they are CORRECT.

Jon, I will try to make this simple so that you are able to understand.

Mohammedism implies that Muslims worship Mohammed, which they do not. They worship God. It is not the correct word, and if you knew anything about Islam beyond what you read on KKK sites, you would realize that. If you are capable of any thought, that is.

“Name calling never wins a debate!”

Except I won the debate the moment you opened your mouth. The moment you replied to me, I had already won the debate!

Oh, and I call people on what they are. If you don’t like it, then stop being an Islamophobic paranoid fool!

Jon says:

07:34am | 08/06/11

Dan@ The only difference between Mohammad and Ron L Hubbard is time. Now there’s a truth for you.

TheRealDave says:

02:40pm | 06/06/11

Dagnabbit..I forgot to add:

Any Digger ‘outside the wire’ in Oruzgan is far more likely to have the ‘Odd Angry Shot’ thrown their way not because he’s a western soldier or supposed ‘occupier’ but more likely because he’s on the same side as a tribe the locals hate.

And yes…I’m getting a new keyboard…this wireless one is crap….I blame all typos on this pece of shit keyboard…and my lack of giving a crap to run it through a spell checker before posting….

michael j says:

03:50pm | 06/06/11

@-summed up preaty well TRD these Taliban fells bin around a fair wile
about a pommy officer describing them as Taliban in a quable they had around 1865 ?unless they are all killed what is going to change nothing?
2 Warlords rule in the north of Kabul,do the UN even have operations there,,
Taliban go round building medical centres and schools, settling disputes ,,and collect taxs with a very sharp knife ,,?that i do not Like the way they they treat their female’s could be said of many nations on this Planet,,,I saw the Presidents top Political Analyst interviewed the other day,HE said when they pull out in 4 years time things will stay the same as they are now ,,,4 regions with 4 rulers,,Our troops can come home now,,
and dave i think the is only 1 b and 2 t s Dagnabitt fuc-en spealcheck,,

TheRealDave says:

07:30pm | 06/06/11

Oh dear…I wouldn’t even know where to start….probably blaming the education system you went through Chris might be one place…..your parents obvious lack of interest in your schooling would be another….

Could you, just for humors sake, point out where exactly in Afghanistan the ‘oil’ is you allude to…or even where ‘the US and Australia’ got our ‘arses kicked’’ in Vietnam?

Are you John positing under a different name to throw of your conspiracy theory delusions??

Jon says:

06:41pm | 06/06/11

Alexander the Great conquered all of Afghanistan.

TheRealDave says:

07:26pm | 06/06/11

Afghanistan has been conquered plenty of times. As soon as you see anyone spouting this undefeated unwinnable crap you know for a fact they know nothing of Afghanistan, its history or anything to do with current operations and are merely parroting someone elses bollocks.

Like Che here.

John the Zombie says:

10:47pm | 06/06/11

Che learn about the Sikh empire. The empire ruled Afghanistan and the unbeatable Afghans as you call them were well beaten in battle. This was during the rule of Maharaja Ranjit Singh

Also if you want to know about strengh and courage read about the battle or Saragarhi. In this battle 21 Sikh soldiers held off 10,000 pushtu’s forces till the British were able to organise enough forces to repell the attack. This force of 21 Sikhs had a choice to retreat or fight and they choose to fight. When the battle was finished and the forces had arrived to push the Pashtus back it was found these 21 had killed over 1,000 of the enemy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Saragarhi

samir says:

09:14pm | 06/06/11

Afghani means of Afghan. A local would call himself Afghani, a westerner would call him an Afghan.

Karl says:

08:58pm | 07/06/11

Thanks Samir,  When I was in Kabul, the locals always said they should be referred to as Afghan.

fml says:

09:54am | 07/06/11

So your there fighting so we dont have an opinion back here?

I’ll just shut up then drill sargent.

AKoiLus says:

12:31pm | 07/06/11

Me thinks PJW (who’s caps key must be stuck) Is asking to be left to do the job he signed up for, trained for, and is enjoying despite the dangers.
@fml Where do you work mate? So I can come down and rattle you to get out of your career path.

Cab says:

11:38am | 27/01/12

I too had the sad experience of working with Jason. you are being to nice in your comments. Beware fo the self professing person who has tried to reinvent himself at the expence of others. I hope he is not working with anyone in a danger zone. Beware of this person

Danger Close