Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Polling update for first half of August – politicalbetting.com

1356

Comments

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,535
    edited August 2021

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Actually, there's some truth in that. If you are prepared to go back 40 or 50 years, before Wahhabi Islam and the fall of the Shah, you'd have found that some of those societies were probably more tolerant of homosexuality than many Western countries of the time.

    Not true now, of course.

    And the idea that it was British colonialism that was responsible is for the birds.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 1,332

    GIN1138 said:

    R&W


    Is in good physical and mental health
    Starmer 37%
    Johnson 27%
    DK 36%


    LOL! Bizarre question?
    Not so bizarre when you look at the appearance and behaviour of Boris Johnson. He looks obese, prematurely aged and unwell. He behaves like a poorly brought-up primary school child.

    Folk go on about Biden’s dementia, but is Johnson not about the same? He seems to struggle with elementary tasks.
    Time for your nap Stuart 👍
  • Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    Until recently, India (Hindu majority, natch) had an article 370 of its penile code - "Carnal intercourse against the order of nature".
    Er... penal code shirley?
    It was all done in the best possible taste!
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 3,480
    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    Chameleon said:

    RobD said:

    Far too much of the commentary is about the West's fault or responsibility and how Biden, Trump or {insert politician you don't like} has screwed up.

    This is the wrong way of looking at things.

    In fact its a very 'colonialist' way of looking at things.

    In reality the people with agency, the people making the decisions were the Afghans.

    And they have made their choice and that is the Taliban.

    Now that might hurt - its painful to accept that the Afghans did not want western values and that the efforts made have been wasted - but we cannot deny it.

    You might have a point, had the Taliban won a free and fair election. But they didn't, and I doubt the average Afghani had much input in the matter.
    But you're just going in a circle back to the original problem.

    If the Taliban weren't wanted why has there been sod all opposition to them ?

    If the government was accepted - your free and fair election line - then why was nobody willing to fight for it ?
    Because the US was outright saying that 'we're almost certain you'll fail and lose to the Taliban in 6-9 months, the choice laid out wasn't Taliban vs Democracy, it was Taliban vs Death. However this is far from the end, already there are rumours of the Uzbek warlords (who say that senior Govt. officials stood down their troops) are readying their men. It's a big mess that is only going to get worse, and all could have been averted with a relatively limited (sub-10k) permanent mission. The AnA felt deserted because they were deserted.
    Whether he wanted it or not, politically a c10k permanent mission wasn't an option after Trump had already instigated the almost complete drawdown of US troops in January.
    Why not?
    The US public wouldn't accept it. Hence "politically". The US public don't want to be in Afghanistan. They don't in general care what happens there. There are dozens of regimes around the world with similar or worse records on human rights. They don't want to get involved in those either.
    “Martha? I know we always vote Democrat. But I just won’t stand for it any longer, this training and security mission in Afghanistan”.

    Said no voter ever.
    They've been on a "training and security" mission in Afghanistan for 20 years. And all the polling says they'd had enough and wanted out.
    Healthcare. The economy. Abortion. Gun control. Civil rights. Coronavirus. Climate change. Student debt. Government debt. Tariff policy / offshoring.

    Afghanistan has been an afterthought for American voters. Stop pretending that Biden’s hands were tied. This is on him. He’s wanted it for as long as Obama held office.
  • GIN1138 said:

    R&W


    Is in good physical and mental health
    Starmer 37%
    Johnson 27%
    DK 36%


    LOL! Bizarre question?
    Not so bizarre when you look at the appearance and behaviour of Boris Johnson. He looks obese, prematurely aged and unwell. He behaves like a poorly brought-up primary school child.

    Folk go on about Biden’s dementia, but is Johnson not about the same? He seems to struggle with elementary tasks.
    Boris is 57. Does he look prematurely aged or just older than Blair or Cameron when they were in office?

    I'd agree Boris might be showing a touch of the long Covids, but even without that, he is no spring chicken.
    He looks like what he is - a self-indulgent bloke with a chaotic life moving beyond middle age.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    edited August 2021
    Andy_JS said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone think Justin Trudeau could be heading for a fall next months snap Canadian election?

    A couple of weeks of bad Covid news in the middle of a needless general election. Seems risky?

    Plus Afghanistan means the Conservatives can go on national security, I doubt they will win but I like the Conservative leader Erin O'Toole and he is pro British and pro Brexit too.

    I am not particularly anti Trudeau, he is certainly better than Singh and the NDP and the BQ but he is taking a big risk and voters do not like being taken for granted, I certainly think there are no guarantees he will get the majority he wants
    The first two polls of the campaign are at odds but within the margin of error.

    Forum Research has the Conservatives ahead 31-28 while Mainstream Research has the Liberals ahead 33-30 but both have a 3% or greater MoE so it's a statistical tie.

    Both pollsters have the NDP on 19% - Forum then has Greens on 8%, Bloc Quebecois on 7% and the People's Party on 5%. Mainstreet has BQ on 6%, People's Party on 5% and Greens on 4%.

    Forum would be a swing of 1% to the Conservatives on October 2019, Mainstreet would be a swing of 2% to the Liberals.

    Both Conservatives and Liberals down a little on 2019, NDP up three points, People's Party up four points and both BQ and the Greens about the same.

    Very early days but it's correct to say Trudeau has taken a chance here - O'Toole has been Conservative leader for barely a year and the Forum Research poll is the best he's had. Apart from two tied polls, the Conservatives have trailed the Liberals in every poll in his tenure but that of course means nothing.
    Those polls are pretty bad for the Liberals compared to the previous ones which led Trudeau to call the election.
    As May discovered voters do not like unnecessary elections called well before needed.

    The only early snap election I can think of that really payed off was Wilson's in 1966 and that was because Labour had only been in just 2 years, was still fresh and had not got a majority in 1964 which it got in 1966

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,252
    edited August 2021

    GIN1138 said:

    R&W


    Is in good physical and mental health
    Starmer 37%
    Johnson 27%
    DK 36%


    LOL! Bizarre question?
    Not so bizarre when you look at the appearance and behaviour of Boris Johnson. He looks obese, prematurely aged and unwell. He behaves like a poorly brought-up primary school child.

    Folk go on about Biden’s dementia, but is Johnson not about the same? He seems to struggle with elementary tasks.
    Boris is 57. Does he look prematurely aged or just older than Blair or Cameron when they were in office?

    I'd agree Boris might be showing a touch of the long Covids, but even without that, he is no spring chicken.
    We really don't have much experience of ageing male PM's recently. Brown was kicked out aged 59. The only recent one older than Boris,
    We have to go back to Callaghan for one in their sixties.
  • Redfield & Wilton poll tonight

    Sturgeon approval

    Approve 29% (-1)

    Disapprove 34% (+1)

    Net approval - 5 (-2 )

    Notice @StuartDickson omitted this from his list
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,535
    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
  • ChelyabinskChelyabinsk Posts: 372
    edited August 2021
    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Religions change. People invent things in religious texts that aren't there to pursue the agendas they want to pursue. 'Twas ever thus. Once Islam led the world in enlightened thought and scientific advancement when Christian Europe was stuck in the dark ages. The idea that they were somehow influenced by backwards Christianity is bonkers.
    If you're suggesting that people outside Europe have agency, and that sometimes they use that agency to do bad things, then I have to warn you that these are exceptionally courageous views to hold in the current era. Next you'll be suggesting that the phenomenon of communalism in India, and the tensions between Hindus and Muslims entailed therein, weren't solely a colonial import. Chalk that up as another worldview that British colonialism managed to change in less than a century, by the way.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 3,480
    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 21,866
    Top quality covid responsong going on in America.

    On the same day Tennessee activated the national guard to help hospitals the Govenor instituted and emergency order to allow parents to ignore mask mandates for schools.

    https://twitter.com/ngeidner/status/1427371149831311361?s=19
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,796
    Wait a minute, now Trump’s statement from April 18, 2021, has been deleted from his website! He said, “Getting out of Afghanistan is a wonderful and positive thing to do. I planned to withdraw on May 1.” Republicans now think they can delete history to try and own the libs.

    https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1427231535359528966?s=20
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,535
    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,150
    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    Chameleon said:

    RobD said:

    Far too much of the commentary is about the West's fault or responsibility and how Biden, Trump or {insert politician you don't like} has screwed up.

    This is the wrong way of looking at things.

    In fact its a very 'colonialist' way of looking at things.

    In reality the people with agency, the people making the decisions were the Afghans.

    And they have made their choice and that is the Taliban.

    Now that might hurt - its painful to accept that the Afghans did not want western values and that the efforts made have been wasted - but we cannot deny it.

    You might have a point, had the Taliban won a free and fair election. But they didn't, and I doubt the average Afghani had much input in the matter.
    But you're just going in a circle back to the original problem.

    If the Taliban weren't wanted why has there been sod all opposition to them ?

    If the government was accepted - your free and fair election line - then why was nobody willing to fight for it ?
    Because the US was outright saying that 'we're almost certain you'll fail and lose to the Taliban in 6-9 months, the choice laid out wasn't Taliban vs Democracy, it was Taliban vs Death. However this is far from the end, already there are rumours of the Uzbek warlords (who say that senior Govt. officials stood down their troops) are readying their men. It's a big mess that is only going to get worse, and all could have been averted with a relatively limited (sub-10k) permanent mission. The AnA felt deserted because they were deserted.
    Whether he wanted it or not, politically a c10k permanent mission wasn't an option after Trump had already instigated the almost complete drawdown of US troops in January.
    Why not?
    The US public wouldn't accept it. Hence "politically". The US public don't want to be in Afghanistan. They don't in general care what happens there. There are dozens of regimes around the world with similar or worse records on human rights. They don't want to get involved in those either.
    “Martha? I know we always vote Democrat. But I just won’t stand for it any longer, this training and security mission in Afghanistan”.

    Said no voter ever.
    They've been on a "training and security" mission in Afghanistan for 20 years. And all the polling says they'd had enough and wanted out.
    Healthcare. The economy. Abortion. Gun control. Civil rights. Coronavirus. Climate change. Student debt. Government debt. Tariff policy / offshoring.

    Afghanistan has been an afterthought for American voters. Stop pretending that Biden’s hands were tied. This is on him. He’s wanted it for as long as Obama held office.
    I didn't say he didn't want it. He argued against Obama committing more troops 8 years ago. He saw it as a futile mission. He was probably right.

    Doesn't mean that Trump had left him with no choice but to do what he wanted to do anyway
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,796
    Summary of Biden’s speech: “Why after 20 years did we plan our withdrawal the night before? Because Afghans are cowards”

    https://twitter.com/MacaesBruno/status/1427367890819420166?s=20
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 70,247

    Wait a minute, now Trump’s statement from April 18, 2021, has been deleted from his website! He said, “Getting out of Afghanistan is a wonderful and positive thing to do. I planned to withdraw on May 1.” Republicans now think they can delete history to try and own the libs.

    https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1427231535359528966?s=20

    It'll probably work.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    Quincel said:

    Cracking example here of truth being stranger than fiction.

    Some people spot that Johnson's watch in a photo of him observing a minute's silence for the Plymouth shooter's victims is nearly 15 minutes after the minute's silence was meant to be held. Did he forget and fake it for the press photo? Well, judging by other photos of him where the time is almost certainly not faked and his watch is visible: No. He just has his watch set 10-15 minutes fast and has done for at least a few weeks now.

    https://twitter.com/SpotMonkey/status/1427289471020683267

    Haha

    I saw that picture earlier and thought ‘oh no he’s been caught out there, how embarrassing’. Then I saw Southam Observer was tweeting about it, and as he always trips over his own feet in the rush to believe anything bad for Boris, I had pause for thought, maybe he just sets his watch fast… and he does!!!
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,831
    alex_ said:

    Quincel said:

    Cracking example here of truth being stranger than fiction.

    Some people spot that Johnson's watch in a photo of him observing a minute's silence for the Plymouth shooter's victims is nearly 15 minutes after the minute's silence was meant to be held. Did he forget and fake it for the press photo? Well, judging by other photos of him where the time is almost certainly not faked and his watch is visible: No. He just has his watch set 10-15 minutes fast and has done for at least a few weeks now.

    https://twitter.com/SpotMonkey/status/1427289471020683267

    Some people do this deliberately.
    True, though I wouldn't wish to presume in this case (or any, I guess).
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 3,480
    Grandpa Joe restoring America’s moral leadership one step at a time.

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1427228472544485378?s=21

    ‘In 2010 Biden told Richard Holbrook the US had to leave Afghanistan regardless of the consequences for women or anyone else. When asked about American obligations to Afghans like the school girl in Kabul, Biden replied: “fuck that. We don’t have to worry about that. We did it in Vietnam, and Nixon and Kissinger got away with it”.’

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 18,568

    Redfield & Wilton poll tonight

    Sturgeon approval

    Approve 29% (-1)

    Disapprove 34% (+1)

    Net approval - 5 (-2 )

    Notice @StuartDickson omitted this from his list


    LOL! I think Big G just owned @StuartDickson ;)
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,840
    Foxy said:

    GIN1138 said:

    R&W

    Is in good physical and mental health
    Starmer 37%
    Johnson 27%
    DK 36%

    LOL! Bizarre question?
    Not so bizarre when you look at the appearance and behaviour of Boris Johnson. He looks obese, prematurely aged and unwell. He behaves like a poorly brought-up primary school child.

    Folk go on about Biden’s dementia, but is Johnson not about the same? He seems to struggle with elementary tasks.
    He looks like he copies his idols drinking habits rather better than Churchill's oratory, principles or literary skills
    Yes. He’s got a bit of the SeanT’s going on there: easier to count the white days than the wet months.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 3,497
    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    I think you're right, I think most of the public both in the USA and here, across the political spectrum, are sick of the military adventurism that has characterised too much foreign policy over the last 20 years (and going back longer for those who are older). Whether it be Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or wherever, the human and financial cost of trying to export western values is just not worth the candle. Especially as it never succeeds in the long term.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 3,480
    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 18,568
    edited August 2021
    moonshine said:

    Grandpa Joe restoring America’s moral leadership one step at a time.

    https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1427228472544485378?s=21

    ‘In 2010 Biden told Richard Holbrook the US had to leave Afghanistan regardless of the consequences for women or anyone else. When asked about American obligations to Afghans like the school girl in Kabul, Biden replied: “fuck that. We don’t have to worry about that. We did it in Vietnam, and Nixon and Kissinger got away with it”.’

    I don't know... he seems like quite a nasty old man to me?

    I thought the Dems were supposed to be all warm and cuddly and the GOP were supposed to be the nasty ones?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,840

    GIN1138 said:

    R&W


    Is in good physical and mental health
    Starmer 37%
    Johnson 27%
    DK 36%


    LOL! Bizarre question?
    Not so bizarre when you look at the appearance and behaviour of Boris Johnson. He looks obese, prematurely aged and unwell. He behaves like a poorly brought-up primary school child.

    Folk go on about Biden’s dementia, but is Johnson not about the same? He seems to struggle with elementary tasks.
    Seems to out poll Starmer on the important issues
    You don’t think that good physical and mental health are important in a prime minister?
    Remarkable.

    That buffoon has his finger on the nuclear trigger. Sleep well Big G.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,796
    Support for Afghanistan Withdrawal Tumbles Amid Taliban Resurgence
    49% of voters back withdrawal of U.S. forces, down 20 points since April



    https://morningconsult.com/2021/08/16/afghanistan-withdrawal-taliban-polling/
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 3,480

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    I think you're right, I think most of the public both in the USA and here, across the political spectrum, are sick of the military adventurism that has characterised too much foreign policy over the last 20 years (and going back longer for those who are older). Whether it be Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or wherever, the human and financial cost of trying to export western values is just not worth the candle. Especially as it never succeeds in the long term.
    I cannot speak for America. But here, I have been struck by how much these events have cut through to people only loosely interested in politics and who were in the main highly anti war in the Blair years. “So disgusted and angry I can’t even talk about it” was what one said.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,979

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Religions change. People invent things in religious texts that aren't there to pursue the agendas they want to pursue. 'Twas ever thus. Once Islam led the world in enlightened thought and scientific advancement when Christian Europe was stuck in the dark ages. The idea that they were somehow influenced by backwards Christianity is bonkers.
    If you're suggesting that people outside Europe have agency, and that sometimes they use that agency to do bad things, then I have to warn you that these are exceptionally courageous views to hold in the current era. Next you'll be suggesting that the phenomenon of communalism in India, and the tensions between Hindus and Muslims entailed therein, weren't solely a colonial import. Chalk that up as another worldview that British colonialism managed to change in less than a century, by the way.
    We're living in a time where it's fashionable to attack, wholesale, all aspects of our history and hold us accountable for all the ills of the world in the belief this is both right and represents progress.

    In time, that'll be seen for the nonsense that it is - the only question is how much damage is done in the meantime.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 56,651

    Support for Afghanistan Withdrawal Tumbles Amid Taliban Resurgence
    49% of voters back withdrawal of U.S. forces, down 20 points since April



    https://morningconsult.com/2021/08/16/afghanistan-withdrawal-taliban-polling/

    It would have been interesting to see the question rephrases as "Donald Trump's decision". I suspect those numbers would have been reversed.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    edited August 2021

    Support for Afghanistan Withdrawal Tumbles Amid Taliban Resurgence
    49% of voters back withdrawal of U.S. forces, down 20 points since April



    https://morningconsult.com/2021/08/16/afghanistan-withdrawal-taliban-polling/

    The key figure there is 58% of Republicans now oppose the withdrawal.

    Biden has even managed to turn the GOP neocon again!!

    If the Taliban regain full control of the country even All US voters by 45% to 38% oppose the withdrawal, as they do by an even bigger 48% to 35% margin if A Qaeda and terrorists re establish operations in Afghanistan.

    Those are very worrying numbers for Biden if jihadi militants come back
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 1,332

    GIN1138 said:

    R&W


    Is in good physical and mental health
    Starmer 37%
    Johnson 27%
    DK 36%


    LOL! Bizarre question?
    Not so bizarre when you look at the appearance and behaviour of Boris Johnson. He looks obese, prematurely aged and unwell. He behaves like a poorly brought-up primary school child.

    Folk go on about Biden’s dementia, but is Johnson not about the same? He seems to struggle with elementary tasks.
    Seems to out poll Starmer on the important issues
    You don’t think that good physical and mental health are important in a prime minister?
    Remarkable.

    That buffoon has his finger on the nuclear trigger. Sleep well Big G.
    You are the buffoon Stuart. Time for you to have an extended break from this site and leave it to the sophisticated adults like me 👍
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,840

    GIN1138 said:

    R&W


    Is in good physical and mental health
    Starmer 37%
    Johnson 27%
    DK 36%


    LOL! Bizarre question?
    Not so bizarre when you look at the appearance and behaviour of Boris Johnson. He looks obese, prematurely aged and unwell. He behaves like a poorly brought-up primary school child.

    Folk go on about Biden’s dementia, but is Johnson not about the same? He seems to struggle with elementary tasks.
    Boris is 57. Does he look prematurely aged or just older than Blair or Cameron when they were in office?

    I'd agree Boris might be showing a touch of the long Covids, but even without that, he is no spring chicken.
    Yes, you may well be correct. Blair, Cameron, Clegg all looked young and frisky. Brown looked plain odd, but not unwell. Major looked like he thought sipping a cool Fanta was a bit racey. Maggie had an enormous vigour and burning force (the deil?) bursting out from her very innards. Johnson looks like a collapsed soufflé.

    Long-covid seems possible.

    He is no spring chicken, but I know lots of folk in their mid-50s that look a lot better than Johnson.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 21,295
    edited August 2021
    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Heathener said:

    Words fail me on Afghanistan.

    And unlike most other stories over the past few months this one will really bite with loyal Boris supporters. The Mail and Telegraph are up in arms and the question is being asked about why all 'our boys' died in vain out there, let alone the utter betrayal of the Afghan peoples.

    Whatever your views on our involvement twenty years ago, this is an absolutely disgraceful episode in western foreign policy, a defeat of epic proportions.

    I suspect most "loyal Boris supporters" will not in fact give a damn about events in Afghanistan, unless we accept large numbers of Afghani refugees; it's a country far away from here that few would be able to locate on a map.

    But I agree it's a disgraceful episode of western foreign policy. What made the west think that it could transpose its norms and values into Afghani culture through a combination of military force and bribery, and get buy-in from the locals, including the Afghani army?

    Mercifully, and at least in the short-term, the Taliban 'revolution' seems to have been relatively peaceful. We haven't read of large numbers of casualties, apart from the disorder at the airport. This does seem to indicate that Taliban rule is not unpopular with a lot of Afghanis, perhaps even a majority. There's not a lot we can do about that, however much we don't approve.
    You are sadly deluded. The Taliban really are Islamic Nazis, like ISIS. That’s their USP. Their DNA. Radical, brutal Islam of the most mediaeval variety. What’s more, the most evangelical of them will now feel even more emboldened: we beat Imperial Britain, the USSR and now the USA. We cannot lose, Allah is with us!

    The most extreme within their movement will now assume moral command. Within a few months they will be stoning women and exporting terror, all over again. They are scorpions who have no other weapon than the stinger
    They are already hunting down women journalists, who have gone into hiding. We will not hear of the reality of what will,happen because journalists will leave, the world will get bored and anyway how will anyone manage to talk to any women since they will all be hidden behind veils in their homes.

    The horror will exist but will be hidden.
    Well, onething has changed since 2001, the prevalence of smartphones and Internet. Those women cannot be isolated in the way they were by the first Taliban regime. That goes for both information in and out. The word has changed, and it is much harder to keep secrets.
    Right - because if you're on the run from people trying to kill you, you'll obviously be on the internet and your phone because the silly old Taliban wonuldn't think of trying to track you down that way.

    Look at the pictures coming out of Afghanistan now. How many women are in those films of Kabul airport? Where are they?

    The reality of stunted lives - of what people cannot do, of the pain caused by not being able to access medical treatment, of not being able to go out for a walk etc - does not make for riveting films. So it will be ignored and quietly forgotten by most.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,840
    HYUFD said:

    Redfield & Wilton Strategies

    Boris Johnson net approval Scotland -58

    In 2071 you will still be posting this sort of stuff about UK including Scotland prime minister
    Are you happy having such an unpopular leader in the second largest member of the Union?
    Why does it matter? In 2014 Scots voted in a once in a generation referendum when they had a Tory government to keep their general elections decided by the UK as a whole not just them.

    So tough, the only figures that matter are Boris' UK approval ratings, not his Scottish ones
    Thank you for that much needed clarification. Job done! Union saved for another evening! My goodness, what a clever boy you’ve been.

    Sorry for being a Jock. I promise never to bother you again sir. Thank you for giving me a sound beating: I deserved it and it will do me good. Please send a tank next time.

    Dofts cap.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 14,736
    "Konstantin Kisin, Clownworld Skeptic
    @KonstantinKisin

    Surprisingly persuasive speech from Biden. Obviously it was a decision with horrific trade-offs either way but he made a strong case for his decision."

    https://twitter.com/KonstantinKisin/status/1427365519884173325
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 14,736
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone think Justin Trudeau could be heading for a fall next months snap Canadian election?

    A couple of weeks of bad Covid news in the middle of a needless general election. Seems risky?

    Plus Afghanistan means the Conservatives can go on national security, I doubt they will win but I like the Conservative leader Erin O'Toole and he is pro British and pro Brexit too.

    I am not particularly anti Trudeau, he is certainly better than Singh and the NDP and the BQ but he is taking a big risk and voters do not like being taken for granted, I certainly think there are no guarantees he will get the majority he wants
    The first two polls of the campaign are at odds but within the margin of error.

    Forum Research has the Conservatives ahead 31-28 while Mainstream Research has the Liberals ahead 33-30 but both have a 3% or greater MoE so it's a statistical tie.

    Both pollsters have the NDP on 19% - Forum then has Greens on 8%, Bloc Quebecois on 7% and the People's Party on 5%. Mainstreet has BQ on 6%, People's Party on 5% and Greens on 4%.

    Forum would be a swing of 1% to the Conservatives on October 2019, Mainstreet would be a swing of 2% to the Liberals.

    Both Conservatives and Liberals down a little on 2019, NDP up three points, People's Party up four points and both BQ and the Greens about the same.

    Very early days but it's correct to say Trudeau has taken a chance here - O'Toole has been Conservative leader for barely a year and the Forum Research poll is the best he's had. Apart from two tied polls, the Conservatives have trailed the Liberals in every poll in his tenure but that of course means nothing.
    Those polls are pretty bad for the Liberals compared to the previous ones which led Trudeau to call the election.
    As May discovered voters do not like unnecessary elections called well before needed.

    The only early snap election I can think of that really payed off was Wilson's in 1966 and that was because Labour had only been in just 2 years, was still fresh and had not got a majority in 1964 which it got in 1966

    I wonder whether Trudeau will resign if he comes out of the election with fewer seats than he went into it with.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,725
    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,840
    HYUFD said:

    Redfield & Wilton Strategies

    Boris Johnson net approval Scotland -58

    Irrelevant, even if the Tories lost all of their remaining 6 seats in Scotland Boris would still have a UK Tory majority of 68
    It’s nice to be valued.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    Andy_JS said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone think Justin Trudeau could be heading for a fall next months snap Canadian election?

    A couple of weeks of bad Covid news in the middle of a needless general election. Seems risky?

    Plus Afghanistan means the Conservatives can go on national security, I doubt they will win but I like the Conservative leader Erin O'Toole and he is pro British and pro Brexit too.

    I am not particularly anti Trudeau, he is certainly better than Singh and the NDP and the BQ but he is taking a big risk and voters do not like being taken for granted, I certainly think there are no guarantees he will get the majority he wants
    The first two polls of the campaign are at odds but within the margin of error.

    Forum Research has the Conservatives ahead 31-28 while Mainstream Research has the Liberals ahead 33-30 but both have a 3% or greater MoE so it's a statistical tie.

    Both pollsters have the NDP on 19% - Forum then has Greens on 8%, Bloc Quebecois on 7% and the People's Party on 5%. Mainstreet has BQ on 6%, People's Party on 5% and Greens on 4%.

    Forum would be a swing of 1% to the Conservatives on October 2019, Mainstreet would be a swing of 2% to the Liberals.

    Both Conservatives and Liberals down a little on 2019, NDP up three points, People's Party up four points and both BQ and the Greens about the same.

    Very early days but it's correct to say Trudeau has taken a chance here - O'Toole has been Conservative leader for barely a year and the Forum Research poll is the best he's had. Apart from two tied polls, the Conservatives have trailed the Liberals in every poll in his tenure but that of course means nothing.
    Those polls are pretty bad for the Liberals compared to the previous ones which led Trudeau to call the election.
    As May discovered voters do not like unnecessary elections called well before needed.

    The only early snap election I can think of that really payed off was Wilson's in 1966 and that was because Labour had only been in just 2 years, was still fresh and had not got a majority in 1964 which it got in 1966

    I wonder whether Trudeau will resign if he comes out of the election with fewer seats than he went into it with.
    I doubt it, most likely he would try and get support from the NDP and Greens to stay in office even if the Conservatives win most seats
  • YokesYokes Posts: 749
    edited August 2021
    There was a key point of substance in Joe Biden's speech and it was words to the effect that 'we provided support for their airforce'. Yes you did Joe, in fact it relied pretty much entirely on US operational & technical support to fully function, largely through US government paid contractors.

    And what did you do? You removed that support. The US trained the bulk of the Afghan military to operate its counter insurgency with one of its major pillars being air support; get contact of any size, call in air support exactly as Western forces did for years. You then withdrew the support for that airforce by removing the US managed tech support and withdrew US airpower with it.

    Finally, no one with any knowledge would tell you the Afghan forces had 300k troops, it had an effective fighting force much smaller. They also did not all skip over the border, some fought and died, other surrendered and died, some realised they were stuffed, changed clothes but were gunned down anyway. Others will be searched out and killed soon enough.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    edited August 2021

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,832
    Cyclefree said:



    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Heathener said:

    Words fail me on Afghanistan.

    And unlike most other stories over the past few months this one will really bite with loyal Boris supporters. The Mail and Telegraph are up in arms and the question is being asked about why all 'our boys' died in vain out there, let alone the utter betrayal of the Afghan peoples.

    Whatever your views on our involvement twenty years ago, this is an absolutely disgraceful episode in western foreign policy, a defeat of epic proportions.

    I suspect most "loyal Boris supporters" will not in fact give a damn about events in Afghanistan, unless we accept large numbers of Afghani refugees; it's a country far away from here that few would be able to locate on a map.

    But I agree it's a disgraceful episode of western foreign policy. What made the west think that it could transpose its norms and values into Afghani culture through a combination of military force and bribery, and get buy-in from the locals, including the Afghani army?

    Mercifully, and at least in the short-term, the Taliban 'revolution' seems to have been relatively peaceful. We haven't read of large numbers of casualties, apart from the disorder at the airport. This does seem to indicate that Taliban rule is not unpopular with a lot of Afghanis, perhaps even a majority. There's not a lot we can do about that, however much we don't approve.
    You are sadly deluded. The Taliban really are Islamic Nazis, like ISIS. That’s their USP. Their DNA. Radical, brutal Islam of the most mediaeval variety. What’s more, the most evangelical of them will now feel even more emboldened: we beat Imperial Britain, the USSR and now the USA. We cannot lose, Allah is with us!

    The most extreme within their movement will now assume moral command. Within a few months they will be stoning women and exporting terror, all over again. They are scorpions who have no other weapon than the stinger
    They are already hunting down women journalists, who have gone into hiding. We will not hear of the reality of what will,happen because journalists will leave, the world will get bored and anyway how will anyone manage to talk to any women since they will all be hidden behind veils in their homes.

    The horror will exist but will be hidden.
    Well, onething has changed since 2001, the prevalence of smartphones and Internet. Those women cannot be isolated in the way they were by the first Taliban regime. That goes for both information in and out. The word has changed, and it is much harder to keep secrets.
    Right - because if you're on the run from people trying to kill you, you'll obviously be on the internet and your phone because the silly old Taliban wonuldn't think of trying to track you down that way.

    Look at the pictures coming out of Afghanistan now. How many women are in those films of Kabul airport? Where are they?

    The reality of stunted lives - of what people cannot do, of the pain caused by not being able to access medical treatment, of not being able to go out for a walk etc - does not make for riveting films. So it will be ignored and quietly forgotten by most.
    On the contrary, if on the run the first thing to take is your smartphone, as you need to communicate and gather news, as we see with refugees everywhere.

    The Taliban are not the CCP with their surveillance state, or even the Britain of "Hunted". Sure, be discrete how you do it, but smartphones and the Internet make it impossible to isolate people as they were in 2001
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 1,332
    Andy_JS said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone think Justin Trudeau could be heading for a fall next months snap Canadian election?

    A couple of weeks of bad Covid news in the middle of a needless general election. Seems risky?

    Plus Afghanistan means the Conservatives can go on national security, I doubt they will win but I like the Conservative leader Erin O'Toole and he is pro British and pro Brexit too.

    I am not particularly anti Trudeau, he is certainly better than Singh and the NDP and the BQ but he is taking a big risk and voters do not like being taken for granted, I certainly think there are no guarantees he will get the majority he wants
    The first two polls of the campaign are at odds but within the margin of error.

    Forum Research has the Conservatives ahead 31-28 while Mainstream Research has the Liberals ahead 33-30 but both have a 3% or greater MoE so it's a statistical tie.

    Both pollsters have the NDP on 19% - Forum then has Greens on 8%, Bloc Quebecois on 7% and the People's Party on 5%. Mainstreet has BQ on 6%, People's Party on 5% and Greens on 4%.

    Forum would be a swing of 1% to the Conservatives on October 2019, Mainstreet would be a swing of 2% to the Liberals.

    Both Conservatives and Liberals down a little on 2019, NDP up three points, People's Party up four points and both BQ and the Greens about the same.

    Very early days but it's correct to say Trudeau has taken a chance here - O'Toole has been Conservative leader for barely a year and the Forum Research poll is the best he's had. Apart from two tied polls, the Conservatives have trailed the Liberals in every poll in his tenure but that of course means nothing.
    Those polls are pretty bad for the Liberals compared to the previous ones which led Trudeau to call the election.
    As May discovered voters do not like unnecessary elections called well before needed.

    The only early snap election I can think of that really payed off was Wilson's in 1966 and that was because Labour had only been in just 2 years, was still fresh and had not got a majority in 1964 which it got in 1966

    I wonder whether Trudeau will resign if he comes out of the election with fewer seats than he went into it with.
    Hopefully CON will win enough to make the decision easy for him!
  • ChelyabinskChelyabinsk Posts: 372
    edited August 2021

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Religions change. People invent things in religious texts that aren't there to pursue the agendas they want to pursue. 'Twas ever thus. Once Islam led the world in enlightened thought and scientific advancement when Christian Europe was stuck in the dark ages. The idea that they were somehow influenced by backwards Christianity is bonkers.
    If you're suggesting that people outside Europe have agency, and that sometimes they use that agency to do bad things, then I have to warn you that these are exceptionally courageous views to hold in the current era. Next you'll be suggesting that the phenomenon of communalism in India, and the tensions between Hindus and Muslims entailed therein, weren't solely a colonial import. Chalk that up as another worldview that British colonialism managed to change in less than a century, by the way.
    We're living in a time where it's fashionable to attack, wholesale, all aspects of our history and hold us accountable for all the ills of the world in the belief this is both right and represents progress.

    In time, that'll be seen for the nonsense that it is
    Nope.

    1) The people currently in charge of academia in the West have no intention of letting their ideological opponents anywhere near positions of power (88% of academics are left wing; between a third and a half of left-wingers reviewing a grant bid would mark it lower if it took a right-wing perspective; about a third of academics who voted remain are likely to discriminate against a leaver in job appointments; 40% of left-wing academics would discriminate in favor of a Corbyn supporter over a Leave supporter.)

    2) By 2050 Nigeria will be the world's third largest country, while Africa's population of 2.5 billion will be nearly six times greater than that of Europe (440m); the US will be 47% white and the UK will be 62% white, with a majority-minority population among young people. Under the circumstances, is it really plausible to claim that historical interpretations will become more favourable towards the empire?

  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 3,480
    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,796
    Tonight, the A400M of the German Luftwaffe evacuated 7 people from Kabul.
    Yes, you read that correctly. SEVEN.
    Those 7 were at the airport and on the official embassy-list to be flown out.
    My heart breaks for those who helped our army for years and are now being left behind.


    https://twitter.com/JeannePlaumann/status/1427389030694629377?s=20
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 3,480
    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
    "We would like more money"
    Is the Navy known for petitioning the government for funds for theoretical science research?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    It would be pretty difficult to shake the world from a position inside the atmosphere surely?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    edited August 2021

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Religions change. People invent things in religious texts that aren't there to pursue the agendas they want to pursue. 'Twas ever thus. Once Islam led the world in enlightened thought and scientific advancement when Christian Europe was stuck in the dark ages. The idea that they were somehow influenced by backwards Christianity is bonkers.
    If you're suggesting that people outside Europe have agency, and that sometimes they use that agency to do bad things, then I have to warn you that these are exceptionally courageous views to hold in the current era. Next you'll be suggesting that the phenomenon of communalism in India, and the tensions between Hindus and Muslims entailed therein, weren't solely a colonial import. Chalk that up as another worldview that British colonialism managed to change in less than a century, by the way.
    We're living in a time where it's fashionable to attack, wholesale, all aspects of our history and hold us accountable for all the ills of the world in the belief this is both right and represents progress.

    In time, that'll be seen for the nonsense that it is
    Nope.

    1) The people currently in charge of academia in the West have no intention of letting their ideological opponents anywhere near positions of power (88% of academics are left wing; between a third and a half of left-wingers reviewing a grant bid would mark it lower if it took a right-wing perspective; about a third of academics who voted remain are likely to discriminate against a leaver in job appointments; 40% of left-wing academics would discriminate in favor of a Corbyn supporter over a Leave supporter.)

    2) By 2050 Nigeria will be the world's third largest country, while Africa's population of 2.5 billion will be 440m; the US will be 47% white and the UK will be 62% white, with a majority-minority population among young people. Under the circumstances, is it really plausible to claim that historical interpretations will become more favourable towards the empire?

    By then the Empire will have ended 100 years ago, it will have been as distant to young people then as WW1 is to young people now, it will be a matter of largely historical curiosity whatever view taken on it little more.

    Though on your wider point yes the world will become more African population wise and the West will become even less white, by 2100 the only white majority nations left will likely be in Russia and Eastern Europe.

    Not that that is a problem but there will be some political and cultural tensions on the way
  • moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
    "We would like more money"
    Is the Navy known for petitioning the government for funds for theoretical science research?
    Yes.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 749
    edited August 2021
    US KIA in Afghanistan in 2019 - 22.
    2018-15

    Buy the time 2020 rolled round it was clear the US was going to backseat and back out- 5.

    The US has taken less than 30 dead per year since 2015 when they were still knee deep in there. Sad every single one but not exactly a huge rate of attrition. Not all of those were caused by hostile action either.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 3,480

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
    "We would like more money"
    Is the Navy known for petitioning the government for funds for theoretical science research?
    Yes.
    Please do tell
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 3,480
    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
    "We would like more money"
    Is the Navy known for petitioning the government for funds for theoretical science research?
    Yes.
    Please do tell
    Actually don’t bother.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,066
    Yokes said:

    US KIA in Afghanistan in 2019 - 22.
    2018-15

    Buy the time 2020 rolled round it was clear the US was going to backseat and back out- 5.

    The US has taken less than 30 dead per year since 2015 when they were still knee deep in there. Sad every single one but not exactly a huge rate of attrition. Not all of those were caused by hostile action either.

    Biden and Trump are cowards and rodents who will be judged. America does not have to retreat so shamefully
  • ChelyabinskChelyabinsk Posts: 372
    edited August 2021
    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Religions change. People invent things in religious texts that aren't there to pursue the agendas they want to pursue. 'Twas ever thus. Once Islam led the world in enlightened thought and scientific advancement when Christian Europe was stuck in the dark ages. The idea that they were somehow influenced by backwards Christianity is bonkers.
    If you're suggesting that people outside Europe have agency, and that sometimes they use that agency to do bad things, then I have to warn you that these are exceptionally courageous views to hold in the current era. Next you'll be suggesting that the phenomenon of communalism in India, and the tensions between Hindus and Muslims entailed therein, weren't solely a colonial import. Chalk that up as another worldview that British colonialism managed to change in less than a century, by the way.
    We're living in a time where it's fashionable to attack, wholesale, all aspects of our history and hold us accountable for all the ills of the world in the belief this is both right and represents progress.

    In time, that'll be seen for the nonsense that it is
    Nope.

    1) The people currently in charge of academia in the West have no intention of letting their ideological opponents anywhere near positions of power (88% of academics are left wing; between a third and a half of left-wingers reviewing a grant bid would mark it lower if it took a right-wing perspective; about a third of academics who voted remain are likely to discriminate against a leaver in job appointments; 40% of left-wing academics would discriminate in favor of a Corbyn supporter over a Leave supporter.)

    2) By 2050 Nigeria will be the world's third largest country, while Africa's population of 2.5 billion will be 440m; the US will be 47% white and the UK will be 62% white, with a majority-minority population among young people. Under the circumstances, is it really plausible to claim that historical interpretations will become more favourable towards the empire?

    By then the Empire will have ended 100 years ago, it will have been as distant to young people then as WW1 is to young people now, it will be a matter of largely historical curiosity whatever view taken on it little more.
    Slavery in the UK's colonies ended 188 years ago, and 156 years ago in the United States. Is the topic "a matter of largely historical curiosity"? Indeed, is it more or less contentious today than it was twenty years ago?
  • moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
    "We would like more money"
    Is the Navy known for petitioning the government for funds for theoretical science research?
    Yes.
    Please do tell
    Actually don’t bother.
    I don't know why I would with you. You've made your mind up.

    For anyone interested, the Pentagon's relationship with science research is not exactly a Rumsfeldian Unknown Unknown.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 749

    Tonight, the A400M of the German Luftwaffe evacuated 7 people from Kabul.
    Yes, you read that correctly. SEVEN.
    Those 7 were at the airport and on the official embassy-list to be flown out.
    My heart breaks for those who helped our army for years and are now being left behind.


    https://twitter.com/JeannePlaumann/status/1427389030694629377?s=20

    That is just typical of the fucking Germans in a situation like this.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,252

    Andy_JS said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone think Justin Trudeau could be heading for a fall next months snap Canadian election?

    A couple of weeks of bad Covid news in the middle of a needless general election. Seems risky?

    Plus Afghanistan means the Conservatives can go on national security, I doubt they will win but I like the Conservative leader Erin O'Toole and he is pro British and pro Brexit too.

    I am not particularly anti Trudeau, he is certainly better than Singh and the NDP and the BQ but he is taking a big risk and voters do not like being taken for granted, I certainly think there are no guarantees he will get the majority he wants
    The first two polls of the campaign are at odds but within the margin of error.

    Forum Research has the Conservatives ahead 31-28 while Mainstream Research has the Liberals ahead 33-30 but both have a 3% or greater MoE so it's a statistical tie.

    Both pollsters have the NDP on 19% - Forum then has Greens on 8%, Bloc Quebecois on 7% and the People's Party on 5%. Mainstreet has BQ on 6%, People's Party on 5% and Greens on 4%.

    Forum would be a swing of 1% to the Conservatives on October 2019, Mainstreet would be a swing of 2% to the Liberals.

    Both Conservatives and Liberals down a little on 2019, NDP up three points, People's Party up four points and both BQ and the Greens about the same.

    Very early days but it's correct to say Trudeau has taken a chance here - O'Toole has been Conservative leader for barely a year and the Forum Research poll is the best he's had. Apart from two tied polls, the Conservatives have trailed the Liberals in every poll in his tenure but that of course means nothing.
    Those polls are pretty bad for the Liberals compared to the previous ones which led Trudeau to call the election.
    As May discovered voters do not like unnecessary elections called well before needed.

    The only early snap election I can think of that really payed off was Wilson's in 1966 and that was because Labour had only been in just 2 years, was still fresh and had not got a majority in 1964 which it got in 1966

    I wonder whether Trudeau will resign if he comes out of the election with fewer seats than he went into it with.
    Hopefully CON will win enough to make the decision easy for him!
    There seems to be a minor head of steam building up on this. On PB that is.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,840
    GIN1138 said:

    Redfield & Wilton poll tonight

    Sturgeon approval

    Approve 29% (-1)

    Disapprove 34% (+1)

    Net approval - 5 (-2 )

    Notice @StuartDickson omitted this from his list


    LOL! I think Big G just owned @StuartDickson ;)
    Err no. Big G omitted quite an important detail from his report (naughty boy!) Unlike Starmer and Johnson, she doesn’t need to attract votes in England or Wales.

    Even as a GB measurement, that is astonishingly good, considering how many on here say that the SNP scare English voters.

    Johnson -58 in Scotland = piffling detail
    Sturgeon -5 in England = guffaw central

    PB Tories really are an odd bunch.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    I have no idea how the tic tac object stays airborne - it has no propulsion we can see and was caught on multiple radars on multiple days travelling conservatively at 50,000 miles an hour plus and pulling something like 12,250 g's - including immediate stops after dropping 50,000 feet in a couple of seconds. They also "flew" at 80,000 feet at 100 knots - not easy to explain.

    No idea what powers them or how they can operate as they do - but its certainly not traditional tech
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Yokes said:

    Tonight, the A400M of the German Luftwaffe evacuated 7 people from Kabul.
    Yes, you read that correctly. SEVEN.
    Those 7 were at the airport and on the official embassy-list to be flown out.
    My heart breaks for those who helped our army for years and are now being left behind.


    https://twitter.com/JeannePlaumann/status/1427389030694629377?s=20

    That is just typical of the fucking Germans in a situation like this.
    As a German official so eloquently put it earlier today "no one forced them to help us"

    Utter %%%%s
  • TimTTimT Posts: 5,181
    edited August 2021
    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
    "We would like more money"
    Is the Navy known for petitioning the government for funds for theoretical science research?
    DARPA - so I guess not specifically the Navy.

    Edit.. Doh!!! Of course the Navy is. The Applied Physics Lab ...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    edited August 2021

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Religions change. People invent things in religious texts that aren't there to pursue the agendas they want to pursue. 'Twas ever thus. Once Islam led the world in enlightened thought and scientific advancement when Christian Europe was stuck in the dark ages. The idea that they were somehow influenced by backwards Christianity is bonkers.
    If you're suggesting that people outside Europe have agency, and that sometimes they use that agency to do bad things, then I have to warn you that these are exceptionally courageous views to hold in the current era. Next you'll be suggesting that the phenomenon of communalism in India, and the tensions between Hindus and Muslims entailed therein, weren't solely a colonial import. Chalk that up as another worldview that British colonialism managed to change in less than a century, by the way.
    We're living in a time where it's fashionable to attack, wholesale, all aspects of our history and hold us accountable for all the ills of the world in the belief this is both right and represents progress.

    In time, that'll be seen for the nonsense that it is
    Nope.

    1) The people currently in charge of academia in the West have no intention of letting their ideological opponents anywhere near positions of power (88% of academics are left wing; between a third and a half of left-wingers reviewing a grant bid would mark it lower if it took a right-wing perspective; about a third of academics who voted remain are likely to discriminate against a leaver in job appointments; 40% of left-wing academics would discriminate in favor of a Corbyn supporter over a Leave supporter.)

    2) By 2050 Nigeria will be the world's third largest country, while Africa's population of 2.5 billion will be 440m; the US will be 47% white and the UK will be 62% white, with a majority-minority population among young people. Under the circumstances, is it really plausible to claim that historical interpretations will become more favourable towards the empire?

    By then the Empire will have ended 100 years ago, it will have been as distant to young people then as WW1 is to young people now, it will be a matter of largely historical curiosity whatever view taken on it little more.
    Slavery in the UK's colonies ended 188 years ago, and 156 years ago in the United States. Is the topic "a matter of largely historical curiosity"? Indeed, is it more or less contentious today than it was twenty years ago?
    It is only contentious as the left intelligentsia make it so, for the majority, white, black or asian in ethnicity it is long ago and far away and they have moved on.

    If they push too far however we will end up with the nightmare scenario of the far right gaining increasing ground amongst the white population, especially working class whites in opposition to the woke intelligentsia's pushing hatred of the nation state and ethnic division
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,840

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    That is the key question Tories never want to answer. Too deep up to their necks in Saudi oil.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 56,651
    TimT said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
    "We would like more money"
    Is the Navy known for petitioning the government for funds for theoretical science research?
    DARPA - so I guess not specifically the Navy.
    Yeah, the armed forces in the US do a lot of research.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 5,181
    RobD said:

    TimT said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
    "We would like more money"
    Is the Navy known for petitioning the government for funds for theoretical science research?
    DARPA - so I guess not specifically the Navy.
    Yeah, the armed forces in the US do a lot of research.
    See my edit. The Applied Physics Lab - the biggest Lab of them all - started out as a Navy lab.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 6,840
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Religions change. People invent things in religious texts that aren't there to pursue the agendas they want to pursue. 'Twas ever thus. Once Islam led the world in enlightened thought and scientific advancement when Christian Europe was stuck in the dark ages. The idea that they were somehow influenced by backwards Christianity is bonkers.
    If you're suggesting that people outside Europe have agency, and that sometimes they use that agency to do bad things, then I have to warn you that these are exceptionally courageous views to hold in the current era. Next you'll be suggesting that the phenomenon of communalism in India, and the tensions between Hindus and Muslims entailed therein, weren't solely a colonial import. Chalk that up as another worldview that British colonialism managed to change in less than a century, by the way.
    We're living in a time where it's fashionable to attack, wholesale, all aspects of our history and hold us accountable for all the ills of the world in the belief this is both right and represents progress.

    In time, that'll be seen for the nonsense that it is
    Nope.

    1) The people currently in charge of academia in the West have no intention of letting their ideological opponents anywhere near positions of power (88% of academics are left wing; between a third and a half of left-wingers reviewing a grant bid would mark it lower if it took a right-wing perspective; about a third of academics who voted remain are likely to discriminate against a leaver in job appointments; 40% of left-wing academics would discriminate in favor of a Corbyn supporter over a Leave supporter.)

    2) By 2050 Nigeria will be the world's third largest country, while Africa's population of 2.5 billion will be 440m; the US will be 47% white and the UK will be 62% white, with a majority-minority population among young people. Under the circumstances, is it really plausible to claim that historical interpretations will become more favourable towards the empire?

    By then the Empire will have ended 100 years ago, it will have been as distant to young people then as WW1 is to young people now, it will be a matter of largely historical curiosity whatever view taken on it little more.
    Slavery in the UK's colonies ended 188 years ago, and 156 years ago in the United States. Is the topic "a matter of largely historical curiosity"? Indeed, is it more or less contentious today than it was twenty years ago?
    It is only contentious as the left intelligentsia make it so, for the majority, white, black or asian in ethnicity it is long ago and far away and they have moved on.

    If they push too far however we will end up with the nightmare scenario of the Far right gaining increasing ground amongst the white population, especially working class whites in opposition to the woke intelligentsia's pushing hatred of the nation state and ethnic division
    Very eloquent. Very Enoch Powell.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 5,181
    TimT said:

    RobD said:

    TimT said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    alex_ said:

    moonshine said:

    Foxy said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

    But the western diplomatic and intelligence services seemed to think they would.

    Because if they didn't then why have we been funding the Afghan army ?
    The most striking thing is the intelligence failures. It seems our much vaunted secret services knew very little of how likely the Afghan Army were to collapse and how a lot of tribal warlords of the old Northern Alliance were quite happy to flip sides. Some real questions to be answered by our spooks.
    They’ve completely blown Afghanistan. They were blind to the outbreak of Covid in Wuhan for 5 months. And they’ve got no answers to the questions posed by the tic tac ufo’s.

    I start to wonder what the CIA and MI6 are for. Are they now just a bunch of pen pushers clocking in and out?
    If only they'd managed to get a mole into Alpha Centauri.
    Leon and I have plugged the tic tac ufo as other worldly, because of the extreme unlikelihood that Russia or China could have developed anti gravity tech without us knowing. Seems to me our intelligence agencies are clueless about most everything so perhaps we were wrong.
    There was nothing in the declassified reports that required antigravity tech.
    You have your fingers in your ears on this. So does Biden of course.
    As do the authors of the report.

    The report that you predicted was going to shake the world.

    Which didn't shake the world.
    I never said that. It’s always been part of a process, not an event. I don’t know how long the process will take but I suspect it will be done by the end of the decade. Really though I’m bored talking to people about that topic who are not prepared to do the research with an open mind.
    I watched videos. I read papers. I would love to discover that aliens were out there, and visiting us on earth.

    It would be the most extraordinary story of my lifetime. My excitement would be beyond measure, and it would suggest humankind might be able to outlive the earth.

    But the more I read, and the more videos I watched the less impressed I was. There are things we can't understand. Sure. Agree 100%. But the summary of the Pentagon report was right: there are lots of things these could be. Plus, we now live in a world where five billion people carry cameras with them all the time. And yet - apart from some obviously faked videos on YouTube - I'm seeing very little evidence of aliens on earth.

    It seems to me, that when you say "open mind", what you actually mean is "agree with me".

    There may be aliens out there (statistically, highly likely). They may be observing us on earth (possible, if orders of magnitude less likely). But as yet, I am unconvinced.
    You’re a smart person who can read between the lines. What do you think was meant by this paragraph?

    “we may require additional scientific knowledge to successfully collect on, analyze and characterize some of them. We would group such objects in this category pending scientific advances that allowed us to better understand them”.
    "We would like more money"
    Is the Navy known for petitioning the government for funds for theoretical science research?
    DARPA - so I guess not specifically the Navy.
    Yeah, the armed forces in the US do a lot of research.
    See my edit. The Applied Physics Lab - the biggest Lab of them all - started out as a Navy lab.
    And .....

    "The Biden administration is proposing to increase the budget for the Department of Defense's Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) programs by 3% to $114 billion for fiscal year 2022, pushing it past an already historically high level."
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    edited August 2021

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    Bin Laden based himself in Afghanistan and then fled to Pakistan not Saudi, indeed the House of Saud have become more wary of AQ and its affiliates as they know that Bin Laden wanted to replace them too.

    Saudi also sent fighter jets to bomb ISIS too

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-sends-jets-to-turkish-base-to-boost-role-in-isis-fight-1455463348
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 17,663

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Religions change. People invent things in religious texts that aren't there to pursue the agendas they want to pursue. 'Twas ever thus. Once Islam led the world in enlightened thought and scientific advancement when Christian Europe was stuck in the dark ages. The idea that they were somehow influenced by backwards Christianity is bonkers.
    If you're suggesting that people outside Europe have agency, and that sometimes they use that agency to do bad things, then I have to warn you that these are exceptionally courageous views to hold in the current era. Next you'll be suggesting that the phenomenon of communalism in India, and the tensions between Hindus and Muslims entailed therein, weren't solely a colonial import. Chalk that up as another worldview that British colonialism managed to change in less than a century, by the way.
    We're living in a time where it's fashionable to attack, wholesale, all aspects of our history and hold us accountable for all the ills of the world in the belief this is both right and represents progress.

    In time, that'll be seen for the nonsense that it is - the only question is how much damage is done in the meantime.
    You can attack our history whilst not holding the present population accountable though. It isn't either or.

    Some have a habit of seemingly claiming that Britain has never done anything worthy of modern day criticism ever.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    edited August 2021
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Anyone think Justin Trudeau could be heading for a fall next months snap Canadian election?

    A couple of weeks of bad Covid news in the middle of a needless general election. Seems risky?

    Plus Afghanistan means the Conservatives can go on national security, I doubt they will win but I like the Conservative leader Erin O'Toole and he is pro British and pro Brexit too.

    I am not particularly anti Trudeau, he is certainly better than Singh and the NDP and the BQ but he is taking a big risk and voters do not like being taken for granted, I certainly think there are no guarantees he will get the majority he wants
    The first two polls of the campaign are at odds but within the margin of error.

    Forum Research has the Conservatives ahead 31-28 while Mainstream Research has the Liberals ahead 33-30 but both have a 3% or greater MoE so it's a statistical tie.

    Both pollsters have the NDP on 19% - Forum then has Greens on 8%, Bloc Quebecois on 7% and the People's Party on 5%. Mainstreet has BQ on 6%, People's Party on 5% and Greens on 4%.

    Forum would be a swing of 1% to the Conservatives on October 2019, Mainstreet would be a swing of 2% to the Liberals.

    Both Conservatives and Liberals down a little on 2019, NDP up three points, People's Party up four points and both BQ and the Greens about the same.

    Very early days but it's correct to say Trudeau has taken a chance here - O'Toole has been Conservative leader for barely a year and the Forum Research poll is the best he's had. Apart from two tied polls, the Conservatives have trailed the Liberals in every poll in his tenure but that of course means nothing.
    Those polls are pretty bad for the Liberals compared to the previous ones which led Trudeau to call the election.
    As May discovered voters do not like unnecessary elections called well before needed.

    The only early snap election I can think of that really payed off was Wilson's in 1966 and that was because Labour had only been in just 2 years, was still fresh and had not got a majority in 1964 which it got in 1966

    In fact Labour had only been in office for 16.5 months when the 1966 election was called.Labour had scraped a majority of 5 in October 1964 which the March 1966 election increased to 97.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 5,181

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    We occupied the areas that now constitute Pakistan for 150 years. How effectively did we change their world view?

    The British rarely sought to change world views.
    The BBC tells me that we created homophobia in much of Africa and Asia in less than a century..
    Utter bullshit. The reason most of those countries have anti-gay laws is because they are muslim not because they were once ruled by the British.
    The BBC article is pretty appalling - that's not to say that the British were always perfect colonial administrators - but it's just plain deluded to think that (were in not for British rule), Africa and Asia would be hotbeds of homosexual tolerance.
    Welcome to modern academia. "377 and the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia", by Douglas E. Sanders, Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia:

    An Arab-American has written: "The Middle East has a long history of tolerance of homosexuality – it was European colonizers who introduced anti-gay laws to the region, and it is those laws that tyrants enforce for political gain." Western homophobia was exported to the Arab world, according to another author: "What passes in present-day Saudi Arabia, for example, as sexual conservatism is due more to Victorian Puritanism than to Islamic Mores... Originally, Islam did not have the same harsh Biblical judgment about homosexuality as Christianity."
    Religions change. People invent things in religious texts that aren't there to pursue the agendas they want to pursue. 'Twas ever thus. Once Islam led the world in enlightened thought and scientific advancement when Christian Europe was stuck in the dark ages. The idea that they were somehow influenced by backwards Christianity is bonkers.
    If you're suggesting that people outside Europe have agency, and that sometimes they use that agency to do bad things, then I have to warn you that these are exceptionally courageous views to hold in the current era. Next you'll be suggesting that the phenomenon of communalism in India, and the tensions between Hindus and Muslims entailed therein, weren't solely a colonial import. Chalk that up as another worldview that British colonialism managed to change in less than a century, by the way.
    We're living in a time where it's fashionable to attack, wholesale, all aspects of our history and hold us accountable for all the ills of the world in the belief this is both right and represents progress.

    In time, that'll be seen for the nonsense that it is - the only question is how much damage is done in the meantime.
    You can attack our history whilst not holding the present population accountable though. It isn't either or.

    Some have a habit of seemingly claiming that Britain has never done anything worthy of modern day criticism ever.
    I think self-criticism is very healthy and can lead to considerable growth.

    I think self-loathing is extremely harmful, and leads to paralysis, self-harm, or worse.

    Living in the US, I think this country does too little of the former. One of the reasons I choose to live here is that the UK sails too close to the latter.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,725
    .
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    Bin Laden based himself in Afghanistan and then fled to Pakistan not Saudi, indeed the House of Saud have become more wary of AQ and its affiliates as they know that Bin Laden wanted to replace them too.

    Saudi also sent fighter jets to bomb ISIS too

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-sends-jets-to-turkish-base-to-boost-role-in-isis-fight-1455463348
    Check the date of your WSJ article. Fifteen years after 9/11.

    I again refer you to @rcs1000 's analysis of why Bin Ladin was hiding in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Rather more to do with the geography rather than the politics as I recall.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191

    .

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    Bin Laden based himself in Afghanistan and then fled to Pakistan not Saudi, indeed the House of Saud have become more wary of AQ and its affiliates as they know that Bin Laden wanted to replace them too.

    Saudi also sent fighter jets to bomb ISIS too

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-sends-jets-to-turkish-base-to-boost-role-in-isis-fight-1455463348
    Check the date of your WSJ article. Fifteen years after 9/11.

    I again refer you to @rcs1000 's analysis of why Bin Ladin was hiding in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Rather more to do with the geography rather than the politics as I recall.
    Yes and since 9/11 the House of Saud have made clear they have no truck with AQ and IS.

    Topple the House of Saud and you would end up with something far worse, a Sunni version of the Islamic revolution in Iran on steroids maybe even ending up with a supreme leader looking not too dissimilar to Bin Laden
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,535

    Tonight, the A400M of the German Luftwaffe evacuated 7 people from Kabul.
    Yes, you read that correctly. SEVEN.
    Those 7 were at the airport and on the official embassy-list to be flown out.
    My heart breaks for those who helped our army for years and are now being left behind.


    https://twitter.com/JeannePlaumann/status/1427389030694629377?s=20

    That's absolutely disgraceful. I hope there's a very good reason why the Germans were not helping out their NATO allies.

    (Of course, given the A400M's reliability issues, it may be that they didn't dare add another person's weight.)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 42,535
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    Bin Laden based himself in Afghanistan and then fled to Pakistan not Saudi, indeed the House of Saud have become more wary of AQ and its affiliates as they know that Bin Laden wanted to replace them too.

    Saudi also sent fighter jets to bomb ISIS too

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-sends-jets-to-turkish-base-to-boost-role-in-isis-fight-1455463348
    Saudi Arabia, which you seem to admire so much, killed a kidnapped and killed a journalist.

    The idea that they are now cuddly friends who hate fundamentalist Islam is beyond absurd.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    Bin Laden based himself in Afghanistan and then fled to Pakistan not Saudi, indeed the House of Saud have become more wary of AQ and its affiliates as they know that Bin Laden wanted to replace them too.

    Saudi also sent fighter jets to bomb ISIS too

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-sends-jets-to-turkish-base-to-boost-role-in-isis-fight-1455463348
    Saudi Arabia, which you seem to admire so much, killed a kidnapped and killed a journalist.

    The idea that they are now cuddly friends who hate fundamentalist Islam is beyond absurd.
    I never said I admire them and yes they can sometimes be ruthless.

    However it is naive to expect any alternative to them in Saudi would be anything but 10 times worse
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    .

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    Bin Laden based himself in Afghanistan and then fled to Pakistan not Saudi, indeed the House of Saud have become more wary of AQ and its affiliates as they know that Bin Laden wanted to replace them too.

    Saudi also sent fighter jets to bomb ISIS too

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-sends-jets-to-turkish-base-to-boost-role-in-isis-fight-1455463348
    Check the date of your WSJ article. Fifteen years after 9/11.

    I again refer you to @rcs1000 's analysis of why Bin Ladin was hiding in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Rather more to do with the geography rather than the politics as I recall.
    Yes and since 9/11 the House of Saud have made clear they have no truck with AQ and IS.

    Topple the House of Saud and you would end up with something far worse, a Sunni version of the Islamic revolution in Iran on steroids maybe even ending up with a supreme leader looking not too dissimilar to Bin Laden
    Just as a matter of interest, approximately what percentage of Muslims are Sunni?
    Depends where they are, in Iran 90% are Shia and only 5% Sunni, in Saudi by contrast 80-90% are Sunni and only 10% Shia
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    Bin Laden based himself in Afghanistan and then fled to Pakistan not Saudi, indeed the House of Saud have become more wary of AQ and its affiliates as they know that Bin Laden wanted to replace them too.

    Saudi also sent fighter jets to bomb ISIS too

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-sends-jets-to-turkish-base-to-boost-role-in-isis-fight-1455463348
    Saudi Arabia, which you seem to admire so much, killed a kidnapped and killed a journalist.

    The idea that they are now cuddly friends who hate fundamentalist Islam is beyond absurd.
    I never said I admire them and yes they can sometimes be ruthless.

    However it is naive to expect any alternative to them in Saudi would be anything but 10 times worse
    So, ten times as many September 11ths?

    Quite possibly
  • YokesYokes Posts: 749
    Its strange how few in the media seem to ask the question how many US & UK citizens are stuck in Kabul and unable to to the airport and what exactly the plan is to extract them.

    Reportedly its in the thousands on the US side. Some may stay (NGO people for example) but lots of others want out

  • I'm feeling all old school feminist..

    Does anyone else know and love Fanny?

    “They were one of the finest fucking rock bands of their time,” David Bowie told Rolling Stone of Fanny in 1999. “They were extraordinary: They wrote everything, they played like motherfuckers, they were just colossal and wonderful, and nobody’s ever mentioned them. They’re as important as anybody else who’s ever been, ever; it just wasn’t their time.”
    https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/fanny-lives-inside-the-return-of-the-pioneering-all-female-rock-band-125635/

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pukOcZ4Tjk0
  • YokesYokes Posts: 749
    rcs1000 said:

    Tonight, the A400M of the German Luftwaffe evacuated 7 people from Kabul.
    Yes, you read that correctly. SEVEN.
    Those 7 were at the airport and on the official embassy-list to be flown out.
    My heart breaks for those who helped our army for years and are now being left behind.


    https://twitter.com/JeannePlaumann/status/1427389030694629377?s=20

    That's absolutely disgraceful. I hope there's a very good reason why the Germans were not helping out their NATO allies.

    (Of course, given the A400M's reliability issues, it may be that they didn't dare add another person's weight.)
    Because the Germans dont. They about the most weasel-like country imaginable when it comes to standing up on the global stage. They will be back in Kabul doing deals for heavy industrial kit within the year.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,480
    Leon said:

    Yokes said:

    US KIA in Afghanistan in 2019 - 22.
    2018-15

    Buy the time 2020 rolled round it was clear the US was going to backseat and back out- 5.

    The US has taken less than 30 dead per year since 2015 when they were still knee deep in there. Sad every single one but not exactly a huge rate of attrition. Not all of those were caused by hostile action either.

    Biden and Trump are cowards and rodents who will be judged. America does not have to retreat so shamefully
    Biden: "American troops cannot and should not be fighting in a war and dying in war that Afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves."

  • HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    .

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    Bin Laden based himself in Afghanistan and then fled to Pakistan not Saudi, indeed the House of Saud have become more wary of AQ and its affiliates as they know that Bin Laden wanted to replace them too.

    Saudi also sent fighter jets to bomb ISIS too

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-sends-jets-to-turkish-base-to-boost-role-in-isis-fight-1455463348
    Check the date of your WSJ article. Fifteen years after 9/11.

    I again refer you to @rcs1000 's analysis of why Bin Ladin was hiding in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Rather more to do with the geography rather than the politics as I recall.
    Yes and since 9/11 the House of Saud have made clear they have no truck with AQ and IS.

    Topple the House of Saud and you would end up with something far worse, a Sunni version of the Islamic revolution in Iran on steroids maybe even ending up with a supreme leader looking not too dissimilar to Bin Laden
    Just as a matter of interest, approximately what percentage of Muslims are Sunni?
    Depends where they are, in Iran 90% are Shia and only 5% Sunni, in Saudi by contrast 80-90% are Sunni and only 10% Shia
    Globally 87-90% of Muslims are Sunni and 10-13% are Shia.

    And the Saudis have been radicalising that 87-90% by promoting the most extreme sect of Sunni, that of Wahhabism, around the globe. State sponsored using oil revenues.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 749

    Leon said:

    Yokes said:

    US KIA in Afghanistan in 2019 - 22.
    2018-15

    Buy the time 2020 rolled round it was clear the US was going to backseat and back out- 5.

    The US has taken less than 30 dead per year since 2015 when they were still knee deep in there. Sad every single one but not exactly a huge rate of attrition. Not all of those were caused by hostile action either.

    Biden and Trump are cowards and rodents who will be judged. America does not have to retreat so shamefully
    Biden: "American troops cannot and should not be fighting in a war and dying in war that Afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves."

    Completely missing the point that Afghan troops have been doing most of combat work in recent years.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 8,247
    MaxPB said:

    moonshine said:

    MaxPB said:

    Biden blaming the Afghanistan leaders and their army for not standing up to the Taliban

    He is not convincing to be honest

    Pretty damning, isn't he?

    Might not be wrong, but I am a bit surprised as to how blunt he's being.
    He's got a point though.
    Has he? What fool would fight for Afghanistan? How many Afghan people believed in the government and its aims? What proportion even bought into the idea of a secular nation?

    If you can't get the people to believe in the nation they are supposed to be fighting for they won't fight. So it came to pass. It was almost twitter FBPE foolishness on steroids as the liberal idiots spoke to the tiny section of liberal Afghan people in Kabul and they each convinced each other that the wider population in a deeply conservative and Islamist nation was actually on board with the idea of building a secular nation. It never was and I doubt it ever will be.

    Biden is a fool if he truly believed that the Afghan army would ever stand up to the Taliban.
    I doubt if he did believe that. But his stance is surely valid, the US Army cannot prop up an Afghan government forever.
    Why not?
    The thing is if you're going to do colonialism then you really need to do it for 70-100 years and essentially outlive the conservative generations who want to live under Taliban rule.
    Rejoin has the same strategy.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191
    edited August 2021

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    .

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    alex_ said:

    Here's a prediction. Biden will not be harmed politically (domestically) by this, in fact he may even get a boost. And within a few short weeks Trump will be back claiming credit for the withdrawal.

    It all depends how the next few days go. The avoidance of US casualties is the key.

    If everyone gets home safely, the narrative that 20 years and billions of USD brought no benefit, just an army that capitulated in 20 seconds, so no point throwing good money after bad, might well work.
    On tonight's Morning Consult poll a clear plurality of Americans say they would have opposed the withdrawal if it leads to the return of AQ and terrorists to Afghanistan, so Biden is taking a big risk
    But as @rcs1000 has already explained Afghanistan and the Taliban were not the root cause of international Islamic terror.

    So in order to defund international Islamic terror, what plans have you for the House of Saud?
    Bin Laden based himself in Afghanistan and then fled to Pakistan not Saudi, indeed the House of Saud have become more wary of AQ and its affiliates as they know that Bin Laden wanted to replace them too.

    Saudi also sent fighter jets to bomb ISIS too

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-sends-jets-to-turkish-base-to-boost-role-in-isis-fight-1455463348
    Check the date of your WSJ article. Fifteen years after 9/11.

    I again refer you to @rcs1000 's analysis of why Bin Ladin was hiding in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Rather more to do with the geography rather than the politics as I recall.
    Yes and since 9/11 the House of Saud have made clear they have no truck with AQ and IS.

    Topple the House of Saud and you would end up with something far worse, a Sunni version of the Islamic revolution in Iran on steroids maybe even ending up with a supreme leader looking not too dissimilar to Bin Laden
    Just as a matter of interest, approximately what percentage of Muslims are Sunni?
    Depends where they are, in Iran 90% are Shia and only 5% Sunni, in Saudi by contrast 80-90% are Sunni and only 10% Shia
    A 'Taliban' that cared about insular domestic issues in charge of Saudi could be better for the west than the House of Saud.

    The House of Saud in Saudi have spent decades exporting Wahhabism. They are our worst enemy in the world when it comes to the funding of extremist Islam.

    The growth of extremist Islam around the globe has been primarily brought to you by Saudi petroleum funds. They're even worse than the Iranians.
    As I posted earlier topple the House of Saud and you would get militant jihadi Sunni fundamentalism in charge in Riyadh so extreme it would make Tehran look like a parish tea party.

    There would be militant jihadism exported around the world on steroids and never mind 9/11 2, there would be 9/11 3, 4 and 5 and 6 and more to come.

    Astonishing to think you could be so naive as to think replacing the House of Saud would not lead to anything but probably the most extreme Islamic fundamentalist government ever to have graced humanity, the Taliban would be nothing in comparison.

    The fact Saudi and Iran use proxies to fight their Sunni and Shia conflicts does not mean the House of Saud are AQ or IS, the Saudis even sent fighter jets against IS.

    Topple them and you would get AQ or IS literally in charge of Saudi Arabia, you are breathtakingly naive on this
  • The Saudi regime have literally spent tens of billions of dollars of oil revenues promoting extremist Wahhabism through Mosques around the globe, attempting to radicalise over a billion Sunni Muslims. They literally created the Jihad in Afghanistan that became the Taliban themselves. They've spawned all that followed.

    But sure HYUFD, lets consider the Saudis are friends and allies. Get a grip!
  • YokesYokes Posts: 749
    I will give the CIA this, they have wasted no time at all talking to their old pals up in the Panjshir Valley in recent days.
  • The House of Saud aren't AQ or IS.

    They're worse.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,191

    The House of Saud aren't AQ or IS.

    They're worse.

    You are a complete moron then
  • HYUFD said:

    The House of Saud aren't AQ or IS.

    They're worse.

    You are a complete moron then
    Nope, you are.

    AQ and IS may be the monster, but the House of Saud is Frankenstein that created the monster.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 31,023
    I see the Germany has been far too welcoming to refugees lads have pivoted.
This discussion has been closed.