What are you reading tonight?

[Lord Kangana]

We're creating one. In short. Fisk was present when the Russians invaded in '79. Corrupt puppet government supported by imperialist invader... ring any bells? Historically, no-one conquers Afghanistan, and certainly not any power that is non-muslim. The parallels between the Soviet invasion and our own occupation are really and truly frightening.

The best illustration is the story of the soldiers from the Islamic satellites of the USSR. They had removed their Hammer and Sickle badges, and whilst present, adopted a live and let live policy with the Mujahadeen(ie , their Muslim brothers). In short, we are fighting a battle we can't win, with ill defined goals, with little understanding of the nature of the country we're in, and are exascerbating all our perceived problems. The Soviet invasion created the Taliban, it would appear we are making a rod for our own back.

This is all in short, as the book is 1320 pages of this stuff.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

We're creating one. In short. Fisk was present when the Russians invaded in '79. Corrupt puppet government supported by imperialist invader... ring any bells? Historically, no-one conquers Afghanistan, and certainly not any power that is non-muslim. The parallels between the Soviet invasion and our own occupation are really and truly frightening.

The best illustration is the story of the soldiers from the Islamic satellites of the USSR. They had removed their Hammer and Sickle badges, and whilst present, adopted a live and let live policy with the Mujahadeen(ie , their Muslim brothers). In short, we are fighting a battle we can't win, with ill defined goals, with little understanding of the nature of the country we're in, and are exascerbating all our perceived problems. The Soviet invasion created the Taliban, it would appear we are making a rod for our own back.

This is all in short, as the book is 1320 pages of this stuff.

The thing that concerns me is that the line about the Russians trying and failing with 200,000 troops has become the fashionable thing for know-nothings to say now, to pass themselves off as having some kind of insight.

I fully appreciate that you're not in this camp, and that is quite the weighty tome to have consumed on the subject, but would you not say that the situations are very different? As far as my understanding extends (and as I say, it's pretty limited) Russia were pursuing a policy of expansion with the intention to topple and conquer an incumbent regime, whereas our ultimate goal is to leave an independent Afghan government in place, but with the Taliban removed.

Do you really think our aims are 'imperialist' and to 'conquer'? Is that how the average Afghan bloke sees it? What kind of popular support does the Taliban have?

I am not a pacificist, but what I am is incredibly selfish by nature, as you know, and if I were ever in charge I would want to know why the enormous cost of this war in financial terms and the lives of servicepeople is worth it to us - I personally am against Britain being an international police force or even, I'm afraid, a human rights enforcer at the expense of the British taxpayer. Do you see us as having ulterior motives regarding resources in the region etc?

As it is though, from this position of ignorance, what it comes down to is making a judgement about some of the characters involved, and I have to say that when I hear people like General McChrystal speak, I believe in the sincerity and expertise in what they are saying - that this is a necessary war to make our world safer.

[Lord Kangana]

As with much of history and politics, the truth is in the eye of the beholder. The previous, communist puppet government (and make no mistake, that is exactly what we have installed) actually made serious inroads into healthcare and welfare reforms, education and so on. They elevated Afghanistan to a level it has never reached before or since. The Taliban destroyed all that, and whilst they are not a majority force, what they are is Islamic and incumbent. In short, to win the fire fight and the hearts and minds simultaneously is nigh on impossible, and would require forces of such magnitude as to be economically and politically unsustainable.

The only counter-insurgancy war that has ever been successfully concluded was that conducted by the British in Malaya in the post WW2 era. We bought the compliance of the population there by bankrolling democracy(and a sympathetic version of capitalism) and getting the f*ck out of their country, in exchange for wholesale rejection of communism. Its the only time its been tried, and the only time it worked.

As for economic reasons, of course they are the driver. America has been meddling in the Middle East for decades now, as we did when we ran the world. It really is pretty much all down to Oil (and always has been). This may, in the short term, suit your selfish aims of keeping our economic heads above water, but we really are storing up problems for ourselves. We are sowing the wind at the moment. Truly I fear the whirlwind, as Arabs and Muslims consider themselves brothers first and foremost, far beyond national boundaries. America is also sh*t-scared of the Dollar being replaced as the international trading currency (current frontrunners to replace it are the Euro and Yen) and is starting to make increasingly rash foreign policy decisions in a flailing attempt to keep a hold on its global dominance. That effectively means using the military as an economic enforcer. Its 21st century gunboat diplomacy.

The real damning issue, however, is Islam. Me and my Brother against the infidel is something fundamentally enshrined in Afghan culture, something we signally fail to take heed of. Its why Bin-Laden is there, and they have no f*ckin idea where he is, because they haven't the manpower to catch him. Basically, I think we will blink first - the British public doesn't have the stomach for such a prolonged fight, and frankly, if anyone even vaguely knew what success looked like we might be on the road to achieveing it. Becasue if we really just wanted to deal with terrorism, why not put all those troops on our borders, at our ports and airports, stop immigration? We could achieve far more tangible results than sending men halfway round the world to die in a country that won't thank them.

[TANGODANCER]

- the British public doesn't have the stomach for such a prolonged fight, .

The British public never did. Even in the hey day of the great empiring campaigns it was the government who made all the rules and orated all the wonderful reasons to be there. The soldiers just died believing the lies.There's never been an army yet that wasn't motivated by the political greed and power lust of its leaders. Where has it ever got us? Everything is temporary and nothing lasts. Unless the world lives in peace (which it never will, of course) the British public (or at least those with any sense) just have to look at a map and see what Alexander the great and Genghis Kahn did on horseback. That took years to achieve. Now it would take weeks. Then we look realistically at our own little island and forget when we had knights and the best archers and men fought each other instead of pounding each other to death with artillery and missiles. etc. We look back a the futility of the Crusades and the repercussions of religious fanaticism that resulted. Our gunboat domination of the world was a self-serving short term act of brutality to give poor countries a picture of Queen Victoria and a Union Jack and declare them British while we pillaged anything worth taking.. We were always little fish in a big pond puffing around with chests out whilst the sharks slept.

Only the counter threat of nuclear war is holding it all together. Add religion into the equation and its all so clear that unless the world lives in peace it will end itself.

[Raven]

- the British public doesn't have the stomach for such a prolonged fight, .

The British public never did. Even in the hey day of the great empiring campaigns it was the government who made all the rules and orated all the wonderful reasons to be there. The soldiers just died believing the lies.There's never been an army yet that wasn't motivated by the political greed and power lust of its leaders. Where has it ever got us? Everything is temporary and nothing lasts. Unless the world lives in peace (which it never will, of course) the British public (or at least those with any sense) just have to look at a map and see what Alexander the great and Genghis Kahn did on horseback. That took years to achieve. Now it would take weeks. Then we look realistically at our own little island and forget when we had knights and the best archers and men fought each other instead of pounding each other to death with artillery and missiles. etc. We look back a the futility of the Crusades and the repercussions of religious fanaticism that resulted. Our gunboat domination of the world was a self-serving short term act of brutality to give poor countries a picture of Queen Victoria and a Union Jack and declare them British while we pillaged anything worth taking.. We were always little fish in a big pond puffing around with chests out whilst the sharks slept.

Only the counter threat of nuclear war is holding it all together. Add religion into the equation and its all so clear that unless the world lives in peace it will end itself.

Both inspiring leaders and tactical genius' something we no longer have

[Hoboh]

- the British public doesn't have the stomach for such a prolonged fight, .

The British public never did. Even in the hey day of the great empiring campaigns it was the government who made all the rules and orated all the wonderful reasons to be there. The soldiers just died believing the lies.There's never been an army yet that wasn't motivated by the political greed and power lust of its leaders. Where has it ever got us? Everything is temporary and nothing lasts. Unless the world lives in peace (which it never will, of course) the British public (or at least those with any sense) just have to look at a map and see what Alexander the great and Genghis Kahn did on horseback. That took years to achieve. Now it would take weeks. Then we look realistically at our own little island and forget when we had knights and the best archers and men fought each other instead of pounding each other to death with artillery and missiles. etc. We look back a the futility of the Crusades and the repercussions of religious fanaticism that resulted. Our gunboat domination of the world was a self-serving short term act of brutality to give poor countries a picture of Queen Victoria and a Union Jack and declare them British while we pillaged anything worth taking.. We were always little fish in a big pond puffing around with chests out whilst the sharks slept.

Only the counter threat of nuclear war is holding it all together. Add religion into the equation and its all so clear that unless the world lives in peace it will end itself.

Both inspiring leaders and tactical genius' something we no longer have

Duke of Welly!! You gotta love that guy and Nelson of course he was a true tactical genius.

[Raven]

- the British public doesn't have the stomach for such a prolonged fight, .

Duke of Welly!! You gotta love that guy and Nelson of course he was a true tactical genius.

They are both dead and you forgot Admiral Collingwood

[TANGODANCER]

- the British public doesn't have the stomach for such a prolonged fight, .

Duke of Welly!! You gotta love that guy and Nelson of course he was a true tactical genius.

They are both dead and you forgot Admiral Collingwood

And then of course, there was Hohinho, who could change himself in to Tango and send posts Tango hadn't written.

[Worthy4England]

Not sure how this one will work, but I've just bought Unseen Academicals by Terry Pratchett.

I'm quite a fan of Pratchett's stuff - not sure how it'll go combining it with footy though!

[thebish]

just reading the second of Stig Larsson's trilogy..

"The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo", "The Girl Who Played With Fire" and "The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest"

am still struggling with the Swedish place-names - but it's good stuff - and a sad back story in that just as he became famous - and before they were published - he carked it from a heart attack aged 50...

[enfieldwhite]

just reading the second of Stig Larsson's trilogy..

"The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo", "The Girl Who Played With Fire" and "The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest"

am still struggling with the Swedish place-names - but it's good stuff - and a sad back story in that just as he became famous - and before they were published - he carked it from a heart attack aged 50...

Bought the first two for Mrs. EW a couple of weeks ago. She's struggling with the palce names too.

His brief biography describes him as a former journalist and expert in Neo-Nazis.

[Jakerbeef]

Not sure how this one will work, but I've just bought Unseen Academicals by Terry Pratchett.

I'm quite a fan of Pratchett's stuff - not sure how it'll go combining it with footy though!

I'm interested to see if he's much of a footy fan, and maybe try and work out who his team is.

I know it's late in the day for him, but I wouldn't mind another Guards effort.

[CAPSLOCK]

Feel the fear and do it anyway

It could be the beginning of a traumatic period.........

[TANGODANCER]

Just started "Of Love and Other Demons" by Marquez.

[William the White]

Just started "Of Love and Other Demons" by Marquez.

Good one... you'll enjoy the priest...

Another short, i notice...

So, when are you going to tackle the true masterwork, One Hundred Years of Solitude?

For me, the greatest novel of the last century...

[TANGODANCER]

Just started "Of Love and Other Demons" by Marquez.

Good one... you'll enjoy the priest...

Another short, i notice...

So, when are you going to tackle the true masterwork, One Hundred Years of Solitude?

For me, the greatest novel of the last century...

The truth? I started it and am finding it hard to hold my attention. Too much whacko (Gypsies on flying carpets and one guy disappears for a few years and comes back having been round the world 67 times? ). I'll get back to it later.

[Verbal]

democratisation theory.

F
M
L

[Raven]

Just read the Gargoyle and didn't really like it.

Also reading Dark Star about Gilles De Rais...........what a pleasant man!!

[General Mannerheim]

Just read the chapter 'Lunch with Bethany' in American Psycho.

Ouch - poor Bethany!

[clapton is god]

Just starting out on Stephen Kings Under the Dome.

Its many years since I tried anything from King but this one caught my eye and my imagination.