German Base In Afghanistan Attacked

by jack whyte Tue Aug 30, 2005 03:16

Irish complicity in the war is reprehensible, but under no circumstances can it render Ireland a "legitimate target' for what, on the basis of the attacks in the UK, NYC etc, will be an indiscriminate attack on the civilian population.

Your post reeks of the misanthropic islamo-fascism that"legitimised" the slaughter of civilans in Algeria through the 1990s (deemed complicit in the military coup which prevented the fundamentalist FIS from winning power democratically), and likewise the murder of western civilians in Egypt. The logic of your claim is that we should be governed by the same fear wielded by reactionary governments in the west, now inverted and mobillized by freelance zealots in a generalised threat against civilians.

Ireland knows retaliation against non-combatants from Croke Park in 1920 (bloody sunday, hogan stand). Palestine knows it under the shadow of collective punshment today. New Yorkers and Londoners know it, and so do the Iraqis defined as a legitimate enemy under the hail of imperialist bombing raids.

Neither texas nor taleban.

No pasaran.

by John Tue Aug 30, 2005 14:44

Do editorial guidelines not cover obvious propagandist terms like 'american led murder/invasion' or does this not apply to causes you support?

by Current Soldier Tue Aug 30, 2005 14:54

People should trust the aparatus of the state to protect people, they have been doing it against internal terrorists for decades.

Also I agree with Jogn, where are the guidelines?

by iosaf Tue Aug 30, 2005 15:22

This august a helicopter crashed carrying 17 members of the spanish armed forces contribution to the UN operation which was established under the Bonn conference on Afghanistan and resulting resolutions.
The incident though presently described as an accident and not resulting from terrorist activity, brought a short debate on Spain's committment to the Afghan theatre.

All political parties support the continuing deployment with the exception of IU (the marxist left who favour complete spanish armed forces disengagement from overseas) and BNG (the galician nationalists).

In the words of the president Zapatero, "we are in Afghanistan for the same reasons we left Iraq, to uphold international law, to safeguard the UN and to help peace and democracy".

Afghanistan this year accounted for 90% of the world's registered opium crop, though the global opium figures are down slightly on 2004, Afghanistan has returned to its position as number one supplier of the raw material from which heroin is made. It will take between 2 and 3 years for that opium to reach the streets of western europe in heroin form. Where it will be directly linked to "acquisitive crime".

Afghanistan has been laid waste by constant war for the last quarter of a century. There is very little state apparatus, and continuing activity from armed groups loyal to the Taliban, loyal to the mujahadeen bases which were welcomed under the Taliban and those who guard the opium fields.

Afghanistan is increasingly described as "failed state", one which beyond the fashion award winning "best dressed political leader" president Karzai can not guarantee food, water, fuel or rights to even 20% of its population.

The USA has progressively resigned command and leadership in both military and diplomatic spheres to the european states.

Afghanistan is not Iraq.

The Afghanistanis are now waiting on elections this September 18th to continue a process to developing a "state", at the moment the country can be thought of as divided between Kabul and the dominant ISAF area in the west and south, and the part ISAF part Osama clean up in the north east.

Afghanistan is divided amongst 9 ethnic groups, Pashtun, Kyrgyrz, Turkmen, Baluchi, Hazara, Uzbek, Tajik, Nuristani and Ismaili who speak dialects and subgroup languages from both Iranian and Turkic families.
Brahui & Nuristani are spoken in the border regions with Pakistani and belong to the indo-iranian language group (closer to Urdu than Pashtu) and the people there have little concept of being either "pakistani" or "afghanistani", that was a british/russian border.

Afghanistan is such a mess, that if the europeans leave it, it will never be better, and if they stay, it won't improve that much soon, but maybe the highest density of land mines and unexploded ordinance in the world will be cleared or made safe and then some of the kids will have two legs.

It is the perfect case study for asking how can war being peace, and what should the armed forces of the West do?

http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/afghanistan/intro/

by RobbieS Tue Aug 30, 2005 21:24

Before the state led by the Taliban, there were Burhanuddin Rabbani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (president and pm respectively, carving up Kabul with artillery, landmines and explosives your probably an expert in.

Before that, the the current allies engaged in an active disrespect of the Afghani state of Naji Bullah's regime by arming and training the Mujahaideen/elquaeda.

Who owns the current state that it should be trusted so much? Look to the paymasters (not the NATO public but their governments and elite cronies).

by Michael Wed Aug 31, 2005 04:18

Firstly, the Irish police, secret police and army have had zero success to date at stopping peace activists who go airside at Shannon Airport to protest and disarm. Air Rianta continue to allow Ryanair passengers walk about freely on the apron between their aircraft and the terminal building. That's where most of the dangerous stuff in the airport is found (flamable, explosive stuff).

It doesn't take a wizz to guess that if the state's security forces have been so crap up to now at guarding SNN from the pacifists, they'll no doubt fail to stop a violent attack at the airport too. And they don't appear to care either.

For obvious reasons to characterise the U.S. led military intervention in Afghanistan as an "invasion" is quite fair. The burden to show that the intervention was not an invasion is with the dissenters -- those who would call it by some other name.
It's obvious too that to include the word "murder" the author above is reminding us what invasion/regime change/whathaveyou means for many thousands of families and orphans in Afghanistan.

If, or rather WHEN, someone bombs SNN in retaliation (for Afghanistan or Iraq), or self-defence (Syria, Iran, etc. 60 countries I believe), we can assume that it will be with mixed motivations about not only Christian countries "invading" Muslim and Arab countries, but also murdering Muslims and Arabs too.

So to sum up: Public safety isn't a priority for the Irish authorities -- neither here nor anywhere else in the world effected by our actions. Irish people still in some doubt about the likeliness of some retaliation would do well to take a peek at the Holy Qur'an if they can't understand yet why some -- one is all it would take -- Muslims might be moved to avenge the deaths of our (U.S. and allies) victims in Afghanistan and Iraq.

by Current Soldier Wed Aug 31, 2005 17:37

RobbieS,

I was referring to this state and its function to protect our citizens from terrorism. Hilal made an assertion that we should not rely on our own services to protect people

However in relation to your analysis of Afghan politics over the years you ask

"Who owns the current state that it should be trusted so much"

In relation to Afghanistan and its importance in relation to geopolitical issues and more importantly oil and gas piplines its obvous that the USA are the paymasters of the state, its was through their croins, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan that the Taliban were installed and supported and they (USA) before that supported the aforementioned government of Rabbani and Hekmatyar and they actively opposed Najibullahs regieme.

by Current Soldier Wed Aug 31, 2005 17:37

Wrong Michael

Fighting Terrorism is intelligence led. The state security apparatus is well aware and capable of targeting terrorists. The reason so called "peace activists" can go around "disarming" aircraft is that it serves the states purpose because actions like that alienate the "peace" movement.

No one who is a serious threat will ever get near an airport or the likes unless of course Michael you are suggesting that the "peace activists" wopuld carry out terrorist attacks.

by RobbieS Wed Aug 31, 2005 18:38

These teachers of terror are the same people our government is aiding in the 'war on terror' (once called).

Why should we trust 'our' government on security matters when it make such dangerous and immoral alliances?

by Michael Wed Aug 31, 2005 21:06

You say "wrong!" and then proceed with a rebuttal for something I never said -- I never said that "fighting terrorism" wasn't "intelligence led", whatever that means.

The point I was making was about the security situation at Shannon Airport. I don't buy your conspiracy theory about lax security by design ("because actions like that alienate the "peace" movement"). And if I recall, the largest demonstration in over twenty years (perhaps the largest antiwar demo in Ireland ever?) was held in Dublin on February 15th, just weeks after two high profile actions at Shannon. That would sound odd if the peace movement were being alienated.

Without explaining what you mean by "terrorism", I can't tell exactly what you're saying. I didn't use that word, and I think that the situation is quite clearly thus: Shannon Airport is used as a foreign military airfield, only with the security setup of a carpark or shopping centre. Like the people of Rossport, the folks in Shannon might like to look out for their own safety - because the authorities will not!

by Current Soldier Wed Aug 31, 2005 22:00

Michael,

What I am saying is,

The security u mention at shannon is not lax, the only "threat" at shannon is from "PEACE ACTIVISTS"

Any threat from real terrorists is well covered,

any action by the "peace activists" serves only alienate the movement from the public. U mention a demo in dublin 2 years ago, where are the 100,000 people now? Alienate from the movement by crackpots .

My points are that any real threat to the state is covered by the security services and anything the "peace activists" do in shannon only alienates the movement and is by no means a measure of lax security

by Michael Wed Aug 31, 2005 22:48

The large protests against the war were all before the invasion, during the same period as the nonviolent direct action at Shannon Airport (Autumn 2002 - Spring 2003).

The actions didn't seem to alienate the peace movement, except from the state. Indeed, I think the timeline during that period goes something like this: Action-Protest, More Actions-More protests, More Actions-More Protests. The nonviolent direct actions were both a direct attempt to disrupt the military traffic at Shannon, and a call to conscience for all the people in Ireland. Willie O'Dea even acknowledged their sincerity in Dail Eireann during a debate on Shannon security issues.

Perhaps you're right though, and this has all been a conspiracy. Indeed, the figure of 20m EUR spent on extra security at Shannon Airport to keep out protesters (the figure for 2002-2003 I think, I can't rmember of the top of my head) might just be a lie. Maybe they didn't spend a penny, or if they did, then they paid all those people to look the other way. -- No doubt the SWP were involved in the conspiracy, as were the SP -- no wait, they editorialised about the time not being ripe for direct action at Shannon Airport (best wait for the planes to go first?).

by Hilaal Thu Sep 01, 2005 01:18

Following the 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan to bring about regime change, Nato/ISAF including Irish soldiers, paid for and equipped by Irish people, is to expand its force.

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/08/e4bfc5de-1474-41b0-9c9a-2da39f34ae6f.html

Here is the guy who is commanding our Irish soldiers in Afghanistan, General James Jones


http://www.usmc.mil/genbios2.nsf/0/2d8a3578c1c9460b85256808004afbb6?OpenDocument

He has been for a long time trusted with running intelligence operation in Europe so if you are reading this one of his guys is reading you thanks to our own fine brand of traitors, G2.

General Jones CO of Irish troops in Afghanistan

by Duine Thu Sep 01, 2005 13:34

Scríobh tú:
"Nato/ISAF including Irish soldiers"

Cad a chaill mé? Bhfuil tú a rá go bhfuil saighdiúirí Éireannacha in Ecat/ISAF?
Cá bhfuil an fhianaise agat?