Weston Super Saint

I would say that right here, right now, the chance of a terrorist attack is less likely, although you only seem to conflate terrorist attacks with attacks on the UK. This handy timeline might show you that terrorism is a global problem : https://since911.com/explore/terrorism-timeline You might also notice (maybe, maybe not), that the majority of terrorist attacks in the last 40 years have happend DURING THE 20 YEARS THAT THE WEST OCCUPIED AFGHANISTAN, which kind of smacks in the face of your claim that the world is a safer place whilst foreign troops are stationed there and that's why we should send all the soldiers back! As for your tolerance of different views, your posts on here today suggest you cannot tolerate another country having a different culture, religion or set of values to those that you hold!

Excellent, looks like you have your definition! Where was the bit where I made light of it?

Why? It was you who mentioned it. You define it, then show how I have made light of it.

More random thinking! Isis / Isil have been around since before the occupation of Afghanistan and have literally only existed during that time (plus a couple of years). Was there ever a stated intention to rid the world of their existence? Have they gone away? Whilst it's clear you would love all those who don't agree with your ideals, philosophies and religion to disappear off the face of the Earth, no, they haven't 'gone away'. Is the threat still there, absolutely. Will the threat be there in the future, yep. Whilst different religions exist and religious people consider their religion to be better than someone else's then there will always be a threat from extremists. Quite how you plan to rid the planet of radical extremists will be very entertaining to hear.

Excellent. In what way have I made light of mental health?

D & C police seem happy with the evidence....

Sadly I think this persona isn't working. You're equating the Nazis (Germans) invading Poland (and a fair bit more of Europe) with the goal of taking over the continent, with the Taliban who were born and raised in Afghanistan, taking (temporary) control of their own country. Then you claim that is logical Genuinely, your posts from this morning make you look like a paranoid schizophrenic. I hope you have the support network in place that you need.

Which is exactly what is being planned in Afghanistan at the moment. The Taliban have allegedly taken 'temporary' control whilst the country is re-organised back to the tribal areas with their own 'capital' cities.

Let's be clear, for NATO to stay in Afghanistan imposing Western ways and culture on a nation that clearly knows no better (), involves more than just a financial cost. The Taliban has been 'quiet' during the past 18 months and the death toll has reduced virtually to nothing precisely BECAUSE the West agreed to withdraw its troops. Had that agreement not been forthcoming, the Taliban would have continued to kill NATO troops in the same way it had for the previous 18 years. How many more lives should have been wasted trying to impose our Western culture on a country that doesn't want it? What value do you place on each life lost in our never ending occupation of a country that doesn't want us there (I know you struggle sometimes, so I'll point out you don't need to answer that one as we all know how much value you place on the people you insist should stay and keep the natives under control ad infinitum). Incredible on so many subjects you miss so much.

Judging by those that are stamping their feet and demanding that we should have stayed in the country like the imperialist masters they think we are, "they" are clearly the thick, uneducated heathens that had the sheer audacity to be born in the country and clearly can't be trusted to run their own affairs.

Yep, we should have stayed there until they finally decided to be a democratic society, built shopping malls and leisure centres. Only once they were truly westernised would they be civil enough to be left alone. Bloody heathens, who do they think they are wanting to control their own country with their own laws and religion. They should show more gratitude.

And how is 'finish the job' defined?

Exactly. Good post.

I can only imagine that when they spent millions of dollars training the Afghan security forces, teaching them tactics, providing weapons etc etc, that they thought the country would remain relatively 'safe' for a long time, maybe even indefinitely. I doubt that they envisaged that the Afghan forces would capitulate in little under 2 weeks, necessitating the requirement to remove American and British nationals. You do realise though that it isn't just American and British nationals being removed? It must also be embarrasing for : Germany Canada Pakistan Netherlands Switzerland Czech Republic Denmark Sweden Spain

I've heard he is undergoing some 're-education' work to ensure he comletely forgets his learned ability to defend once the clock reaches 60 minutes. Once he's completed this he should be up to date with our current tactics.

As previously posted, quote from Biden : source In what manner should they have left which wouldn't have been an awful strategic error and a huge mistake?

The planes and weapons were left for the Afghan security forces to use to protect themselves. The fact that the Afghan security forces capitulated and didn't use the hardware that was provided, presumably means they are the ones who are responsible and should be ashamed? Or was the US supposed to withdraw and leave nothing for the local forces - I can only imagine the hand wringing it that would have happened

Judging by Biden's statement I imagine they were hoping that the Afghan military wouldn't capitulate, but weren't betting the house on it! Source

The headline is taken from a quote by Ghani who claims the US left 'abruptly'. In the article (which I assume you didn't even bother to read!) he also claims : "The war torn nation will be under control in six months" (to be fair it actually only took two weeks, but I guess not in the same way he envisaged...). "The reason for our current situation is the decision was taken abruptly" (By Obama, over a decade ago!). "Protection of the people is a duty he will maintain" (pretty sure he's now left the country!). "The Afghan Army will sacrifice their lives for the nation" (or roll over and have their bellies tickled). I guess if you're happy to believe that the US left abruptly based on the ramblings of a man with such an obvious lack of grip on reality, then you go ahead and snuggle up to that comfort blanket!

Clever one that Antrim Fooled everyone.

And yet, in the grand scheme of a complete regime change for the entire country there has been little to no violence, especially given that these occurrences tend to be particularly bloody and brutal affairs. To elaborate for whelk and sue who are clearly struggling with the concept, I am NOT stating there has been no violence at all. I am pointing out that the amount of violence has been miniscule when compared to other regime changes when the entire government has been overthrown. Figured out what the word abruptly means yet?

Sorry, did I claim there was no violence?

Educate me oh wise one. Which bit of my post was wrong?

There has been little to no violence. The Russians tried to control Afghanistan, how did that end up?

Weird post.