Afghanistan -is leaving the right thing?

[Vinty]

That is not an accurate quote of what he said.

Would you care to try again, and this time not misrepresent it, and quote properly, even though that will show that you were being untruthful when you claimed that he said "Britain should accept millions of Afghan refugees", or will somebody else have to do that for you?

And will you explain for the benefit of the forum why you thought you woud get away with making a false claim?

When Rory used the word 'we', was he speaking on behalf of the rest of the world or was he speaking on behalf of Britain.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

 

[Vinty]

That is not an accurate quote of what he said.

Would you care to try again, and this time not misrepresent it, and quote properly, even though that will show that you were being untruthful when you claimed that he said "Britain should accept millions of Afghan refugees", or will somebody else have to do that for you?

And will you explain for the benefit of the forum why you thought you woud get away with making a false claim?

When Rory used the word 'we', was he speaking on behalf of the rest of the world or was he speaking on behalf of Britain.

No - its a quaint custom known as "caring about the truth". I guess its unfamiliar to you.


Vinty cares enough about it to post misleading, false versions of it.

It is all down to how you interpret what Rory Stewart was saying.
When Rory said..
We are talking about many many millions of people

What did he mean?

 

[Android 07]

Maybe the US and it's allies should have divided up the country so that the Taliban can have all the mountain areas to themselves.

 

[Vinty]

.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

It is all down to how you interpret what Rory Stewart was saying.

Indeed.

I guess you could decide to interpret it to mean that Britain should take millions of refugees, but then youd have to come up with an explanation of why that would require an international effort involving dozens of other countries to work out how Britain could provide asylum.

Do you think that you are up to the task of providing an explanation which would survive its first contact with logical analysis?

 

[Vinty]

No - its a quaint custom known as "caring about the truth". I guess its unfamiliar to you.


Vinty cares enough about it to post misleading, false versions of it.

Slightly misleading perhaps but not false.
You have your own interpretation of what Rory said.
Others are entitled to make their own interpretation.

Rory said..

I would expect Britain to lead an international effort… to work out how we can provide safe passage and asylum for Afghans who want to leave. But be in no doubt: we are talking about many many millions of people.

My interpretation of what he said is as follows.
Whe he uses the word 'we' he is referring to Britain, as to my knowledge Rory Stewart is a British MP and AFAIK he has no authority to speak on behalf of the rest of the world.

 

[Vinty]

Indeed.

I guess you could decide to interpret it to mean that Britain should take millions of refugees, but then youd have to come up with an explanation of why that would require an international effort involving dozens of other countries to work out how Britain could provide asylum.

Do you think that you are up to the task of providing an explanation which would survive its first contact with logical analysis?

Have you authority from Rory Stewart to give your definition of what he meant when he said we have to provide asylum for Afghan refugees.

 

[ellal]

I would expect Britain to lead an international effort… to work out how we can provide safe passage and asylum for Afghans who want to leave. But be in no doubt: we are talking about many many millions of people. And this is an entirely horrifying and unnecessary tragedy, but it’s a tragedy that we bear the responsibility for for the reckless actions of the last few weeks.

- RORY STEWART

I guess you don't understand the word 'international'

Keep on digging that hole of yours vinty

 

[Vinty]

I guess you don't understand the word 'international'

Keep on digging that hole of yours vinty

Thankyou for pointing that out.
I have edited my original post to avoid further confusion.

 

[Vinty]

If and when many many millions Afghans do arrive, what will Boris do about it.

 

[fillyboy]

If and when many many millions Afghans do arrive, what will Boris do about it.

Shared accommodation, Afghans top bunk, Hong Kongese bottom bunk.

 

[Vinty]

Corruption abounds in the place

western tax payers were pouring billions into the pockets of the self serving rich

one ahfghan Vice President in 2009 was discovers with 52 million
Dollars in cash arriving in Dubai

they were milking the system and flow of funds

some US officials called it the biggest per capita fraud in history

an Ahfagan intel officer said half the US cash spent on security had been looted and embezzled

A Swedish aid agency said aid had become a crutch sustaining crooks and thieves

and who carry’s the can

the ordinary bloke and woman on the street whilst all those who should be put up against the wall
F off abroad with there stolen Ill gotten gains

You can't really blame the Afghan army for not putting up a fight.
They obviously don't feel motivated to fight for a corrupt regime.
The same thing happened in Vietnam.
In Vietnam, ARVN generals were using military helicopters to ferry their luxury cars and cronies out of the country.
Another scam was ghost soldier's, conscripts to the army were allowed to return home if they agreed to split their army salaries with their commanding officers.
The dozy Yanks were paying millions of dollars for soldiers who were sat at home or back out in the paddy fields.
Much the same thing is probably happening in Afghanistan.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

Slightly misleading perhaps but not false.
You have your own interpretation of what Rory said.
Others are entitled to make their own interpretation.

Rory said..

I would expect Britain to lead an international effort… to work out how we can provide safe passage and asylum for Afghans who want to leave. But be in no doubt: we are talking about many many millions of people.

My interpretation of what he said is as follows.
Whe he uses the word 'we' he is referring to Britain, as to my knowledge Rory Stewart is a British MP and AFAIK he has no authority to speak on behalf of the rest of the world.

So despite100% undeniable evidence, verifiable by everybody who listens to his words you still think you can get away with

"Rory said..

I would expect Britain to lead an international effort"

No

He

Did

Not.

He said something different.

His words were not as you represent.

You may think it doesnt matter, but it shows that you have no interest in accurately reporting what he said but instead want, right from the start, to twist it to suit your ideology.

The question he was asked, was, verbatim:

"Just finally, Rory, you, just to recap, you are saying are you that we have a moral duty to resettle Afghans who want to come here, where, where would you draw the line, what are your, what is your thinking about, you know, how we do that. "

And in his reply, he immediately said that we have to make this an international effort. He said we should lead, with other nations. He said we should be working with [many other nations] to see how we can provide asylum for Afghans who want to leave. He referenced what happened after the end of the Vietnam war where people who wanted to leave were granted asylum in a number of different countries.

So when he indicated that he thought we should work with other countries to see how we can provide asylum you think that a valid interpretation is that we should be working with other countries to see how Britain can provide asylum?

I know that people like you are often very bad at thinking, but really?

If we take your "interpretation" and change his words to make it explicit, you think he meant

"Well, practically we have to make this an international effort, so I would expect Britain to lead, with other nations, remember there were at any time over 40 different NATO nations on the ground, so we should be working with France, with Germany, Scandinavia, with the US, with Canada, with Australia, and others, as in fact happened after the Vietnam war, to work out how Britain can provide safe passage and asylum for Afghans who want to leave."

Really?

Remember what I said about an explanation which would survive its first contact with logical analysis?

Lets have one.

Lets have an explanation from you of why if he meant Britain should take all the Afghans who want to leave we would need to work with dozens of other countries to work out how Britain can provide asylum? If Britain was providing safe passage and asylum what would we need to "work out" with other countries?

Please explain.

If we didnt work it out properly, do you think that other NATO countries would refuse to allow us to offer asylum? Please explain.

If we didnt work it out properly with these other NATO nations how Britain would provide safe passage, do you think these other NATO countries would shoot down British planes or sink British ships? Please explain.

If he meant for Britain to take all the Afghans who want to leave, why did he mention Vietnam, when the people in a similar situation there went to a number of different countries. Please explain.

Alternatively admit that you were wrong, and that what he meant was that there were lots of countries involved in Afghanistan along with us and we all bear a shared responsibility to help the Afghans who want to leave and we should all work together to find a way to provide that help.

 

[Vinty]

Alternatively admit that you were wrong

I am never wrong, just not as right as i could be.