True, but that is Australia’s failing. 20K is not really that many as @najaB points out and is probably the least we should be doing given the chaos we caused.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Current events in Afghanistan
- Thread starter daodao
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
malc-c
Member
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 995
But surely you could learn the language? So what you are saying is that if for factious example you needed to get out of Spain, and crossed the border into France, you wouldn't stay there and continue on to the UK because to didn't understand the language rather than the fact you would be safe ?
I would go wherever I thought was best for my future. Some of the factors that might enter into that calculation may well be if I spoke some of the language or not. Certainly for me if I ever had to seek asylum from the UK (which is not something I envision happening but who knows!) assuming that it wasn't possible to get to Canada or New Zealand (due to the historic links and shared language) I would head for Germany as I already have some limited German. Even though I'd have to pass through at least one other country to get there.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
The legalities and requirements for refugees are in the public domain. I would suggest posters seek them out. Such simple research via google would tell you that there is no rule requiring refugees to claim refuge in the first safe country in which they arrive or pass through.
However, I guess it is easier simply to accept what commentators tell you .
Last edited:
Let’s not forget the “refugees” being extracted today were last week fighting the taliban and protecting our own soldiers.
A soldier died last night, was an Afghan National soldier.. which means he hadn’t surrendered to the Taliban, nor was he “gutless” he was still fighting alongside our own, and being inside the airport is probably highest risk for an ANA soldier once we leave than anywhere else in the country.. no escape surrounded by Taliban all sides. Rourkes drift .. His decision to do that, instead getting undressed into civvies and going home was a brave one.
If you read between the news headlines, much of the issues at Kabul airport is separating the Chancers from those who did assist our forces… which is why visa processing is so important now..
Those washing up on a dingy in Sussex may be a whole different story to those being evacuated from Kabul, and figuring that out next year much harder.
A soldier died last night, was an Afghan National soldier.. which means he hadn’t surrendered to the Taliban, nor was he “gutless” he was still fighting alongside our own, and being inside the airport is probably highest risk for an ANA soldier once we leave than anywhere else in the country.. no escape surrounded by Taliban all sides. Rourkes drift .. His decision to do that, instead getting undressed into civvies and going home was a brave one.
If you read between the news headlines, much of the issues at Kabul airport is separating the Chancers from those who did assist our forces… which is why visa processing is so important now..
Those washing up on a dingy in Sussex may be a whole different story to those being evacuated from Kabul, and figuring that out next year much harder.
Last edited:
BananaRepublic
Member
- Joined
- 9 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 800
Meanwhile there's a row brewing in the EU with a general opposition to taking in large numbers of Afghan refugees.
"The European Union will not agree to a bloc-wide programme to resettle Afghan refugees, its president has warned, amid infighting over how to handle a wave of refugees fleeing the chaos in Afghanistan after it fell to the Taliban earlier this month.
He said there could be no repeat of the “strategic mistake” of the 2015 migrant crisis, when the EU introduced a mandatory migrant resettlement programme despite opposition from Poland and Hungary.
The EU is heavily divided on the issue, with ambassadors set to be begin talks over a common European position on Afghanistan and migration this week in Brussels.
Some individual member states are already evacuating and resettling Afghan nationals who worked with their governments.
Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, has offered cash from Brussels to countries taking in refugees but Sebastian Kurz, of Austria, has vowed Vienna will not “voluntarily accept more people” while he is chancellor.
Paris and Berlin are pushing for a European-wide plan, but it will likely fall short of any mandatory refugee-sharing system.
Armin Laschet, who Angela Merkel has backed to succeed her as Chancellor, said there can be no repeat of 2015, when Germany opened its borders to about 1 million Syrian refugees........"
z
"The European Union will not agree to a bloc-wide programme to resettle Afghan refugees, its president has warned, amid infighting over how to handle a wave of refugees fleeing the chaos in Afghanistan after it fell to the Taliban earlier this month.
He said there could be no repeat of the “strategic mistake” of the 2015 migrant crisis, when the EU introduced a mandatory migrant resettlement programme despite opposition from Poland and Hungary.
The EU is heavily divided on the issue, with ambassadors set to be begin talks over a common European position on Afghanistan and migration this week in Brussels.
Some individual member states are already evacuating and resettling Afghan nationals who worked with their governments.
Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, has offered cash from Brussels to countries taking in refugees but Sebastian Kurz, of Austria, has vowed Vienna will not “voluntarily accept more people” while he is chancellor.
Paris and Berlin are pushing for a European-wide plan, but it will likely fall short of any mandatory refugee-sharing system.
Armin Laschet, who Angela Merkel has backed to succeed her as Chancellor, said there can be no repeat of 2015, when Germany opened its borders to about 1 million Syrian refugees........"
z
nlogax
Established Member
It may well be that refugee numbers are limited. The Taliban indicate that foreign troops will be need to be gone from the country by August 31st. Meanwhile key border crossings are being closed. Although the Taliban has declared that those wishing to leave the country still can, those wishing to do so would need to possess 'proper documentation'. Whatever that means.
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,222
If the West in general is seen to be abandoning Afghans that helped us over the years (be it translators, soilders, general workers etc) then the next time there is a reason for Western military involvement anywhere in the world, you can bet that the locals are going to be much less likely to help us out!
RailWonderer
Established Member
Afghans have already crowded the Pakistani embassy for visas and immigration papers. Along with a passport, that is what proper documentation is likely referring to.
A tiny amount worse.
There's 4 million socially rented properties in the UK, housing probably in excess of 8 million people (more likely over 10 million), even if we took on 100,000 Afghans (which is 5 times the number being suggested) that's 1.25% more people.
In comparison there's about 8 million owner occupier households with 2 or more extra bedrooms (about half of all owner occupier households).
Now the big issue with council properties is cuts to grants from central government squeezing budgets meaning cuts have to be made and add long as there's a house that can be used then chances are savings on maintenance will be made.
By living in the UK we have won life's lottery as to where we could live, the majority due to the dumb luck of where our ancestors lived. There's very few places in the world where there's the level of services for the level of taxes we pay.
As such it's not unreasonable to suggest that to ensure that we keep the services which we should be getting, including those who are reliant on social housing, that there should be more tax paid by us (probably by making it that those earning more than £25,000 start to pay more).
I would however guess that many who say charity starts at home would strongly disagree with such a suggestion, and their thinking would more accurately be charity starts and ends at my home - i.e. if it's not someone I'd invite in to my home then they shouldn't benefit from me.
YorkshireBear
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 9,078
If you look at the numbers, which I did the other day but I now for the life of me can't remember where, the UK is so far down the list in terms of numbers, even more so when compared per capita. It's tiny compared to countries closer to the crisis which is logical.
There are numerous reasons, they may want to continue but at the end of the day other countries struggle to process people the same we do, they have housing problems like we do, so if they feel they aren't getting anywhere and are having a crap time, I'm not shocked they continue.
Is this the original US deadline for withdrawing troops?
The modified deadline, yes. The original agreement with the previous administration had them leaving by June 1st.
Butts
Veteran Member
Why don't any of the Afghans want to go to Russia or other former Soviet Republics, or indeed fellow Muslim Countries such as Pakistan or Saudi Arabia ?
Some do go to Pakistan, but mainly from the mountain regions. That said, if your desire is to move away from a brutal theocracy, tribal Pakistan might not be your first choice.
Why would they have any particular affinity for Russia?
Russia.. Afghanistan was at war with Russia, before 2001.
Saudi Arabia.. similar levels of religious law.
Pakistan.. hostile to Afghanistan, supporters of Taliban, the very ones they are escaping from.
Most popular location is Iran.
Your question, restructured, might help contextualise the thought..
if you spend hours of your life watching Neighbours, Home and Away, and Wanted Down Under, having BBQs and drinking Fosters, then suddenly you were forced at gun point to get on a boat to Australia or Argentina or be shot.. which one would you pick ?, alternatively you could runaway and hide in Scotland…
Now you arrive in Sydney, are you expecting the Aussies to welcome you with open arms, give you a bondi beach condo and a cocktail.. or suspicious of empty pocketed £1 poms with a reputation of alcohol fuelled aggression.
Last edited:
Butts
Veteran Member
Iran ? - really.
That well known defender of liberties where they hang people in public from cranes !!
Butts
Veteran Member
Is Pakistan not one of the Taliban's greatest facilitators - everyone is swerving their involvement .
Some of the former Soviet Republics border Afghanistan do they not with Muslim populations ?
Gostav
Member
- Joined
- 14 May 2016
- Messages
- 516
yes, nothing the Western governments really can do if - no absolute advantage in force, no geographical advantage - Afghanistan is the backyard of Russia and China, not Britain or US.
Even in Europe,similar action to expulsion (or just "removed") the Germans from Eastern Europe after WWII also happened, l believe that many German civilians died very undecently in Czechoslovakia.
Last edited:
Iran is the nearest neighbour, but as you point out its not exactly a bastion of freedom Itself.
That might explain why they keep on walking northwards.
Butts
Veteran Member
Seems not all European Countries are being as accommodating as the UK - Austria in particular springs to mind.
Much closer to home Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and China are much closer to Afghanistan but don't seem to be queuing up to take refugees.
antharro
Member
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2006
- Messages
- 674
Pakistan have already officially taken 1.4 million documented Afghan refugees, and a further 1.4 million undocumented.
(Sources: thehindu.com and UNHCR)
If the UK were to take the same amount compared to the size of our population then we should be taking 860,000.
That puts the 20,000 "agreed" figure into context, especially given just how wealthy this country is compared to Pakistan.
Now whilst we are likely to fund towards looking after those people, and or would be cheaper than doing so here, we then don't get the economic benefits from the spending (as even someone on benefits provides benefits to the economy, even if that's not enough to fully pay for the tax spending). Nor would we benefit when (even if only a few do it) they start paying taxes.
Given that we've got an aging population there's going to be a point when we need more younger people to come and do all the jobs that need doing.
The population between 2019 and 2020 is broadly static under 50, with the growth in population being from there being more 60+ year olds.
It's quite telling that it's clear enough that you can see it in a single year.
daodao
Established Member
The Taliban are not mass murderers. They just employ what in my view are unduly harsh/inhumane and summary punishments for criminal acts, and those they perceive as traitors, according to their interpretation of Sharia law.
In late 2001, it was not morally wrong to bomb Al Qayda hideouts in the mountains of Afghanistan, but the actual invasion of that country was unwise and has now proved futile and costly. In any case, it took years for the USA to locate Bin Laden, and he was ultimately found and killed in Pakistan, not Afghanistan.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
You mean, 'criminal acts' such as, going to school, or walking out in the street, or meeting up with your friends, or disagreeing with the Taliban, or being a member of an ethnic minority, or following a slightly different version of Islam from the Taliban?
You're failing to distinguish between the invasion and the sudden abandonment of Afghanistan that we are now seeing. There was nothing about the invasion that compelled us to suddenly walk out 20 years' later. The invasion was certainly costly, but not at all futile: It did prevent the Taliban from sheltering Al Qaeda and enabling Al Qaeda to launch many more terrorist attacks against the West. And it did allow Afghanistan to have a much better (albeit corrupt and still far from perfect) Government, giving millions of people, most obviously including women, the chance for a massively better life than they would have otherwise had. Do you really not think that those things are worth while? Do you really care so little for - for example, the women of Afghanistan that you're happy to see them persecuted under the Taliban? That's certainly the impression your posts are giving.
The thing that was futile (and totally unnecessary) was suddenly walking away and leaving so many people to the mercy of the Taliban, in the way we've suddenly done. And I would say it's also likely to prove very costly, in Afghan peoples' lives, in the reputation of the West, in terms of setting back the cause of democracy across the World, in terms of the numbers of terrorist attacks likely to be launched against us in the coming years, and in terms of increasing the power and influence of Russia and China in their attempts to suppress liberal democracy wherever they can.
birchesgreen
Established Member
Not surprised a rabid Blair hater would be a Taliban apologist to be honest.
daodao
Established Member
I am not happy about this, but it is not the business of foreign governments to meddle in the internal affairs of other sovereign states. That is liberal interventionism, first espoused by Gladstone and more recently by Blair.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
The important thing for the Corbyn fan club is to detest everything Blair did or was involved in. Any suffering felt by natives is less important than ideological purity. It is so tiresome and naïve.
Unless it is Palestine. Then it's fair game. It is also fine for Russia to invade countries willy nilly.
daodao
Established Member
The Balfour declaration, and subsequent British occupation of Palestine, is a classic case of British interventionism, and has led directly to the current situation in Palestine. In addition, Israel is currently occupying territory outside internationally recognised borders, so many view its actions as not merely concerning internal matters.
Russia's actions are not "willy nilly". They are essentially specific local irredentism (e.g. Crimea) or support for local nationalist groups (as in Abkhazia).
Last edited:
- Status