NPR

Posted: **Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:54 pm**

Lobby wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 11:01 am Not only did he leave his Afghan staff behind, and threaten to ‘destroy’ the FO staff given the unenviable task of trying to assist the entitled twat, the likelihood is that most of the animals will have to put down when they arrive here.

It seems unlikely he was responsible for leaving any of his staff behind?

Posted: **Sun Aug 29, 2021 10:09 pm**

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:54 pm
Lobby wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 11:01 am Not only did he leave his Afghan staff behind, and threaten to ‘destroy’ the FO staff given the unenviable task of trying to assist the entitled twat, the likelihood is that most of the animals will have to put down when they arrive here.
It seems unlikely he was responsible for leaving any of his staff behind?

Tuesday: “Hey lads, help me get these pets to the airport and I’ll get you on a plane too”
Thursday: “Ah, shit…..”

Posted: **Sun Aug 29, 2021 11:35 pm**

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:54 pm
Lobby wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 11:01 am Not only did he leave his Afghan staff behind, and threaten to ‘destroy’ the FO staff given the unenviable task of trying to assist the entitled twat, the likelihood is that most of the animals will have to put down when they arrive here.
It seems unlikely he was responsible for leaving any of his staff behind?

How much time did he spend lobbying the Home Office to get his staff on flights; versus the time he spent getting a few cats & dogs on them ?

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:18 am**

He wasn’t going to leave without the pets. But the staff …

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 7:18 am**

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:54 pm
Lobby wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 11:01 am Not only did he leave his Afghan staff behind, and threaten to ‘destroy’ the FO staff given the unenviable task of trying to assist the entitled twat, the likelihood is that most of the animals will have to put down when they arrive here.
It seems unlikely he was responsible for leaving any of his staff behind?

He and his staff all had the paper work a couple of weeks ago and all he had to do was get rid of the animals and the whole lot of his staff would have got out. But no, he insisted that the animals went too. The Yanks, who were in charge of who got in the airport, then changed the rules and his staff were left behind to their fate.

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:29 am**

Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:18 am He wasn’t going to leave without the pets. But the staff …

It's in the British psyche. We give the same %age of donations to animal charities as we do children's charities!! And far more to them than disability and homeless charities.
Bonkers!!!

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:58 am**

Someone in ITV has a lovely sense of humor.

They're currently showing "Carry On Up The Kyber"

The casting of Sid James as the lecherous Bumblecunt is inspired; but he's a bit too smart; & I can't work out who is Raab ?

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:24 am**

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:58 am Someone in ITV has a lovely sense of humor.

They're currently showing "Carry On Up The Kyber"

The casting of Sid James as the lecherous Bumblecunt is inspired; but he's a bit too smart; & I can't work out who is Raab ?

Raab would not be in it - He got the OK from the director that he could stay on holiday rather than turn up for work

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:31 am**

Dogbert wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:24 am
fishfoodie wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:58 am Someone in ITV has a lovely sense of humor.

They're currently showing "Carry On Up The Kyber"

The casting of Sid James as the lecherous Bumblecunt is inspired; but he's a bit too smart; & I can't work out who is Raab ?
Raab would not be in it - He got the OK from the director that he could stay on holiday rather than turn up for work

Death by a thousand cuts! Oh don't worry dear, the British are used to cuts!

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:35 am**

Dogbert wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:24 am
fishfoodie wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:58 am Someone in ITV has a lovely sense of humor.

They're currently showing "Carry On Up The Kyber"

The casting of Sid James as the lecherous Bumblecunt is inspired; but he's a bit too smart; & I can't work out who is Raab ?
Raab would not be in it - He got the OK from the director that he could stay on holiday rather than turn up for work

Raab tells his FCO staff not to bother him again while he’s on holiday

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 12:00 pm**

SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:29 am
Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:18 am He wasn’t going to leave without the pets. But the staff …
It's in the British psyche. We give the same %age of donations to animal charities as we do children's charities!! And far more to them than disability and homeless charities.
Bonkers!!!

I'm not sure if that is correct?

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:12 pm**

Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 12:00 pm
SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:29 am
Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:18 am He wasn’t going to leave without the pets. But the staff …
It's in the British psyche. We give the same %age of donations to animal charities as we do children's charities!! And far more to them than disability and homeless charities.
Bonkers!!!
I'm not sure if that is correct?

I agree. Brits give more to animal charities than all the rest put together.

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:34 pm**

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:12 pm
Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 12:00 pm
SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:29 am

It's in the British psyche. We give the same %age of donations to animal charities as we do children's charities!! And far more to them than disability and homeless charities.
Bonkers!!!
I'm not sure if that is correct?
I agree. Brits give more to animal charities than all the rest put together.

I'm not sure if that is correct.

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:17 pm**

Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 12:00 pm
SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:29 am
Ymx wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:18 am He wasn’t going to leave without the pets. But the staff …
It's in the British psyche. We give the same %age of donations to animal charities as we do children's charities!! And far more to them than disability and homeless charities.
Bonkers!!!
I'm not sure if that is correct?

Sorry my mistake.
9% of donations go to childrens charities compared to 8% to animal charities!!!
Donations to homelessness and disabilities are 7% and 4% respectively.

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:42 pm**

SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:17 pm
Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 12:00 pm
SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:29 am

It's in the British psyche. We give the same %age of donations to animal charities as we do children's charities!! And far more to them than disability and homeless charities.
Bonkers!!!
I'm not sure if that is correct?
Sorry my mistake.
9% of donations go to childrens charities compared to 8% to animal charities!!!
Donations to homelessness and disabilities are 7% and 4% respectively.

The other 72% goes to the Tory Party?

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:04 pm**

SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:17 pm
Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 12:00 pm
SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:29 am

It's in the British psyche. We give the same %age of donations to animal charities as we do children's charities!! And far more to them than disability and homeless charities.
Bonkers!!!
I'm not sure if that is correct?
Sorry my mistake.
9% of donations go to childrens charities compared to 8% to animal charities!!!
Donations to homelessness and disabilities are 7% and 4% respectively.

Well that is shocking - do you have the link to the report for this?

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:16 pm**

westport wrote: ↑Sat Aug 28, 2021 1:16 pm

You can't beat a bit of ride of the Valkyries - I am marching round the kitchen

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:20 pm**

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:54 pm
Lobby wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 11:01 am Not only did he leave his Afghan staff behind, and threaten to ‘destroy’ the FO staff given the unenviable task of trying to assist the entitled twat, the likelihood is that most of the animals will have to put down when they arrive here.
It seems unlikely he was responsible for leaving any of his staff behind?

He wasn't - they had visas , Taleban wouldn't let them through. Vaguely dissappointed he opted to go anyway, it slightly contradicts his "we are all in this together" rhetoric...

They whole thing was a bit of a nonsensical sideshow, no one looked good...

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:45 pm**

Openside wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:20 pm
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:54 pm
Lobby wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 11:01 am Not only did he leave his Afghan staff behind, and threaten to ‘destroy’ the FO staff given the unenviable task of trying to assist the entitled twat, the likelihood is that most of the animals will have to put down when they arrive here.
It seems unlikely he was responsible for leaving any of his staff behind?
He wasn't - they had visas , Taleban wouldn't let them through.

If they had all gone straight to the airport on Monday instead of waiting 2 days while the Egomaniac shouted at the world’s press, the Taliban wouldn’t have had a chance to stop any of them.

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 9:40 pm**

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:45 pm
Openside wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:20 pm
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 4:54 pm
It seems unlikely he was responsible for leaving any of his staff behind?
He wasn't - they had visas , Taleban wouldn't let them through.
If they had all gone straight to the airport on Monday instead of waiting 2 days while the Egomaniac shouted at the world’s press, the Taliban wouldn’t have had a chance to stop any of them.

The attention seeking prick was on telly this morning. He made a suggestion that the British and Americans had changed the rules for his staff's visas purely to fuck him over. He also made a big play about offering his empty plane to take Afghans out and the authorities had refused. When asked how many empty seats there were on the plane he would only say "several",

Posted: **Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:39 pm**

Blackmac wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 9:40 pm
Sandstorm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:45 pm
Openside wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:20 pm

He wasn't - they had visas , Taleban wouldn't let them through.
If they had all gone straight to the airport on Monday instead of waiting 2 days while the Egomaniac shouted at the world’s press, the Taliban wouldn’t have had a chance to stop any of them.
The attention seeking prick was on telly this morning. He made a suggestion that the British and Americans had changed the rules for his staff's visas purely to fuck him over. He also made a big play about offering his empty plane to take Afghans out and the authorities had refused. When asked how many empty seats there were on the plane he would only say "several",

Yeah; between this, & the reports of other flights going out half empty, it really shows that the process of clearing Afghans, was what failed; & this is the most damning indictment of Raab et al.

They knew the timetable the shitgibbon signed up to; & they knew the numbers of people involved, & they had been warned of the problems; & he still pissed off on holiday, & removed the people, from Kabul; who could have sped up the process of getting people on planes.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 12:03 am**

Well, it's finished. And given the speed of the Taliban takeover all you can really say is that the writing has been on the wall for years. It was only a question of when they were going to decide to be seen to publicly "lose".

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 12:10 am**

Flockwitt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 12:03 am Well, it's finished. And given the speed of the Taliban takeover all you can really say is that the writing has been on the wall for years. It was only a question of when they were going to decide to be seen to publicly "lose".

I don't think it'll ever be finished; we're just going to go to a new phase.

Now the NATO nations will try & setup a safe railroad for Afghans & their dependents, who got left behind, out of the Country; & then I expect the US, (CIA Actually), to start encouraging friendly tribal groups, into guerilla organizations; that'll carry out attacks on the Taliban, & feed intelligence back to the CIA.

If the CIA is smart; they'll duplicate the way the Viet Cong, & NVA managed to infiltrate every aspect of South Vietnam, & undermine it.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 12:42 am**

I doubt the US is going to actively target the Taliban if they keep up the friendly face. They'd rather keep the Taliban on side for a while yet given the ISIS splinter groups and other issues with geopolitics vs. China and Russia.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:24 am**

fishfoodie wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 12:10 am

If the CIA is smart; they'll duplicate the way the Viet Cong, & NVA managed to infiltrate every aspect of South Vietnam, & undermine it.

The CIA is not smart. They're stupid, arrogant cunts who should stay the fuck out of Afghanistan this time. They won't and they'll get busted in the press within a year and made to look even more stupid.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:28 am**

The new phase is to persuade the Taliban through carrot and stick not to allow ISIS or AQ to openly operate in the territory they control.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:50 am**

tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:28 am The new phase is to persuade the Taliban through carrot and stick not to allow ISIS or AQ to openly operate in the territory they control.

It's been interesting watching various world leaders insist that the Taliban adhere to world norms and respect human rights. They couldn't be doing it from a weaker position or with any less credibility. As if the Taliban give a fuck about any of those things.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:52 am**

RAF launching airstrikes against ISIS in Afghanistan. What is the difference between war and air strikes?

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 9:00 am**

assfly wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:50 am
tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:28 am The new phase is to persuade the Taliban through carrot and stick not to allow ISIS or AQ to openly operate in the territory they control.
It's been interesting watching various world leaders insist that the Taliban adhere to world norms and respect human rights. They couldn't be doing it from a weaker position or with any less credibility. As if the Taliban give a fuck about any of those things.

I think the more perceptive Taliban leaders will realise there ui a window were they can offer some minor concessions and guarantees and in return get the massive benefits of becoming the recognised legitimate government with the diplomatic and trade advantages this brings. Also the US/NATO whilst no longer on the ground can life very dangerous and difficult using air/drone strikes

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 9:09 am**

Slick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 26, 2021 5:37 pm
westport wrote: ↑Thu Aug 26, 2021 5:25 pm 4 US Marines killed and 3 injured
Interested to know from a military person how Boris’ comments will go down.

“It’s not going to interrupt our progress”

“There was always going to be vulnerabilities to terrorist attacks, but I’m afraid it is something we have to be prepared for”

Sounds a bit General Melchett to me, but maybe you just accept that as part of the job

It grates a bit when you're down range but it's the truth. Don't get issued an SA80 and Virtus body armour for nothing.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 9:55 am**

tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 9:00 am
assfly wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:50 am
tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:28 am The new phase is to persuade the Taliban through carrot and stick not to allow ISIS or AQ to openly operate in the territory they control.
It's been interesting watching various world leaders insist that the Taliban adhere to world norms and respect human rights. They couldn't be doing it from a weaker position or with any less credibility. As if the Taliban give a fuck about any of those things.
I think the more perceptive Taliban leaders will realise there ui a window were they can offer some minor concessions and guarantees and in return get the massive benefits of becoming the recognised legitimate government with the diplomatic and trade advantages this brings. Also the US/NATO whilst no longer on the ground can life very dangerous and difficult using air/drone strikes

I don't think they are going to give too much of a fuck about the US and NATO. Russia and China will be all over them making deals to ensure security and using their veto's at the UN. They will let them get on with it as long as it doesn't overspill their borders.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 9:55 am**

tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 9:00 am
assfly wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:50 am
tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:28 am The new phase is to persuade the Taliban through carrot and stick not to allow ISIS or AQ to openly operate in the territory they control.
It's been interesting watching various world leaders insist that the Taliban adhere to world norms and respect human rights. They couldn't be doing it from a weaker position or with any less credibility. As if the Taliban give a fuck about any of those things.
I think the more perceptive Taliban leaders will realise there ui a window were they can offer some minor concessions and guarantees and in return get the massive benefits of becoming the recognised legitimate government with the diplomatic and trade advantages this brings. Also the US/NATO whilst no longer on the ground can life very dangerous and difficult using air/drone strikes

They only need to be recognised by China and her sidekicks to get all the infrastructure and trade they want with no mention of human rights or similar.
They really don’t need the west lecturing them on anything in return for trade/ investment

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:02 am**

Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:04 pm
SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:17 pm
Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 12:00 pm

I'm not sure if that is correct?
Sorry my mistake.
9% of donations go to childrens charities compared to 8% to animal charities!!!
Donations to homelessness and disabilities are 7% and 4% respectively.
Well that is shocking - do you have the link to the report for this?

Charities Aid Foundation 2019 report
Think its this one
https://www.cafonline.org/docs/default ... a29a40_4

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:36 am**

Yeah not sure what the Taliban need now from the West that they can't get on more generous terms from the Russians or Chinese. We've lost, time to move on.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 11:09 am**

SaintK wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:02 am
Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:04 pm
SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:17 pm
Sorry my mistake.
9% of donations go to childrens charities compared to 8% to animal charities!!!
Donations to homelessness and disabilities are 7% and 4% respectively.
Well that is shocking - do you have the link to the report for this?
Charities Aid Foundation 2019 report
Think its this one
https://www.cafonline.org/docs/default ... a29a40_4

OK - but on the pie chart in that report it shows 1 section just for animal welfare - and 13 sections devoted to various 'human' orientated charities.

Wouldn't that suggest that animal charities get about 8% (according to the pie chart) of the total pot where 'human' based charities get around 80% - just that it is spread over a greater number of needs?

Split the animal welfare into similar subsections - rehoming animals, wildlife sanctuary's, medical aide, cat and dog homes, RSPCA etc etc etc. I'm sure that cat and dog homes receive far less funding than say children charities.

Or am I interpreting that wrong?

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 12:36 pm**

I like neeps wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:52 am RAF launching airstrikes against ISIS in Afghanistan.

From where? Re the general situation I don’t think it’s the British Army’s job to facilitate women’s education or gay rights anywhere in the world. What is shameful is that we led Afghans to believe that these things were possible, they behaved accordingly and now we’ve cleared off and left them to face the shit.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 1:25 pm**

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:36 am Yeah not sure what the Taliban need now from the West that they can't get on more generous terms from the Russians or Chinese. We've lost, time to move on.

The price of even basic diplomatic recognition/no airstrikes from the West is not to openly allow ISIS/AQ to base themselves in Afgan and I think it will happen. They can do this whilst remaining a hardcore Sharia state.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 1:32 pm**

GogLais wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 12:36 pm
I like neeps wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 8:52 am RAF launching airstrikes against ISIS in Afghanistan.
From where? Re the general situation I don’t think it’s the British Army’s job to facilitate women’s education or gay rights anywhere in the world. What is shameful is that we led Afghans to believe that these things were possible, they behaved accordingly and now we’ve cleared off and left them to face the shit.

Yes and even when HMG did think it was the armies job they weren't prepared to invest the resources it required to hold a single province.

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 2:05 pm**

Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 11:09 am
SaintK wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:02 am
Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:04 pm

Well that is shocking - do you have the link to the report for this?
Charities Aid Foundation 2019 report
Think its this one
https://www.cafonline.org/docs/default ... a29a40_4
OK - but on the pie chart in that report it shows 1 section just for animal welfare - and 13 sections devoted to various 'human' orientated charities.

Wouldn't that suggest that animal charities get about 8% (according to the pie chart) of the total pot where 'human' based charities get around 80% - just that it is spread over a greater number of needs?

Split the animal welfare into similar subsections - rehoming animals, wildlife sanctuary's, medical aide, cat and dog homes, RSPCA etc etc etc. I'm sure that cat and dog homes receive far less funding than say children charities.

Or am I interpreting that wrong?

I read it as shown on the chart and didn't add all "human" orientated charity donations together
I guess you could split the animal charities down into subsections as well but it would still add up to 8% to the animal charities and the CAF still quote 9% to children charities.
Mind boggling!!!

Posted: **Tue Aug 31, 2021 2:15 pm**

tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 1:25 pm
Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:36 am Yeah not sure what the Taliban need now from the West that they can't get on more generous terms from the Russians or Chinese. We've lost, time to move on.
The price of even basic diplomatic recognition/no airstrikes from the West is not to openly allow ISIS/AQ to base themselves in Afgan and I think it will happen. They can do this whilst remaining a hardcore Sharia state.

True, but that will be the same basic requirement of Russia and China

NPR

Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well

Re: Afghanistan: that turned out well