Red Cross giving first aid lessons to taliban

[Muzzman]

FOR THE LAST TIME , I KNOW THIS, but are you happy to contribute to the red cross knowing the money could indirectly result in british casualties?

If you knew this, then you should really assume that some of your donation to the red cross would be going to treat the Taliban already. Finding out about it now seems a little ignorant...

... and to answer your question. Yes.

I can't track my donation so I'm not going to worry about it.

 

[wellquickwoody]

ganged up on me on account of me being a student,

Sounds fair enough. When you start paying your way rather than just costing me money I will take your opinion more seriously.

 

[philsussex]

Got to agree with Bushy on this.

Can understand that the Red Cross's neutral position puts them in a position where they have to treat scum like the Taliban.

However, treating the Taliban and putting them back in a position where they can kill or injure British soldiers is not something I want any part of and as such I will no longer donate to the Red Cross.

 

[Pantani]

Sounds fair enough. When you start paying your way rather than just costing me money I will take your opinion more seriously.

Sorry, I should have said student with a full time job. I have never been unemployed in my life. So have probably paid my way. This is all without bringing in the fact that University educations are paid through student loans. You did probably help pay my way through school though, so thanks for that.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

FOR THE LAST TIME , I KNOW THIS, but are you happy to contribute to the red cross knowing the money could indirectly result in british casualties?

Yes I am. The Red Cross provide a valuable service all over the world and I'm buggered if I'm going to not give them money so they have to stop helping innocent African children as an example.

You seem to completely dismiss them being neutral because it doesn't suit your arguement. Being neutral means treating everyone. Would you have objected to them treating Iraqi soldiers despite the fact we were there illegally ?

 

[wellquickwoody]

Sorry, I should have said student with a full time job. I have never been unemployed in my life. So have probably paid my way. This is all without bringing in the fact that University educations are paid through student loans. You did probably help pay my way through school though, so thanks for that.

Point taken.

 

[Acker79]

So, everyone in the west stops donating to the red cross, one of two things happen:

1) They lose neutrality for need of funding, and then the taliban/our enemies will start targeting them because they are no longer that neutral party

2) They cease to exist and the good they do for our troops, our allies, and innocent needy people the world over all suffer.

We are not going to lose the war because the red cross helped some of the taliban members instead of leaving them to die. So, it seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And what about the possibility that the experience of life saving treatment from the west isn't going to reduce the numbers of taliban, the healed man going home and spreading word of the wonders of the red cross, and how some good christian man save his life and that perhaps they're not so bad...

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Bushy, surely you realise you're well out on your own with this particular assertion? And are looking pretty dim and isolated. I mean, not even the morons who normally side with you have posted any messages of support.

 

[hart's shirt]

I always felt bad about donating to St John's Ambulance when they took Palace players off the field on a stretcher.

 

[wellquickwoody]

I always felt bad about donating to St John's Ambulance when they took Palace players off the field on a stretcher.

 

[Was not Was]

To help me understand your point of view ...

... can someone who thinks the Red Cross is in the wrong here, explain where they draw the line?

This seems to be the key question, as I've not heard before the idea that it's wrong to be neutral. What is it about Afghanistan/ the Taliban that makes it a special case?

Or would it have been wrong to, for example, treat Argentine conscripts injured in the Falklands conflict?

 

[Was not Was]

... and, in your book, would you expect an Afghan who supports the Taliban to refuse to support the Red Cross financially because they also treat the Brit/US soldiers?

If so, then don't we just end up with everyone in the world only supporting Red Cross care in wars their nation/faction isn't involved in?

Or is there something special about British soldiers that trumps the principle of neutrality?

 

[Husty]

Bushy, are you happy paying taxes which are funding a war in which thousands of innocent civilians have died. The Taliban have killed a few hundred British troops, we have killed thousands more women and children, therefore should we all stop paying our taxes? Because a fraction of what we pay may have payed for he bomb that is dropped on a civilian house?

I personally think that is a pretty fair analogy given how much of the few silvers you would put in your average collection pot outside a super market would actually go towards training the Taliban in first aid.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Bushy, are you happy paying taxes which are funding a war in which thousands of innocent civilians have died. The Taliban have killed a few hundred British troops, we have killed thousands more women and children, therefore should we all stop paying our taxes? Because a fraction of what we pay may have payed for he bomb that is dropped on a civilian house?

I personally think that is a pretty fair analogy given how much of the few silvers you would put in your average collection pot outside a super market would actually go towards training the Taliban in first aid.

And a number of British soldiers have killed their own. Maybe Bushy can get a tax rebate for these if he feels so strongly about this.

 

[Acker79]

I don't agree with him, but Bushy's point, which is repeatedly being missed, isn't that they shouldn't be neutral, it's that our donations are funding them and through their neutrality, they are aiding our opponents in this war. Effectively we are financing the care of the opposition, and should we?


For me the issue is do the pros of having and supporting a neutral red cross outweigh the cons, and for me, yes they do, massively.

 

[Juan Albion]

This is the kind of story that brings out the knee jerk reactions, with the emphasis on neither knee nor reactions.

What people like bushy don't think about is that this war canot be won militarily. If it can be 'won' at all, it is by 'winning' the hearts of the people. So bushy, if you want to bring an end to the deaths of British soldiers, I suggest you start mailing cheques directly to the Red Cross/Crescent in Afghanistan and hope that their humanitarian efforts end this war sooner rather than later.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

This is the kind of story that brings out the knee jerk reactions, with the emphasis on neither knee nor reactions.

What people like bushy don't think about is that this war canot be won militarily. If it can be 'won' at all, it is by 'winning' the hearts of the people. So bushy, if you want to bring an end to the deaths of British soldiers, I suggest you start mailing cheques directly to the Red Cross/Crescent in Afghanistan and hope that their humanitarian efforts end this war sooner rather than later.

Fair comments. Bushy is picking on the wrong organization.

 

[Don Quixote]

You don't have to be there to know what happened. None of us were "there" when Hitler shot himself and we are quite right in stating he did. All notable historians weren't "there" but somehow they know the truth. Crazy isn't it.

 

[Wozza]

I always felt bad about donating to St John's Ambulance when they took Palace players off the field on a stretcher.

 

[daveinprague]

IRC presence in Afghanistan doing what they have done globally since their inception = Legitimate.


HM Forces presence in Afghanistan to give 'moral' rather than military support to the USA, the most powerful military machine on earth, who could more than cover the withdrawal of British forces, against the Taliban that have never attacked the UK or British interests = Stupid waste of British lives.

Guess who will STAY in Afghanistan, long after the US and the UK decide to leave.