The figures - gathered by a network of Afghan veterans - reveal the scale of what one former UK general calls a “betrayal” and a “disgrace”.

The soldiers fled to Pakistan, which now says it will expel Afghan refugees.

The UK says it has brought thousands of Afghans to safety.

Gen Sir Richard Barrons, who served the British Army in Afghanistan over 12 years, told BBC Newsnight that the failure of the UK to relocate these soldiers “is a disgrace, because it reflects that either we’re duplicitous as a nation or incompetent”.

“Neither are acceptable,” he said. “It is a betrayal, and the cost of that betrayal will be people who served with us will die or spend their lives in prison.”

  • @MataVatnik
    link
    110 months ago

    No, arguably worse. Because if it was a colony the UK would have at least governed and invested in the country. Instead they came in, wrecked shit for a couple decades and left.

    • @TheGrandNagus
      link
      710 months ago

      Right, so colonialism is when a country doesn’t give residency or citizenship to people that fought alongside British forces, officially or unofficially.

      You’re shoehorning a completely unrelated topic into this.

      • @MataVatnik
        link
        1
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Did you read the comment you replied to? I literally said it wasn’t colonialism in that comment.

          • @MataVatnik
            link
            010 months ago

            My point is that it’s worse than colonialism. Bruh. Holy shit lol.

            • @TheGrandNagus
              link
              010 months ago

              Lmao

              Not giving foreign soldiers citizenship is worse than colonialism. Christ.

              Someone’s never read a history book.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          110 months ago

          That’s a vassal state, not a colony. Under colonial rule, there is no ‘real’ government and there are strong economic ties between colonizer and colonized.