A Guardian editorial today jibs at talk of the British army fighting for a 'noble cause' in Afghanistan. It finds such talk 'unhelpful'. Yet it's not easy to see why, from what the editorial goes on to say. Yes, the possibility of failure is mentioned; and there's the matter of mixed motives, with 'British interests' in there alongside 'fighting terrorism'. Even so, the Guardian seems happy to refer to advances achieved in Afghanistan and now under threat: advances...
... such as democracy, the return of refugees and universal education...And it says that 'suicide bombings are up 600% since 2005' and that 'parts of the country... are now centres of kidnapping'. I don't know, but democracy and universal education as against suicide bombers and centres of kidnapping - I think I'd go along with 'noble cause'. And also with a good job being done 'in very difficult circumstances'.
Maybe the Guardian's leader-writer was just wanting to give some force to the Robert Frost dictum.
