Serious question are now being raised about the UK's strategy in Afghanistan.
Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank, the former Chief of the Defence Staff, is saying that an extra 2,000 troops requested by the military but rejected by the Government would have made a difference in the current fighting.
UK troops are involved in Operation Panchai Palang, or Panther's Claw, a major British assault against the Taliban in Helmand ahead of next month's Afghan elections. They have been joined by about 4,000 US and 650 Afghan troops.
American commanders have apparently been scathing about the British forces resourcing, citing that the number of troops available does not match the role they have been asked to do.
Couple this with a lack of air support and helicopter transport and it's easy tos ee why casualties are rising.
The public understand the need to stabilise Afghanistan to prevent the spread of terrorism but some serious changes in strategy & resourcing are needed if this is going to be achieved in any meaningful sense.
The more images I see from the battlefield, the more this is reminding me of Vietnam.
Vietnam released figures on April 3, 1995 that a total of one million Vietnamese combatants and four million civilians were killed in the war. The accuracy of these figures has generally not been challenged. 58,226 American soldiers also died in the war or are missing in action. Australia lost almost 500 of the 47,000 troops they had deployed to Vietnam and New Zealand lost 38 soldiers.
Niko, 80% of the deaths caused by IDs are to civilians. The Taleban are blowing up the Afghanis by the hundreds. You don't see a comparison with Vietnam?
Little Davy Andy Pandy the son of a Belgian Nazi Soviet operative says it's all OK.
All Nato forces are there on a pretext. It is a ceremonial and ritualistic facade for our lads to be there.
They've been sent into danger's way as always with nothing to cover them.
It really needs to be stated quite plainly that Westminster does not care for our armed forces, never has done, never will do. The GGT gives in-depth right and left field cover.
They must be removed.
All of them.
@ Wardog Do not expect any action from so called friendly forces. If I was a member of the Ayrshire Irregulars operating under Bolivian command in Sutherland, guess who I’d be faithful too?
@Rab Don’t forget part of the Nato/GGT cover is to disguise the drug traffic.
Has anyone noted the correlation, Vietnam, Golden Triangle, Drugs. Colombia. FARC. Drugs . IranContra, US, Drugs.Yugoslavia, Nato, Bosnia/Kosovo Drugs, Afghanistan, Nato, Drugs.
In need of a snifter of Phosferine for my "Premature Decay" as I read earlier this morning but now can't find the reference to our armed forces being told by Westminster that they are now officially "at war" in Afghanistan but this is not to be released to the general public. I presume they can now start firing "single shots"? Its heart-breaking but nothing new in our 'leaders' bungling and craven subservience to money and vested interests. "We learn from history that we learn nothing from history" - GBS.
SUBROSA - Please contact me if you have any ideas, stories or complaints: subrosa.blonde AT yahoo.co.uk Replace AT with the @ symbol. My profile can be viewed here.
When words are not enough.
Posts
9 comments:
Serious question are now being raised about the UK's strategy in Afghanistan.
Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank, the former Chief of the Defence Staff, is saying that an extra 2,000 troops requested by the military but rejected by the Government would have made a difference in the current fighting.
UK troops are involved in Operation Panchai Palang, or Panther's Claw, a major British assault against the Taliban in Helmand ahead of next month's Afghan elections. They have been joined by about 4,000 US and 650 Afghan troops.
American commanders have apparently been scathing about the British forces resourcing, citing that the number of troops available does not match the role they have been asked to do.
Couple this with a lack of air support and helicopter transport and it's easy tos ee why casualties are rising.
The public understand the need to stabilise Afghanistan to prevent the spread of terrorism but some serious changes in strategy & resourcing are needed if this is going to be achieved in any meaningful sense.
The more images I see from the battlefield, the more this is reminding me of Vietnam.
Brown has some serious questions to answer.
We need to get out, and now. If there are still terrorist cells operating in the area, a few daisy cutters will sort them out. End of story.
Wardog
Your extreme hatred is distorting your mind.
http://www.vietnam-war.info/casualties/
Vietnam released figures on April 3, 1995 that a total of one million Vietnamese combatants and four million civilians were killed in the war. The accuracy of these figures has generally not been challenged. 58,226 American soldiers also died in the war or are missing in action. Australia lost almost 500 of the 47,000 troops they had deployed to Vietnam and New Zealand lost 38 soldiers.
I agree with you because Vietnam had no strategy either Wardog, although I'm still not convinced we should be there in the first place.
Niko, 80% of the deaths caused by IDs are to civilians. The Taleban are blowing up the Afghanis by the hundreds. You don't see a comparison with Vietnam?
Little Davy Andy Pandy the son of a Belgian Nazi Soviet operative says it's all OK.
All Nato forces are there on a pretext. It is a ceremonial and ritualistic facade for our lads to be there.
They've been sent into danger's way as always with nothing to cover them.
It really needs to be stated quite plainly that Westminster does not care for our armed forces, never has done, never will do. The GGT gives in-depth right and left field cover.
They must be removed.
All of them.
@ Wardog Do not expect any action from so called friendly forces. If I was a member of the Ayrshire Irregulars operating under Bolivian command in Sutherland, guess who I’d be faithful too?
@Rab Don’t forget part of the Nato/GGT cover is to disguise the drug traffic.
Has anyone noted the correlation, Vietnam, Golden Triangle, Drugs. Colombia. FARC. Drugs . IranContra, US, Drugs.Yugoslavia, Nato, Bosnia/Kosovo Drugs, Afghanistan, Nato, Drugs.
Anyone fancy a Chinese Opium War?
And that takes us off in a whole new direction.
Heads up.
Yes it does Incoming, so does the oil and energy road. Plus of course the billions in bribes...
In need of a snifter of Phosferine for my "Premature Decay" as I read earlier this morning but now can't find the reference to our armed forces being told by Westminster that they are now officially "at war" in Afghanistan but this is not to be released to the general public. I presume they can now start firing "single shots"? Its heart-breaking but nothing new in our 'leaders' bungling and craven subservience to money and vested interests. "We learn from history that we learn nothing from history" - GBS.
Think I could do with a glass full Clarinda.
Of course we're at war there, we always have been. Reid and his lies is just another dangerous individual who has no respect for human lives.
Post a Comment