Withdrawal from Afghanistan?

[ORAC]

two blogs from today's Torygraph:

Kim Howells, Afghan withdrawal and the coming struggle between generals and politicians (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100015661/kim-howells-withdrawal-and-the-coming-struggle-between-generals-and-politicians/)

Kim Howells speaks for the majority on Afghanistan (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/davidhughes/100015658/kim-howells-speaks-for-the-majority-on-afghanistan/)

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Setting withdrawal timetables is not the brightest of moves. Although, at least it gives the terrs a clue to when their maximum effort should be applied.

[hello1]

Fundamentally you've got to have a plan before you spool up the armed forces to go and do 'something' in one of the most inhospitable fighting environments on earth. I'm not going to dig out the Clausewitz quote but surely the government understood what sort of war they were getting into and how they were going to get out of it back in 05 when we decided to go south.

The debate needs to happen in a democracy - as much for the sake of the troops fighting as to ensure public support (or otherwise). Perhaps it will allow our delightful Prime Minister to articulate his strategy and convince everyone of his powers of wartime leadership....... I suspect that the reality is that we seeing the debate start simply because this government has wandered into a second war without conducting the essential analysis that would underpin the policy required to drive military action and achieve enduring public support.

[BarbiesBoyfriend]

'This is how it starts'?

In Afghanistan our guys are working hard. The tactics are one thing but bound to fail if the Stategy is wrong.

And the Strategy IS wrong.

We will leave in due course. When we leave, after a while it will be like we were never there.

All very sad, but of little consequence to anyone except the relatives of the dead and wounded on both sides.

I realise that all involved need to believe their efforts make a difference.

In the short term, they must. But in the long term? I don't think so.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

hello1. You are, of course right. There should be an exit plan but that is not the same thing as an exit timetable.


Kim Howells

I’ve suggested here before that the Lib Dems will be the first part to demand an effective withdrawal timetable

[cazatou]

BarbiesBoyfriend is correct.

This is the UK's 4th Afghan War - the others being 1842, 1878-80 and 1919.

Let us hope that the "Powers that be" have a look in the Archives before deciding on an "Exit Strategy". The only survivor of the Kabul Garrison to reach the Afghanistan/India border in 1842 was Dr William Brydon.

[DADDY-OH!]

Cazatou

That's easy. Pull everyone & everything that can be airlifted out then booby trap everything that can't. IED's??? We'll show Terry Taleban & The Icom Chatterers bloody IED's!!!!!

Get our troops back NOW, fighting the Islamic Extremists & Militants here!!.
:ok:

[cazatou]

DADDY-OH

If you "Pull everyone and everything that can be airlifted out, then booby trap everything that can't" - how do you propose to extract those who are left behind to execute your plan?

I trust you will be volunteering for the "Stay behind" Party - just to show them how it should be done?

[ORAC]

how do you propose to extract those who are left behind to execute your plan?

http://www.zhongnanhaiblog.com/Fall%20of%20Saigon.jpg

[DADDY-OH!]

Cazatou,
Ways & means, Old Boy...ways & means.

I won't be & I pray it isn't one of my 3 nephews currently serving or my godson.

How are the old C E S M's doing over there? They seem to make a hash of tactical withdrawls, from what my Grandfather recalls of his time in France in June 1940 At the first sign of a Stuka, the Frenchies downed tools & ran off into the countryside.

I hope HM Forces aren't counting on the C E S M's to cover any withdrawl.

C'est la merde!!!

[Blacksheep]

We will leave in due course. When we leave, after a while it will be like we were never there.Like the last time. When we withdrew from the North West Frontier in 1947, closely followed by the newly independent Pakistan government's own Frontier Force, leaving "the Pathans" to their own devices, we never dreamed we'd ever be back again.

As one of the last British troops to leave Singapore in September 1971, I distinctly remember that the reasons given for the withdrawal from east of Suez was that our former colonial possessions were fully capable of managing their own affairs, allowing us to downsize our armed forces and save lots of money. So, why the renewed enthusiasm for imperial adventure? Those who fail to heed the lessons of history are doomed to repeat the failures. :rolleyes:

[sitigeltfel]

Get our troops back NOW, fighting the Islamic Extremists & Militants here!!.The politicos are always linking the home threat with the activities of the Taliban and Al-Q. Why did we need to go to Afghanistan to fight this battle if, as they say, the risk to the UK is from "within". My opinion is that the government is afraid to tackle this problem on home ground and is hoping to sub contract the conflict away from UK shores to a place where they think the dirty work can be done at arms length. They are more interested in being perceived to be seen doing something instead of facing up reality. If the money and resources had been used tackling the Islamist problem within the UK I think the population would have been more understanding. All they have done is rattle the hornets nest and set the UK on an even greater course to internal conflict.

[ORAC]

it's not Imperial adventure. The police/intelligence services state that over 90% of the terrorists plots they are aware of start off being planned in the border areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The reason the US, the UK, and others, went in was that those doing so were doing with impunity and running full time training camps as well.

The recent problems of the Pakistani government should amply show that it is a growing active fundamentalist Islamist threat not only to the West, but also to the neighbouring states.

If we pull out the Pakistani government could well fall into the hands of the Islamists, including their nuclear weapons. Those then at risk would not only be India, because of Kashmir, but also the West.

The idea that the threat will go away or that we can "fight the threat" from back here at home is a fantasy.

The danger is that public opinion will demand a withdrawal. it would seem that the the lack of rigorous support from the government, backed by a full review and rigorous review of the options, is also sapping morale in the forces.

With the apathetic support being provided by Brown and Obama it is hardly surprising that the press is starting to debate the subject and mould public opinion.

Public opinion is formed and expressed by machinery. The newspapers do an immense amount of thinking for the average man and woman. In fact they supply them with such a continuous stream of standardized opinion, borne along upon an equally inexhausible flood of news and sensation, collected from every part of the world every hour of the day, that there is neither the need nor the leisure for personal reflection. All this is but a part of a tremendous educating process. But it is an education which passes in at one ear and out at the other. It is an education at once universal and superficial. It produces enormous numbers of standardized citizens, all equipped with regulation opinions, prejudices and sentiments, according to their class or party.

Winston Churchill 1925.

[DADDY-OH!]

leftlegitis

Couldn't agree more, old boy. Hence the rise of the BNP & more moderate English, Scottish & Welsh Defence Leagues.

The stars are all coming into alignment....

[Blacksheep]

The reason the US, the UK, and others, went in was that those doing so were doing with impunity and running full time training camps as well. They still are. In Pakistan. Meanwhile, drug billionaire and corrupt politician Karzai continues to Godfather the heroin trade and our former anti-drug, anti-corruption friends, the Taliban, have become the enemy. WTF?

The newspapers do an immense amount of thinking for the average man and woman.Not for me they don't. As an avid student of history I was opposed to the Iraq and Afghanistan adventures from the very beginning, choosing not to accept the government propaganda directed at us from the press or even the UN Security Council. Almost a million UK citizens marched against the Iraq war but Bliar the Liar and Brown the Clown chose to ignore popular opinion and go in anyway. Iraq was all about oil and Afghanistan is all about what exactly? Tribalsim? The place has been about tribalism for centuries and nothing that outsiders can do or say will change anything.

[BarbiesBoyfriend]

ORAC

There's a certain logic in what you say we're doing in Afghanistan and our reasons for doing it.

But can it be done?

I think not.

And anyway, even if Afghanistan was home to these terrorist training camps and a haven for nutters in general- and we stop it being one, what have we achieved? All they'll do is operate elsewhere. And all we've done is pissed them off!

We know the Taliban are loonies. So what? They were no threat to us. Iff the locals are prepared to put up with them then they only have themselves to blame.

Why should our guys get killed doing anti-Taliban stuff that the locals can't be arsed with?

Bring our guys home alive. The locals can deal with the Talibs- or not. Up to them.

Our Strategy in Afghanistan is a mess. No amount of good tactics can ever compensate for poorly conceived strategy.

We will leave. Firm.

Lets do it sooner than later.

[cazatou]

DADDY-OH

"From what my Grandfather recalls of his time in France in June 1940"

I would just point out that the LAST day of the British Evacuation from Dunkirk was 4th of June 1940. In fact France, now bereft of Allies, fought on alone for a further 18 days until 22 June 1940.

In the 1960's I served with a MAQM who, having been shot down for a 2nd time in 1942, fought for 2 years with the Resistance in the part of France that I now live in.

Incidentally, seeing as you appear to favour the BNP, perhaps you could point out to the BNP Heirachy that the picture of a Spitfire that they have adopted as a backdrop for their Leaders Speeches bears the markings of No 303 Polish Sqn.

[hello1]

Caz,

Outstanding - I don't read or watch extremist propaganda but it comes as no surprise that the rightist idiots used a 303 Sqn Spitfire to promote their nazi views. Wonder if they are aware that 303 was the highest scoring Sqn in the BofB and that Poles accounted for 200ish of the 1100ish German losses.

[ORAC]

Regarding the subject of fighting wars I have, for many , many years, taken to heart the principals stated by Michael Howard in "The Causes of War - ISBN 0-04-940073-8, 1983, paper "The Forgotten Dimensions of War".

In this he starts by talking about the 4 dimensions taken into account when fighting a war: the Operational, the Logistical, the Technological and the Social.

The first 3 are those dictated and enforced by the capabilities of industry and the armed forces. The last relates to social cohesion and the willingness of a society to bear the price. The point being that all 4 are essential requirements to win any war.

Depending on the war and how it is sold - and I accept that propaganda always plays a major role in dehumanising the enemy - the last is vital. Howard gives the example of the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1917, but equally to Vietnam.

he makes the point that, quote:

"Military thinkers in the West, extrapolating from their experience of warfare between industrial states, naturally tended to seek a solution to what was essentially a conflict on the social plane either by developing operational techniques of "counter-insurgency" or in the technological advantages provided by such developments as helicopters, sensors or "smart" bombs. When these techniques failed to produce victory, military leaders, both French and American, complained, as had the German military leaders in 1918, that the war had been "won" militarily but "lost" politically - as if these dimensions were not totally interdependent."

I fear that those in positions of power are not readers in military history of the last 100 years, or very poor scholars, and having not learnt the lessons of the past, are on the well trodden path to repeat it.

[4Greens]

Why cant we buy all the opium for medicinal purposes and then we would own all the warlords?

[Sunray Minor]

ORAC,

I find myself in agreement for once. Howard's point has been taken up Bernd Greiner recently, this time with reference to Vietnam but very pointedly showing the direction headed in Afghanistan. The parallels between Afghanistan and Vietnam are far more deep rooted than is commonly realised.

I don't support the view that just because of failures in 1842, 1878-80 and 1919 that we are destined for failure in 2001-10. However, the outward view of Afghanistan until recently has been one of good versus evil, and perversely we have come down on the side of evil as much as the side of good, despite noble objectives. With little faith in our ability to take a nuanced view of the tribal world in and around Afghanistan in 2001 I vocally opposed the war at the time. Ironically, now that withdrawal is on the cards and more moderate outlooks are finally being accommodated we are in a position to achieve a form of success that was unattainable in the previous 8 years. Too late unfortunately.

[DADDY-OH!]

Caz

My Grandfather was fighting with the 51st Highland Division that covered the withdrawl of the BEF. The date he entered German Captivity was June 18th 1940 in the French village of Inchville, near St. Valery.

The 51st was sacrificed by WSC in the hope that it would give Marshall Petain 'a bit of spine' & prolong his surrender negotiations with the Germans in order to give the evacuated British Army some breathing space.

My Grandfather's unit fought on with captured German weapons & eating captured German rations & eventually raw vegetables from scouring the surrounding fields,knowing full well they'd been left behind unlike the Army of the nation they were there to help who were downing tools en masse & even turning on the remaining British defenders.

So, like I said, I hope the French aren't covering our withdrawl from ' Stan.

[[email protected]]

Perhaps the area that needs to be addressed more forcefully is that of funding - the Taliban are being bankrolled - without that money they cannot run their training camps or recruit footsoldiers. Take away the money and the problem will disappear.

[4Greens]

See my post.

[tu chan go]

In a way, Afghanistan could be said to be about oil................

Afghanistan Oil Pipeline - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_Oil_Pipeline)

[cazatou]

DADDY OH

Your Grandfather should, therefore, have been aware that French Cavalry fought dismounted alongside the 1st Black Watch at St Pierre-le-Viger in the defence of St Valery En Caux until the surrender of the 51st Div.

Still, we mustn't let facts get in the way of prejudice - must we?

PS Would that Surrender make the Regiments involved HESM's - or is your sarcasm reserved for "Johnny Foreigner"?

[VinRouge]

Caz, Daddy, I take it you have never watched the sorrow and the pity then?

I a way, you are indeed both right and wrong.

[barnstormer1968]

Not only is the Spitfire used in the pic, one from 303 (Polish) Sqn RAF, it is the C.O.s personal aircraft.

Sorry (because I banged on about this before) to mention this again, but I note that I have informed two national media companies about this, as well as an MP known as an old campaigner, and no one seems to really care:eek:.

I guess you could not blame the BNP for not knowing the exact squadron involved, but the red and white Polish chequer on the nose should have been a clue:}

[BarbiesBoyfriend]

ntvin

Could you explain what that link is all about. please?

Thanx

Cazatou.

Just a word against your detractors re French fighting men. I spent my youth thinking of the French as shirkers or cowards, based on WW2.

Then I read 'The last valley'.:hmm: