|
Even More Afghan?
Looks like the UK will most likely be making greater efforts to assist US forces in Afghanistan. Reported by BBC 22/08/17,
Sir Michael Fallon, said America's commitment in Afghanistan was "very welcome", adding: "We have to stay the course in Afghanistan to help build up its fragile democracy and reduce the terrorist threat to the West." OAP |
With what (if that's what he actually meant)?
|
What a waste!
We fought the Taliban at enormous cost in lives and money - and we got nowhere in the end. What therefore is the point in starting all over again? |
Those additional 85 advisors we sent in June will be enough to tip the balance. They'll be home, as victors, by Christmas is my prediction.
|
The phrase pissing in the wind springs to mind!
Utter waste of time, money and most importantly life! :ugh: The biggest terrorist threat to the West comes from within our own borders, people radicalized at least in part by virtue of the presence of Western troops on Islamic soil. |
I do wish Sir M Fallon would take an extended trip in a Land Rover around Afghanistan in order to gain a better appreciation of the situation. A couple of weeks should do the trick....
|
The Russians failed. The US failed. Even the Brits failed over a hundred years ago. Let's stop this madness. The defence of the Realm starts at Dover these days. We just don't have enough resources to do anything else. Bigpants has a good suggestion. Mr Fallon, stop listening to the sabre-rattling 5*s and see the big picture. Absolutely no point killing Taliban in a far off land if you cannot stop terrorism in the UK.
|
Not to mention that aside from the Libyan responsible for the Manchester attack, all the terrorists are usually from erm rightt here on UK soil....
|
I do wish Sir M Fallon would take an extended trip in a Land Rover around Afghanistan in order to gain a better appreciation of the situation. A couple of weeks should do the trick.... Episode 2 isn't on YouTube, but here a link to it elsewhere. If you haven't got an hour or two to spare to watch that two-part documentary, take a look at this 18 minute talk he gave. It's as valid now as was when he spoke six years ago. When will we ever learn?! Trying to crush the Afghan resistance never works and it never will, no matter how technologically 'superior' we may believe ourselves to be. |
Originally Posted by sharpend
(Post 9869685)
The Russians failed. The US failed. Even the Brits failed over a hundred years ago. Let's stop this madness. The defence of the Realm starts at Dover these days. We just don't have enough resources to do anything else. Bigpants has a good suggestion. Mr Fallon, stop listening to the sabre-rattling 5*s and see the big picture. Absolutely no point killing Taliban in a far off land if you cannot stop terrorism in the UK.
To 5*s, war equals more money and in house MoD politicing. They are not the ones who are going to have to bleed !! |
For the benefit of those in the UK who aren't aware of the new US strategy announced by President Trump on 21 Aug 17:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOQ8su1Cxrc Went down very well with the retired 1* > 4* talking heads on TV over here. Much more freedom for commanders in the field and SecDef. The Pakistan dimension could get interesting. |
Prime time opinion on President Trump's speech from:
Gen Jack Keane US Army (Ret) - former Vice Chief of Staff of US Army https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuYBETg8P0Q Former US Ambassador to UN John Bolton Lt Col Oliver North USMC (Ret) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9uJrLrc_Js |
Rory Stewart is one of the few MPs I have any time for. Money where your mouth is springs to mind.
|
help build up its fragile democracy |
Serious British campaign medal collectors specialising in the region might be interested in adding the following to their collection:
Candahar, Ghuznee and Cabul medal (1842) (The First Afghan War) Afghanistan Medal (1878- 80) (The Second Afghan War) Kabul to Kandahar Star (1878 - 80) India General Service Medal, clasp 'Afghanistan N.W.F. 1919' (The Third Afghan War) Operational Service Medal (2001 on) I have absolutely no idea how many thousands of British troops died in the campaigns associated with these medals, but it seems that 175 years after the first attempts to bring some sort of order to that country there are to be more. Why? |
Originally Posted by Tankertrashnav
(Post 9870305)
I have absolutely no idea how many thousands of British troops died in the campaigns associated with these medals, but it seems that 175 years after the first attempts to bring some sort of order to that country there are to be more. Why? |
...to help build up its fragile democracy and reduce the terrorist threat to the West." |
Originally Posted by Blacksheep
(Post 9870492)
What I heard President Trump say was that the US would no longer be engaged in nation building, but intended simply to win. That sounds like reducing a terrorist threat by whatever means is necessary, it does not sound like the US is any longer interested in "building up a fragile democracy". It isn't a NATO situation and "by whatever means" will increase radicalisation and international terrorism - we should stay out of it.
How many more body bags will have to pass thru Brize for no good reason ? I can only hope that Parliament has the sense to say no, reflecting the will of the people who have had enough of these ridiculous wars. is this another of those situations where spineless top brass will bravely adopt the 'can do' approach in the face of obvious lack of people and kit ? Or, might we be lucky enough to finally witness the politicians being told that we actually can't do what they expect, quoting various SDR decisions. Sadly, I think not. |
If the US goes to indifference to "collateral" damage then who are the real terrorists?
|
The Taliban and ISIS.
|
In the 16 years which have elapsed has anyone found a scintilla of evidence that 9/11 was perpetrated by Afghans?
The Iraqi government quite certainly wasn't involved either, but we attacked them anyway. We have created the terrorism which now afflicts Britain and other European countries. It's time to admit our mistake and learn from it. |
"Never fight a land war in Asia". Source unknown I'm afraid, but very appropriate.
|
I can't see parliament agreeing to this - if they say they'll send troops they may finish up with an unwinnable vote...............
|
From The Times today:
Send British troops to Afghanistan, urges ex‑forces chief Lord Richards Britain must send more troops to Afghanistan to support President Trump’s new strategy, a former head of the armed forces has told The Times. Despite indications from the British government that it has no plans to reinforce its troops there at present, Lord Richards of Herstmonceux, a former chief of the defence staff and commander of Nato forces in Afghanistan, said that an offer of additional soldiers would help to win back influence in Washington. “Should Britain contribute more men and resources to the revamped US strategy in Afghanistan? Most certainly the answer is yes,” Lord Richards said. Before retiring in 2013 and becoming a life peer, he had served for three years as chief of the defence staff, Britain’s most senior military appointment. From 2006 to 2007 he was Nato commander of 50,000 international troops in Afghanistan, and was responsible for expanding the alliance’s remit across the country. He once warned that the military and diplomatic mission in Afghanistan could last at least 30 years. “The prize for us all is huge in the war against extremism but just as importantly, having lost much of our strategic influence in Washington and around the world in an era when our armed forces have been slashed, this is an opportunity to regain it,” he said. On Monday Mr Trump urged Nato members to send more troops to join America in boosting the military presence in Afghanistan to maintain pressure on the Taliban, al-Qaeda and Islamic State. “If a post-Brexit ‘global Britain’ is to mean anything, it means playing a significant role in this new US-led Afghanistan strategy,” Lord Richards said. However, he warned: “My fear is that the army in particular is now so small [fewer than 80,000] that words and more token efforts will expose the reality of a Britain that is no longer able to play the proud role on the world stage that has been our privilege for hundreds of years.” Britain has 500 military personnel in Kabul, serving at a Sandhurst-style training establishment for Afghan officer recruits. An additional 85 are due to be deployed in November. A small contingent of British special forces serves alongside US and other coalition commandos in a separate counterterrorism operation. Lord Richards said that it was always going to take a long time to build an Afghan army. For the first ten years of the 16-year campaign, the allies “were not given the necessary resources and time to get this right”, he said. Then, just as the army was beginning to take shape, President Obama and David Cameron “took the strategically illiterate decision to wind down our campaign to an almost token effort”. “President Trump’s decision to back his generals is the right one. It will take a few more years but it will work,” Lord Richards said. “It will allow the government of Afghanistan and the moderate Taliban to reconcile themselves to working together in the interests of the country as a whole.” |
The prize for us all is huge in the war against extremism but just as importantly, having lost much of our strategic influence in Washington and around the world in an era when our armed forces have been slashed, this is an opportunity to regain it,” he said. At this latter stage of my life I have come to the realisation that I don't give a monkeys what part Britain plays on the world stage. Do we honestly think that the Belgians are any the less happy because their country isn't a world "player"? Or the Swedes? Or the Spanish, Italians or Danish? I'm not a pacifist by any stretch of the imagination, I want us to have effective armed forces to defend our homeland and our shipping lanes (MRA anyone?) but I want us to consign "empire" to the history books and to stay out of the Middle East and Afghanistan completely from now on. Any idea that there is a "prize" to be won in the war against extremism by getting involved there must surely have been disproved years ago. |
Originally Posted by Tankertrashnav
(Post 9871410)
At this latter stage of my life I have come to the realisation that I don't give a monkeys what part Britain plays on the world stage.
Do we honestly think that the Belgians are any the less happy because their country isn't a world "player"? Or the Swedes? Or the Spanish, Italians or Danish? I'm not a pacifist by any stretch of the imagination, I want us to have effective armed forces to defend our homeland and our shipping lanes (MRA anyone?) but I want us to consign "empire" to the history books and to stay out of the Middle East and Afghanistan completely from now on. Any idea that there is a "prize" to be won in the war against extremism by getting involved there must surely have been disproved years ago. |
Originally Posted by Herod
(Post 9871281)
"Never fight a land war in Asia". Source unknown I'm afraid, but very appropriate.
Inconceivable. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:40. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.