Sick.

[Grinding One]

I have a freind who is a major in the rifles and his opinion is that

" bring our lads home , they shouldnt be there" translates as " 201 brave men will have died for nothing"

My freind says that most of the troops (in the front line units anyway - remfs may be a different matter) dont want to leave with the job half done if it means that their mates will have died for no reason - they want the lily livered politicians to give them what they need to finish the fight then come home when the job is complete.

On the other point , yes if you take the queens shilling you can expect to get shot at, but you also have the right to expect that the goverment will give you equipment to do the job, not 30 year old helicopters that spend more time in maintenance than they do in the air, guns that never jam unless you try to fire them, and batteries for your night sight that are suficuent for less than 1/3 of your tour of duty.

and re legalising heroin , i agree that its an excellent move for domestic policy but it wont cut the legs from under the muj - they'll just get propped up by the oil rich nations in the gulf like the iraqi oposition are.

OK,here is a Good Deal,How about drones??Aircraft with no pilots that carry bombs....nobody gets hit but the bad guys.
Then we get batteries in cars and we have no need for oil....HUH? WIll that work?

 

[devonwoody]

How was the Pacific war ended, it was a terrible solution, but the conflict was ended because the softies after 5 years of world conflict were ignored.

A warrior on one side or the other will solve this eternal problem.

 

[RogerS]

I have a freind who is a major in the rifles and his opinion is that

" bring our lads home , they shouldnt be there" translates as " 201 brave men will have died for nothing"

.......

Absolutely nothing wrong with that view point. But if it is unwinnable? We're talking trying to change the entire culture of a nation here. Afghanistan is a country (as are many in Africa) based on centuries of feudal tribal societies. You're not going to change that overnight or over years...if at all. The latest report on bribery and corruption in their elections is plain evidence of the chasm that exists between what the West asprirations might/might not be and the aspirations of all the factions of/fractions within Afghani society.

 

[woodbloke]

I have a freind who is a major in the rifles and his opinion is that

" bring our lads home , they shouldnt be there" translates as " 201 brave men will have died for nothing"

.......

Absolutely nothing wrong with that view point. But if it is unwinnable? We're talking trying to change the entire culture of a nation here. Afghanistan is a country (as are many in Africa) based on centuries of feudal tribal societies. You're not going to change that overnight or over years...if at all. The latest report on bribery and corruption in their elections is plain evidence of the chasm that exists between what the West asprirations might/might not be and the aspirations of all the factions of/fractions within Afghani society.

Roger - agreed, which is a point that I was attempting to make. The nature of the society in that part of the world is such that an attitude change (or culture change) is probably impossible in the short term and very protracted at best in the long term.
I also take BSM's point that if the lad's are in theatre doing a job that frankly, I wouldn't want to do, they they should be given the tools to do it. For my money, it's a crime that they're not - Rob

 

[devonwoody]

Helicopters are not necessary the weapons for the job, you can't safely use them in enemy occupied territory.

 

[RogerS]

I didn't realise that you were such a world-renowned expert on warfare, dw. :?

 

[devonwoody]

I didn't realise that you were such a world-renowned expert on warfare, dw. :?

Born in 1937 and helped the RAF at night time in the forties directing them towards the Junkers from my bedroom window, used to track the rockets on my bike.

 

[big soft moose]

Helicopters are not necessary the weapons for the job, you can't safely use them in enemy occupied territory.

they worked for the russians - there is a famous quote from the muj comander at the time " we do not fear the russians but we fear their helicopters" - the difference was that the hind MI24 was a flying tank invulnerable to small arms and virtually impossible to knock down without stingers or grails which the CIA supplied only in small numbers because they wanted to prolong the conflict.

Likewise with the british and american apaches - if you read "apache dawn" by Damien lewis it gives a good account of the air war in afganistan - the problem is that there arent enough apaches to go round and 30 year old lynx cant fill the gap

 

[big soft moose]

Absolutely nothing wrong with that view point. But if it is unwinnable? We're talking trying to change the entire culture of a nation here. Afghanistan is a country (as are many in Africa) based on centuries of feudal tribal societies. You're not going to change that overnight or over years...if at all. The latest report on bribery and corruption in their elections is plain evidence of the chasm that exists between what the West asprirations might/might not be and the aspirations of all the factions of/fractions within Afghani society.

all good points but turning afganistan into a western democracy should never have been the mission in the first place - that happened due to western leaders obsession with looking good in the media.

The true millitary objective was basically revenge for 9/11 after the talib refused to handover OBL, ie to destroy the taliban as a military force , help the northern alliance kick their butt, stop al queda using the country as a training base and to give an object lesson to any other regime thinking of supporting them - in basic terms "Dont mess with us, cos we're big and nasty...... go and pick on the french instead "

Our and US military could have acheived that in 01, and still could if the politicos would let them and equip them for the mission, like Patton said " Have a plan, execute it violently, and do it today"

Instead of which the western leadership had an unworkable dream instead of a plan, tied the troops hands with "peace keeping rules of engagement", and had no idea what do next when their dream came to pieces.

 

[woodbloke]

Helicopters are not necessary the weapons for the job, you can't safely use them in enemy occupied territory.

DW - you wouldn't expect the lads to parachute in then, would you, as at Arnhem?...and look what happened there :shock:
There has to be a risk for any materiel equipment in theatre and choppers are probably the right way to move troops around as they'd involve the least amount of danger to men and gear - Rob

 

[Anonymous]

All these comments about equipment and helicopters. The main problem in this war, and it is a world war, is lack of troops. What I dont understand is the Taliban/Al queda are an enemy to all nations in the world today. Led by a dictator and run by sadists.
But a dire few countries are providing support for the battle.
And what makes me angry is the fact military personnel are sitting in comfy barracks around the world getting paid for a job they are not doing.
Fighting.

Koolwabbit