Why Lance-Corporal Elson and our other 175 soldiers killed in an unwinnable war deserve better from this country
By Max Hastings
Last updated at 1:30 AM on 10th July 2009
- Comments (57)
- Add to My Stories
Latest casualty: Dane ElsonYesterday, the Ministry of Defence announced the death of the seventh British soldier to be lost in a fortnight in Afghanistan.
It also named a man killed on Sunday: Lance-Corporal Dane Elson, 22, of the Welsh Guards.
He was patrolling north of Lashkar Gah in support of the Light Dragoons armoured group when an improvised explosive device (IED) detonated.
The Dragoons’ commanding officer said: ‘It’s typical of the man that he died while providing cover to the rest of his platoon.’
In truth, the Colonel was struggling to find words of consolation to explain the unexplainable – a death that brings misery to Dane Elson’s family.
I sympathise with the British military spokesmen in Helmand who are almost daily called upon to find words to accompany the announcement of casualties: ‘We are shocked and saddened. . . outstanding NCO. . . deeply missed. . . heroic example.’
In truth, alas, it is hard to find much heroic about being blown up by a mine, the fate of so many soldiers in Helmand. IEDs impact significantly upon morale.
Most men cheerfully take their chances in firefights, where superior skills and equipment usually enable them to prevail.
But it is a wretched business, to march or ride daily through the Afghan countryside, knowing that at any moment one might be blown to eternity without the smallest chance of averting fate.
No armoured vehicle is proof against mines containing up to 500lb of explosive, such as the Taliban now employ.
Mail reporter Richard Pendlebury’s vivid dispatch from the front line with the Royal Mercians earlier this week highlights the savagery of the struggle to which the Army is committed.
The coffin of Major Sean Birchall of the 1st Battalion Welsh Guards is carried by colleagues. Birchall was killed by an explosion whilst on patrol near Lashkar Gah, in Helmand province on June 19It will not be lost upon a single British soldier that, even as they fight and die in Operation Panther’s Claw, the drive to clear the Taliban out of central Helmand, the British Government has announced a defence review.
Rumour at the Ministry of Defence suggests that ministers want a 10 per cent cut in next year’s Armed Forces budget.
More from Max Hastings…
- MAX HASTINGS: A sick joke: Government has sent troops to die yet starved them of money but today is Britain’s first Armed Forces Day 27/06/09
- The not-so-super life of Supermac: HAROLD MACMILLAN BY CHARLES WILLIAMS 19/06/09
- MAX HASTINGS: Democracy? Most of us feel no one speaks up for our views 08/06/09
- MAX HASTINGS: Steaks for £4 and cheap plonk galore: Can the hand-wringing Tesco-bashers please… BOGOF! 08/06/09
- MAX HASTINGS: Who will put this exhausted, discredited and ridiculous regime out of its misery? 03/06/09
- MAX HASTINGS: North Korea’s ruler may be mad. But his threats expose the impotence of America 28/05/09
- MAX HASTINGS: As Britain teeters on bankruptcy and MPs get ever more discredited, we face political paralysis 22/05/09
- MAX HASTINGS: He’s contemptible and incompetent. But the Speaker is the least of our worries 19/05/09
- VIEW FULL ARCHIVE
Incredibly, the Army is threatened with the loss of some infantry units. This, despite overstretch created by Afghanistan which means units have to be rotated into action, with only a few months’ pause between returning from one deployment and starting to train for the next.
There is an alarming and expensive haemorrhage of trained men who quit the service rather than keep boarding planes for Kandahar.
This is not because they are cowards, but because the schedule forced upon them by manpower shortage makes it impossible to have normal lives, above all family lives, in between. Almost everyone involved, from President Barack Obama downwards, recognises that we are losing the war.
This does not mean the Taliban is defeating British and U.S. soldiers. But the allies are striving to secure the country, and Helmand province in particular, in support of an unpopular, corrupt and ineffective Kabul government.
However much ground Western soldiers clear at such cost in sweat and blood, there are nothing like sufficient Afghans to move in behind, exploit successes and run the region.
A reserve officer who has recently served in Afghanistan delivers a devastating broadside in the British Army Review.
Major Steve Miller writes: ‘The new doctrine of “Clear, Hold, Build” has become a parody of itself. We are really only clearing the immediate vicinity of the security force bases, we are only holding the major settlements, and we are not building. Selfprotection has become the main tactic, reinforced by air strikes that can backfire and undermine the campaign.’
Another recently retired officer, Major Patrick Little, has likewise gone public in the Royal United Services Institute journal, writing about what he perceives as deep-rooted failures.
The hearse carrying the coffin of Lieutenant-Colonel Rupert Thorneloe follows that of Trooper Josh Hammond through Wootton Bassett after the pair were killed on July 1 when their Viking armoured vehicle was blown up by an IED‘All is not well in the British Army,’ he says, before declaring a need to ‘reform a flagging institutional culture that has been slow to adapt to present challenges’.
Junior officers returning from Afghanistan complain that no one in high places seems to want to hear their views. There is still supreme professionalism in the British Army, together with a cheerful willingness to accept the risks of a soldier’s calling.
But there is a growing climate of unrest and anger that they are called upon to fight a costly war with inadequate resources, no Afghan gratitude and cynical indifference from the British Government. It was Gordon Brown’s personal decision to reject on cost grounds the American request – supported by Britain’s generals – to deploy extra troops in Helmand.
From top to bottom of the Army there is dismay that operations are being conducted on a battle-by-battle basis, without any credible plan. This is chiefly the fault of the Americans, who run the alliance.
President Obama’s troop ‘surge’, pouring 10,000 reinforcements into the theatre with more to come, is an act of faith. No one has yet come up with a convincing scheme for stabilising the country.
The Taliban is nowhere near seizing control of Afghanistan. Most Afghans do not want the return of Taliban rule. But security throughout the country continues to deteriorate, because they dislike the Kabul regime and interfering Westerners-just as much. A century ago, British troops fought the same kind of battles on the frontiers of empire. But theirs was a more innocent, fatalistic generation.
Men acquiesced in the immortal answer given to a soldier at Rorke’s Drift in the Zulu war, when he asked why they were expected to stand and die there: ‘Because you’re ‘ere, my lad, because you’re ‘ere.’
Mail writer Richard Pendlebury experienced the heat of battle as ’38’ Engineers attached to B company, 2 Mercians, blasted their way through the Green ZoneToday, such an explanation no longer suffices. Soldiers know the harsh statistic, that an infantryman faces a one-in-ten chance of suffering a life-changing injury during a tour in Helmand.
The fatal casualty figures – 176 British soldiers killed in Afghanistan since 2001 – understate the pain. Men who would have died as recently as the Falklands War now survive terrible wounds thanks to modern medical techniques.
To bear all this, it is essential that soldiers should perceive themselves striving towards attainable objectives, equipped with the means they need and the support of their government. Instead, they see an undersized army threatened with further manpower cuts.
It is more than three years since the Helmand campaign began, but British forces still lack adequate helicopter cover. They perceive their courage exploited, their lives risked, merely so that Britain can ‘show willing’ to the Americans.
Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth claimed yesterday ‘there is a real sense of momentum’ in Afghanistan. He said of British troops: ‘There is no doubt in their minds that they are achieving something.’
Ministers are obliged to say such things, but they are untrue. When Ainsworth also rejected comparisons with Vietnam, he was right about the scale – almost 60,000 Americans died in Indochina – but wrong to dismiss fears that this conflict looks almost equally intractable.
I am not one of those who favours quitting immediately. Afghanistan’s collapse into anarchy could have a grave effect on Pakistan. But the security situation is deteriorating, and those in charge are muddling. We must do Afghanistan differently or admit defeat and come home.
It seems intolerable that Gordon Brown should act as if this was somebody else’s conflict.
This Labour Government sent the British Army to fight and die in Afghanistan, and bears an absolute responsibility.
Lance-Corporal Dane Elson, like the other 175 British soldiers who have perished on the battlefield, deserved better than he received from the country in whose name he died.
dhimbat in sight—the taliban destroyed the opium fields- it’s NATO thats to blame for the NWO drugs.
A major reason for our involvement in Afghanistan it to interdict the chemical warfare chain (heroin) being operated against the west by the Taliban’s use of their opium fields. However as I have stated elsewhere denial of this weapon can be easily accomplished without endangering ANY of our ground forces. We have a surplus of cluster munitions and sowing the poppy fields with bomblets could render them hazardous to the owners and their harvesters and interupt the flow of drugs into the West via Pakistan.
– Peter North, Sutton, Surrey, 9/7/2009 18:18
The Labour part, well a large leftist fraction, have never trusted the Forces, police or any other “Establishment,” organisation. The police have been “modernised,” the Forcies cut back and cut back futher. The socialist cannot tolerate any kind of esprit de corp, other too it’s party. Any form of defeat by these organisations, will be taken as a victory for the left.
– John Knowles, Victoria, Canada, 9/7/2009 17:18
The purpose of Armed Forces is for the DEFENCE of a Nation State – not to engage in exploitation colonialism.
– KMC, Glasgow, UK, 09/7/2009 15:43
Eeeerm September 11th? 7th July? Where these not horrific enough attempts in our own and allies country for you to think action is required? remember where these brain washed scumbags were trained. How very short your attention span and limited your knowledge is KMC Glasgow.
– ScotchEggsRule, London, 9/7/2009 16:48
While I agree that the politicians have the ultimate responsibility for the fiasco in Afghanistan, firstly , following blindly behind the Americans, and then when we got there not ensuring that the troops had adequate equipment, surely there had to be at least a glimmer of an exit strategy. Max says “that we have to do things different”, but doesn,t advance any solution to the problem. The U.S. surge in Iraq was hailed a great success but now seems to be faltering with more and more bomb outrages in recent weeks. So will the surge in Afghanistan, with the addition of 10,000 U.S. troops make any difference? I am no military planner but it seems to me that nobody, Department of Defense, M.O.D. nor anybody in charge has a clue to the eventual outcome. In the meantime the British troops in the front line are taking the majority of the casualties. Nowadays, I find I cant watch politicians expressing their regret for the death of another soldier without feeling sick knowing they are lying.
– Alex Beveridge, Cumbernauld, Scotland, 9/7/2009 16:39
Second rate equipment second rate pay for First class men/women of our armed forces. Why has Tony Blair been allowed to get away with this? Because without is lies we would not be putting so many brave young people in the ground.
– Geoff, England, 9/7/2009 16:14
The purpose of Armed Forces is for the DEFENCE of a Nation State – not to engage in exploitation colonialism.
Those involved in making decisions to place others in the battlefield should themselves be required to serve at the front of the Front line. That would undoubtedly make the ‘Decision makers’ think twice and be more cautious about embarking on such a course of action.
In addition, no one other than those who have been endangered by confronting the ‘Enemy’ should merit or be allowed to wear Campaign medals or ribbons of honour.
– KMC, Glasgow, UK, 9/7/2009 15:43
I have never understood why we are in either Afghanistan or Iraq. The sooner we bring our troops home to protect our own land, and the sooner we stop behaving as though we were a World power, the better.
We could be a self-contained, self-supporting country if we came out of Europe and stoped giving money to all and sundry.
– Lionel, GB, 9/7/2009 15:23
Actually no war is “unwinnable” if the strategies and tactics are sound (it seems they are NOT, by and large….) and the WILL to win is there in sufficient strength within the military AND the politicians, and if there is solid public support……
Enough said already, but I would suggest people hark back to the contrast between the Falklands Campaign in 1982 and the election result the following year, and what happened in Portugal when, in 1974, the military finally had enough of conducting three highly unpopular foreign wars on behalf of a totalitarian government…..
Sleep well, Gordon……
– Robert, Worcester UK, 9/7/2009 14:34
Well said Bob Scott. Gordon Brown chose Ainsworth, 21 / 23 because that is exactly where he ranks the military in importance.
– Susan, Glasgow, 9/7/2009 14:22
In response to Andy, Stamford.
I served 24 years in the Welsh Guards, and I signed the dotted line, I was not naive or stupid, I made that choice as a well informed 16 year old. I knew that by serving my queen and Country, I would be called upon to serve in some foreign field, and I did like so many others who wear their uniform with pride.
I served in the Falklands the Gulf War Northern Ieland on many occassions and Bosnia. I did not complain I did my duty. A duty that I would gladly do so again.
Nobody wants to go to war, but there are times when there is no other option but to go down that road. If it were not for thse brave soldiers of date or yester year, many in our society would not have the freedom to express such a misguided comment you made.
The least you could do is to acknowledge the armed forces are there to protect you and all who believe in freedom and democracy.
Our armed forces deserve our utmost respect……you do not!! I rest my case.
– Tracy Evans, Melbourne Australia, 9/7/2009 13:24
Labour cannot be held totally responsible,as the conservatives must have agreed to go along with the decision,liberals also should take partial blame. all in all the whole parliament should take responsibility for this fiasco.And the Queen as well.It`s the same old story send them out by hook or crook but watch what your spending or we won`t be able to get our expenses. So politicians wake up and throw the coffee away and stick to tea.No more champers drink British Beer and GET STABILITY BACK INTO THIS COUNTRY,THROW AWAY POLITICAL CORRECTNESS,BRING BACK DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS GIVE THE POLICE BACK THEIR AUTHORITY.NO MORE TREATING CRIMINALS AS POOR MIS-GUIDED PEOPLE,PUNISH THEM NOT MOLLY-CODDLE THEM.AND FINALLY BRING THE BRITISH FORCES HOME IT`S NOT OUR BUSINESS AND USE THEM TO FIGHT TERRORISM IN THIS COUNTRY CLEAN UP OUR BACK YARD FIRST.
– Wakers, merthyr Wales, 9/7/2009 11:40
We are being steered away from the real problem with all the complaining, not from the troops I might add, about equipment. The problem is numbers. Helmand is 3 times the size of Northern Ireland, and the population only 300k less yet at its peak there were more than 25000 troops in NI. More troops, a government problem, and better tactics, a military problem, is what is required.
– Jim, Norwich, 9/7/2009 10:45
How many more brave soldiers will lose their lives in this Unwinnable War.
The British Public should Demand an end and bring our troops home Now They have not been given the proper equipment for this type of war The Russians with all their forces walked away in the end as they could see no end to the fighting. Also where are all the other EU countries Forces why is always the British who have to do the fighting and sustain such Sad losses.
– Graham, Cornwall UK, 9/7/2009 10:32
Our cowardly, arrogant and utterly inept politicians swan around in armoured cars, while our poor fighting men do their bidding in useless and dangerous equipment. How much longer are we going to put up with this charade of a government?
– Gaby, London, 9/7/2009 10:23
George Orwell: War is Peace! Duh
– John, United Kingdom, 9/7/2009 10:04
Good article once again from Sir Max,, but what changes, the government will never listen, Ainsworth was rated 21 out of 23 of Cabinet Staff, so why put him in the job??? Did Hutton quit beacuse they couldn’t get the funding they need?
They are too concerned with spending stupid ammounts of Tax-payers Billions on out of date High Tech projects, Aircraft Carriers, Euro-Fighter, Joint Strike Fighter (from the US).
Just 50% of the funding from those wasteful projects would buy an enormous amount of much needed Apaches/Mastiffs and funding for the troops to stand a slight chance of winning the battle
– Bob Scott Ex WO2., Spain, 9/7/2009 9:59
If you dont want to go to war dont join the army,simple.
– Andy, Stamford, 9/7/2009 9:32
In last year’s conference, Brown boasted he HAD fixed the roof when the sun was out when he bragged about the billions he’d thrown at “services.”
In the case of the armed forces the roof’s falling in. Short of an odd photo-shoot opportunity, Brown has shown nothing but contempt for the armed forces and he still does.
– Napoleon XXIV, London England, 9/7/2009 9:16
No one knows what the objective is. The only objective the soldiers have is to do the job and get out alive and hopefully in one piece. As for clown brown and his bunch of crooks, they hate the military and just use them as they see fit, to try and show the world and in particualr america, “look what we are doing” but with other peoples lives at risk not theirs.
– Bryan Caffyn, Mazarron, Spain., 9/7/2009 9:14
The government and Military could start by arming our troops against the enemy of today and not the enemy of yesterday . The modern battle tank could be retro-fitted with a modernized version of the British WWII flail for destrowing mines, the Tucano training aircraft could be converted to a single seat ground attack aircraft with the engine, pilot and other vital parts adequately protected against ground fire. These measures would not be costly, 4 Tucano aircraft addapted for ground attack would cost less than one Apache Helicopter and would deliver the same Tachtical support as the Apache (The Taliban have no airforce). The tanks could be fitted with a modern version of the WWII flail by most construction companie that operate and maintain construction plant. All that is required is the desire to help the army, but sadly this government seems to have other priorities.
– Thomas O’Hara, Milan, Italy. Late of Glasgow, Scotland, 9/7/2009 9:10
Our ministers have no military experience and, more importantly, are not historians. They are not equipped intellectually to take the right decisions. The only way out is for them to take hard hitting advice from men like Hastings who are equipped to understand the strategic blunders being paid for with the blood of our young men and women.
We absolutely have to “do Afghanistan differently”, and there are ways to achieve that but no one seems to be collecting a serious group of regional experts, historians, and creative lateral thinkers who can point to the light.
It is all so unnecessary. With our C21st technology and weaponry, mobile and logistically well supported forces, special forces, and intelligence services, linked to targeted aid and support backing rithless political savvy, there was never any need to occupy Afghanistan or Iraq. Sometimes we can transcend our limitations.
– torqtone, cheltenham, 9/7/2009 8:57
As an ex Guards Sergent I can but not see how ill equipped are troops are. They lack the resources to carry out effective operations.
The starving of the armed forces has always been are caracrarestic of a Labour Government, even back in the 70’s.
It would be intresting to compare the amount spent per head of troops by the Americans to the pitance spent by our goverment.
If the Troops cannot operate as the commanders wish bring then home.
– Michael Alex Topping, Leyland, 9/7/2009 8:55
We are constantly updated on the number of our servicemen killed in this war but this is just the tip of a very large iceberg. The number of servicemen whose lives are permanently wrecked by serious injury is a statistic never published.
– Peter, Poole UK, 9/7/2009 8:48
Spot on Max. I’m ashamed that so may lives are put at risk in my name. And for what? Its always been a pipe dream as UK found in 19th C and the Russians in 20th C. What is the plan? What is the purpose? Why are our fellow citizens so passive? Why did we arm these nutters to fight the Russians. This deceit crosses party lines. I am conservative, but it will be the LibDems for me next time. They have been more alert to our interests here, as in the City. Please join me in this transfer of allegiance to make a difference.
– palepete, Ferndown, Dorset UK, 9/7/2009 8:41
Yeah bring them all home, leave Afghanistan to rot and the innocent people there, let the terrorists have their training camps unhindered so they can fly more planes into targets here. I know, while we are at it, lets stop security altogether and let them blow up as many trains and buses as they want.
This idiotic, ill thought out, cowardly, lefty ideals are the ones that left us vulnerable to this sort of thing in the first place. Now some numpties want to do the same all over again??? How many slaps round the face will you take before you think, enough is enough? These boys and girls out there are doing us proud and I hope they all come back in one piece, but this IS the army and people DO die in combat and that is always the way it has been. People don’t join up with their eyes closed. How easy it is to say just bring them home from behind your computer, am I glad cowardly leftists like that aren’t defending this country.
– ScotchEggsRule, London, 9/7/2009 8:32
The time has come for us to pull out of this unwinnable war. The Russians failed to subdue Afghanistan over 8 years (the same time, incidentally, that we have been there) with many times more soldiers than we have.
I think that all those who think that we should keep the troops in Afghanistan should pull on a uniform and join them. It is also probable that Government ministers between them don’t have one relative serving in Afghanistan and I don’t think that many of them would know one end of a rifle from the other but it didn’t stop Tony Blair and others sending our over-stretched armed forces on yet another mission to appease our masters in Washington.
Once again, the lessons of history in Afghanistan haven’t been learned. Pull our soldiers out now and send them home.
– Steven Shaw, Tyldesley, Manchester, 9/7/2009 8:28
Well done our brave men and women in the armed forces, I say! Keep up the good work!
– bob roberts, worcester, uk, 9/7/2009 8:19
Spot on MAX . This mad campaign ,supported by all the main parties is UN-WINNABLE, there is nothing to win .
Lets get our brave BRITISH TROOPS home… NOW.
– EZZA, LANCS., 9/7/2009 8:17
Those who forget their history are bound to repeat it.
Look at the history of foreign forces in Afganistan – Alexander, The Brits, The Russians – no outside force can hold Afganistan.Why do you think the mountains are called the Hindu Kush?
– Ben, Somerset, South Africa, 9/7/2009 8:09
J.A – Sandwell. You say DECENT jobs and suggest youngsters do not sign on. I do not know if you are implying that a soldier has not got a decent job. I know of no infantryman in my time that thought of it as a job, it was a way of life and yes unfortunately death. To be amongst these men is a privilege and in my advancing years I am still grateful for it.
– Wills, Southampton, 9/7/2009 7:54
Absolutely agreed Max Hastings – all the military experts have told the politicians this is an un-winnable war. It takes my thoughts back to the morons who controlled WW1- (lions lead by donkeys)
Who else is sick of the mindless roll call every week at PMQs of the dead that these politicians have sent to the drug ridden hell-hole that is Afghanistan ? It makes me feel physically nauseous to listen to these idiots.
– Victor M, Cricklewood, London, 9/7/2009 7:53
We may not be winning this war, but we certainly can not afford to lose it. Do some people honestly believe that if we leave Afghanistan, that the taliban and their like are going to leave us alone. Appeasement does not work – it never has.
– christopher w whybrow, Malaga – Spain, 9/7/2009 7:49
Bless you and may your god, if you believe in such, look upon you with favour If not then you have my thanks if that means anything.
I have in the past, had to write similar messages to families. It is very difficult. The loss people feel is inconsolable. The sad lack of support by this government is inexcusable. Banal and trite phrases are the sum total of their commitment. To all who have relatives in harms way, know that there are people that truly care for them and appreciate their efforts.
An ex squaddie
– Chc, Hull, 9/7/2009 7:47
If we cannoy afford an army we should no longer indulge ourselves in the luxury of making war, the ultimate sexy politics
– ian skidmore, march,cambs.uk, 9/7/2009 7:42
I think it would be a good idea if the goverment spent a month on the front line living with the troops. Then ,perhaps, they might understand the requirements of the men of whom they have put in harms way.
– Brian, Holt norfolk, 9/7/2009 7:41
Bring these soldiers home! They are accomplishing very little despite huge efforts! Our Government treats our youngsters with contempt! I wonder if Gordon Brown and Tony Blair would be as willing to become involved in such conflicts if it were their own children’s lives at stake? I think NOT!
To youngsters that are struggling to find DECENT jobs – don’t be tempted to ‘sign on the dotted line’ no matter how attractive the armed forces try to make ‘joining up’ look! MP’s are clearly not bothered one bit what happens to our soldiers since they have been far too busy putting their efforts into ‘screwing’ the system, by claiming the MAXIMUM amount of expenses for themselves!
– J. A., Sandwell West Mids England, 9/7/2009 7:27
Very good article – even here in H we have had enough of this.
– Jimmy, Hereford, 9/7/2009 7:24
The likes of New Labour will not, has not, and never will recognize that the Armed Forces allegiance is to the Crown: and not themselves.
Once that very simple fact is understood for what it is then perhaps the real ” war ” against the UK Republican movement could be fought.
Unlike New Labour the Crown does not cynically manipulate the British Armed Forces for personal and political gain.
There are encouraging signs that this problem is being resolved thanks in large part to the way in which the MP`s expenses scandal has been exposed and I expect further revelations to follow as a result.
The true nature of warfare is emerging in the light of instant communications and the realization that the BBC no longer represents the voice of the British people and can no longer be trusted.
Winning this new war is not an option and therefore success is guaranteed.
– Catch-42, Macclesfield, Cheshire., 9/7/2009 7:18
It seems to me that the British military personnel are in this war for the wrong reasons. History tells us that this is not a place where we will achieve our objectives, but in this case one must ask, “What are the objectives?” The British goverment are not supporting our troops by supplying the necessary equipment & now it appears that the goverment are to demand cuts to make the situation & morale even worst. This goverment have acted disgracefully in regard our trops, both in Afghanistan & Iraq, but then the Labour party never did give meaningful support to the services so why should we be surprise at their current performance
– St.Ray, St.Elsewhere France, 9/7/2009 7:17
It is said that this government are planning to reduce the Infantry from 36 battalions to 33. What a reward for loyalty – This means battalions going back on the line more often,battalions stood down to rest reduced. However, the worst problem by far is that battalions will not maintain training in other roles. “Keep one foot on the ground” was the accepted teaching, prepare to react to the unexpected. Tactics being modified to suit budgetary constraints – is there an accepted casualty rate per million saved? To my brother Guardsmen and service personnel who have marched off into regimental history – you will not be forgotten.
– Wills, Southampton, 9/7/2009 7:15
The government and Dave Cameron are very quick to walk in Gay Pride Marches: what about the rights of our heroic forces to be properly equipped?
– George, Bolton UK, 9/7/2009 7:10
Sir Max is right.
This war is unwinnable in the long term
The soldiers are not properly equipped (why was a CO of battle group in the 21st century not visiting his forward companies in a light helicopter ? Answer: because they haven’t got them.)
The responsibility of the Blair Brown administration is total in this case.
Three sensible solutions:
1. Cut MoD civil servants (100,000) , not soldiers.
2. Reduce the numbers of expensive Eurofighters on order.
3. Ringfence a war fighting budget and pay for thecosts of the war out of the Treasury contingency fund, not the Army budget.
To cut the infantry in the middle of a shooting war is crazy.
Final point: the three services are suffering divide and rule by te Treasury and MoD over their budget. That must stop.
We need an integrated Defence policy.
– Expat 44, Mersin, TURKEY, 9/7/2009 7:08
As an ex soldier of 22yrs having served in many theatres,the situation has always been the same not enough decent equipment and nobody listening at the top.My respect goes to these men and women who get up every day and go and do a really tough job.Then when you leave the Forces after do this tough job you are left hung out to dry,i know!.
– chris, Wiltshire, 9/7/2009 7:03
Unwinnable? Hmm, glad we didn’t think that way during WWII.
“War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”
– John Stuart Mill
– Thomas, Pheonix, AZ, 9/7/2009 6:22
It is a lie for the Government to say we either fight in Afghanistan or death will come to the streets of Britain. The deaths in Britain to date, caused by misguided religious fanatics were the actions of home grown terrorists and their motivation was not so much hatred of the British people but, more the actions of its Government in invading Iraq on a false premise. The Government would rather we forgot this inconvenient fact, we never should.
The Russians lost 100,000 military personnel to forces in Afghanistan hostile to their occupation of their Country. The forces that fought against them were two fold, Tribal Warlords and the students from the thousands of Madrassas in Pakistan. The latter were initially referred to as the Deobandis and now as the Taliban, whatever they choose to call themselves they continue to pour out of Pakistans’ Madrassas at a higher rate than any troops we can send to die in this unwinnable war.
Leave Afghanistan to its own people as we do elsewhere.
– Robert, Scotland, 9/7/2009 6:16
A futile waste of valuable Englishmen. Leave Afghanistan to its fate.
– Philip, Bankrupted Britain, 9/7/2009 6:12
Good article. I’m afraid these lads are fighting on one side of a civil war with no conceivable end in sight. It can go on forever. As it always has. The boys have less than a fighting chance thanks to the reluctance of UK Government to supply and equip them properly. The Taliban have nothing to do with bomb blasts in UK. Just as Sadam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. It’s all a gesture, at the expense of these brave lads, many more of whom will be maimed and killed before they’re pulled out.
– davidkeke, ramsey isle of man, 9/7/2009 5:59
Lions led by donkeys. Nothing changes.
– Martin, Thailand, 9/7/2009 5:47
Bob Ainsworth’s words yesterday were trite and hollow. Our boys are dying because Gordon Brown is incapable of either providing the necessary equipment (vehicles and helicopters) to help them do the job or of admitting that we are fighting a lost war. Like the Americans in Vietnam and the Russians in Afghanistan before us we will eventually have to admit defeat and leave. How many of our young men must die before that happens?
– Tasha, Saintes, France, 9/7/2009 5:43
the only reason are troops are there is because tony blair wanted to impress george bush in the same way a puppy tries to impress its owner
– hagar, blackpool uk, 9/7/2009 4:32
The phrase ‘lions led by donkeys’ springs to mind.
– H K Phillips, Erimi Cyprus, 9/7/2009 4:21
May they rest in peace. God bless them all. My son was a United State Marine for 20 years. He trained with the British soliders and earned their green beret, Was stationed in Lymstone. Said that was a proud moment in his military life. Our hearts go out to the family’s of the brave men and women who serve for peace for all the world. God Bless you all.
– joan, u.s.a., 9/7/2009 3:44
This is a generation of professional politicians who have at most only been involved in a fight in the school playground – and looking at most of them they would probably have lost. They have no concept of the grisly on the ground struggles they send our forces into. They play fast and loose with the lives of our forces. There are not adequate numbers of troops nor adequate eqquipment for those sent into this conflict. Maybe we should send the politicians into battle as part of their job so they can have a real understanding of war. Making statements in the Commons, well that is the easy bit, being shot at or seeing a friend blown up would focus their minds.
– J Burns, Heston Middx, 9/7/2009 2:56
This is not good enough. The British soldier is often stated the best in the world, yet their equipment and support is generally derided as inadequate. Our government bigs up our armed forces whilst denying them the equipment and after care they need. The British public holds our armed forces in high esteem, they do what we can’t, so spend our money on them, not self serving politicians.
Good luck to you all and may you all return safely to you loved ones.
– Andy, Derby, 9/7/2009 2:38
I used to be a supporter of GWB’s policy on Iraq and Afghanistan, but now, bring them all home, no more use less deaths of young people.
Pink Floyd…………Bring the boys back home.
– Stefan, Los Angeles USA, 9/7/2009 2:36
As long as there is a supply of brave, foolhardy and optimistic young men to fill the gaps left by the experienced soldiers who have had enough, Brown and co. will consider it the least expensive option to train them sooner than stump up for new or better equipment, they should hang their heads in shame!
– richard, worcester u.k., 9/7/2009 1:56
Centurean2\'s Weblog 
We should show some metal and march until they BRING THE BOYS BACK HOME!!
LET FABIANS FIGHT THEIR OWN WARS- AIDED BY ALL THE OIL COMPANIES ……………..
Pingback: The Best Deterrent « New Wars