| Coalition Troops Failing Hearts and Minds Everywhere |
|
|
| Sunday, 08 October 2006 | |
|
Nato's commander in Afghanistan has said the country's citizens may start supporting the Taleban unless their lives improve in the next six months. Gen David Richards, a British officer, said the country was at a "tipping point", warning that up to 70% of Afghans could switch their support. They might prefer the "austere and unpleasant" life under the Taleban to five more years of fighting, he said. He was speaking a day after Tony Blair pledged full support for UK troops. Gen Richards said: "If we collectively ... do not exploit this winter to start achieving concrete and visible improvement, then some 70% of Afghans could switch sides." The British general wants about 2,500 additional troops to form a reserve battalion to help reconstruction and development efforts. He said southern Afghanistan was "broadly stabilised" and insisted that Nato had to take advantage of military victories. Gen Richards said: "We have created an opportunity, following the intense fighting that left over 500 militants dead in the southern provinces of Kandahar and Helmand. "If we do not take advantage of this, then you can pour an additional 10,000 troops next year and we would not succeed because we would have lost by then the consent of the people." Addressing military personnel on the fifth anniversary of operations in the country on Saturday, Mr Blair pledged "every support and every protection". He said this included providing more armoured vehicles and more helicopters. In September alone, seven soldiers died in Afghanistan as a result of hostile action and 14 died when a RAF Nimrod crashed after a suspected technical fault. Opinion polls have also shown there is significant support for a British troop withdrawal from the country. Nato has taken charge of the country's eastern provinces, which have been under the control of US forces since the Taleban were ousted five years ago. The alliance's International Security Assistance Force already commands troops in the north, west and south of Afghanistan, as well as Kabul. It means that some 12,000 US soldiers have now come under the command of Gen Richards. Source: BBC News           Readers have left 5 comments.
Kathy:
Quote
I wish our army chief would just look at the history of Afghanistan. We have been beaten out of that country twice, as have the Russians.
It is five years since Bush sent his heavy mob in to oust the Taliban and yet today they are really no further forward. If they control anything it is only the puppet government in Kabul. The sad thing is that it is the innocent Afghanis who have suffered. Thousands have been killed. The remainder have lost their homes and yet nothing has been done to rebuild the country. We will never win their 'hearts and minds' because their tribal loyalties go too deep. No matter how many Taliban are killed, there will always be others to take their place. It is better to leave and let them rebuild their lives as they know but making sure that we compensate them for the damage we did.
(1)
2006-10-09 08:59:01
Guard the Guards:
Quote
Unfortunately it is the British Generals who have failed to voice their concerns earlier on in order to protect all sides. Had the senior Commanders who head the British Army, Navy and Air Force spoken out at the futility of the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan then perhaps the UK would not now be in this black hole. The members of the Armed Forces are now facing growing hostility in these two countries and at home, soldiers coming home in body bags and with serious injuries does not bode well for the Senior Officers as they have failed in providing "Duty of Care". It is incumbment upon the Senior Officers to speak up now and challenge their civilian masters (Tony "Warmonger" Blair & Cabinet), and to bring about an end to the deployment in Afghanistan and Iraq before too many young men and women lose their precious lives for a cause that is all but lost. Significantly the British were warned before commiting to the illegal invasion of Iraq that they would face opposition, now they are reaping what they sowed. Bring back the troops now.
(2)
2006-10-09 15:17:15
Steven_L:
Quote
At least the people of Kabul can listen to music, dance and play cricket now.
If NATO pull out what then? A return to Salafist oppression, the removal of these basic freedoms and mediaevalist punishments for those who dared to have a game of cricket whilst the Taliban were away? What are you guys saying NATO should have done? Just bombed the Takfiri terrorist training camps?
(3)
2006-10-09 16:39:49
Guard the Guards:
Quote
Steven-L: what planet are you on pal, don't you understand that the British have lost any goodwill they had with the citizens of Afghanistan, times have changed we no longer have an Empire where we ruled with impunity. The balance of power is changing or has changed, China is the future no the USA. By the by, the Afghans do not play cricket, they never have and neither did the Afghans attack the USA on 9/11, get your facts right. NATO does not have a legal basis to operate outside Europe or North America because none of the member countries were attacked by the Afghan Government. It is time we the West thought more about what the future is going to be rather than bombing Muslim nations when Bush wants us to.
(4)
2006-10-10 13:15:00
Guard the Guards:
Quote
By the way, for all those interested, George Bush claimed, shortly after "liberating" Aghan women from oppression declared that they no longer wore the Burkha in major towns and cities across Afghanistan. For those of you in the know, women have increasingly worn the Burkha in protest of the foreign occupation and this has had the opposite effect of the one stated. The lies and misleading statements made by Bush and Blair are still being told, this only serves to "dumb down" the British and American publics opinions, not that the latter needed much help in this to start with.
(5)
2006-10-10 13:37:12
|
Search MPACUK.org
Latest Discussions
Recommended Books
