Comments on: The US has the firepower, but what then for Afghanistan?

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:53:40 +0000

At last! Nick Clegg has come out and said it. We need more troops and the only reason they aren’t in Afghanistan already is down to politics. Either provide the necessary man power (at least 2,000 more troops) and equipment; or pull out. Simple as that.

By: Media Picks « Laura MacDonald

Media Picks « Laura MacDonald — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 10:29:43 +0000

[...] go from his post, discusses the current state of journalism and raises some interesting questions. The US has the firepower, but what then for Afghanistan? – Channel 4’s Nick Paton Walsh provides some interesting insight into the reality of military [...]

By: Jay

Jay — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 20:32:54 +0000

Even with their superior firepower the Americans are unlikely to have more success than the British. Though they will probably have fewer casualties. The Russians had superior fire power and were there for twenty years. They still packed up and went home in the end. It’s a war of attrition. Its not about who has the biggest guns. NATO don’t want to be there and the Taliban have no where else to go. They will play the waiting game and pick their battles. As has been said before there is no clear plan for Afghanistan. They are going to be policing it for decades.

The British Military are not the best equipped in the world. Something that should have been addressed a long time ago. And I’m going to play devils advocate here and say its their own fault. The American Military have always admired the British Military’s ability to make do and mobilise at short notice. They on the other hand won’t go anywhere unless the have the right equipment for the job. The British army have a can do attitude which is really a make do attitude. It has done them no favours and perhaps if the top brass had more of a can’t do attitude there might not have been as many casualties and more success.

By: Dan Ehrlich

Dan Ehrlich — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 00:02:05 +0000

In the long run it doesn’t matter what the UK or US does…The history of most counter insurgency conflicts has revealed it comes down to what the host population wants and does. America should have learned this in Vietnam and the UK in Ulster.

NATO could be fighting in Afghanistan for years to come, as long as we have the will and the money, without lasting results unless the population gets in back of the troops and is willing to maintain the security and freedom of their own nation.

By: Snowblog – The US has the firepower, but what then for Afghanistan? | Quality Solutions

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:00:38 +0000

[...] Here is the original post: Snowblog – The US has the firepower, but what then for Afghanistan? [...]

By: Anthony Martin

Anthony Martin — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:38:25 +0000

When those in the British Armed Forces dare not speak the truth for fear of reprisals and, to have to consider diplomatic/political considerations before first opening their mouth to convey reality, just epitomises the corruption & control of the Ministry Of Defence & the British Government. (nothing new there then)
This quagmire needs other approaches other than millitary, because for every person that gets killed, it just causes further hatreds & revenge intentions.