Are troops worth the sacrifice in an unwinnable war?

[rov1200]

Brown like Obama is considering sending more troops to Afghanistan on the behest of a US commander. The head of NATO was on TV this morning saying the situation is so complex there is not just one answer to the conflict. Should we pull out all the troops until a workable strategy where the loss of soldier's lives can be averted? Maybe there is no solution and we should let them revert to somalian type inter warfare.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8283989.stm

[Gromit]

You cannot have a war without the loss of soldiers lives.

The situation and objectives are very different between Afghanistan and Somalia.

We want to nullify al qaeda's ability to harm us. No such threat comes from Somalia. We could leave them to it as you suggest, but the Taliban are likely to seize power again, and we do not want that.

[jake-the-peg]

Amazing isn't it.

200 odd soldiers die over a few years and people are jumping up and down and using this sort of emotive language.

There were 8,000 British casulties at Ahnam alone.

Can you imagine how different history would have been if everybody had taken a defeatist attitude in 1944 and decided that the cost of re-invasion was too high in an "unwinable war".

It wasn't like this when my Dad was a lad you know!

[Gromit]

'Unwinnable' under our current tactics possibly, but that just means we have to adopt new tactics, and re-evaluate what we can realistically achieve.

The Bush/Cheney plan of invading and hoping the grateful peasants would welcome us with open arms was a tad optimistic.

[jake-the-peg]

Very true Grommit.

It's all to do with the political will which is constantly undermined by this sort of talk - one might even call it unpatriotic talk.

I can't imagine many soldiers out there being too happy at being told - "We should bring you home you might get hurt"

[rov1200]

What nobody seems to have cottoned on is that the Taliban are the Afghans, the one and the same. How is it they can disappear into the community without trace? The reason the IRA were never defeated is because after their bomb attacks they blended in with the population. The only reason it came to an end because those terrorists became too old to continue and there were few to take their place.

Now with a corrupt Afghan government, trained troops on a par with Dad;s Army, major corruption, illegal poppy growing and without an end game in sight the NATO troops should be withdrawn similar to what happened in Basra, let them sort out the feudal system themselves and send in the occasional drone.

[Gromit]

rov1200

You have a very strange view of the world.

The IRA got too old?

The Taleban are the Afghans?

Don't you think that all the British lives killed so far will have been in vain if we withdraw. We must get something from this. What message do you think that that will send to the Taleban and al qaeda?

[rov1200]

Gromit If you think we are not fighting a section of the Afghan population you must be on a different planet. I grant you some have come over the border from Pakistan but the Taliban we are up against are home grown.

There is such a law as diminishing returns. Another 5 years holed up there with no end in sight could mean another 500 deaths at the current rate using the same strategy.

Maybe its your thoughts that are out of kilter.

Never heard of McGuiness, said to be once Chief of Staff of the IRA.

Al Qaeda don't just exist in Afghanistan, they will follow Western forces wherever they go in Muslim countries.

[quizzywig]

In my own opinion I don't think our troops should be in Afghanistan and they should never have been in Iraq. As usual our government just did as America told us. It's very easy to commit our troops to do this, it's their job. But they are fighting for Queen and country not for a country where it seems that to be a martyr is almost as rewarding as blowing up our forces. Too many troops have died for nothing.

[Lonnie]

Your right, it is unwinnable, but thats because we don't have the 'active' support of the Civilians, but I have a question of my own,

What is the reason we are still there?.

[quizzywig]

Well said Lonnie!

[I.Don No]

politicians send our troops off to war (and without reservation I support our troops even if I do not support the reasons that they are where they are) and their decisions would be very interesting to follow if they (the politicians) had children serving in the very same forces that they intend to send into war zones.