This is what 8 years of fighting war on a peace time budget has done....

[McPhee]

Point proven.

 

What point? The one that says you're trolling the thread with one sentence "arguments" that are usually inane, baseless and grown out of a complete lack of knowledge of the war, the tactics, the history of the region and the regional and global politics surrounding it?

 

If we're staying on topic i really can't see how anyone can justifiably think the armed forces shouldn't have this equipment. The current stuff is obviously pretty useless against bombs which basically means either A) We send the equipment or B) These soldiers keep dying in greater and greater numbers as the Taliban, al-Qaeda, Laskar-e-Taiba and various other Pakistani militant groups realise just how easy it is to kill British soldiers using this tactic.

 

To make matters worse and greatly more embarrasing we're not the only nation fighting this war. Having our soldiers blown up in pimped out Land Rovers while the French (as an example) sit happily inside their armoured APCs is an embarrasment, we're showing the world that we clearly don't value the lives of our soldiers as much as they do.

 

And Jay, while i can't speak for others I personally haven't bothered to argue with you over your points because to do so would involve me writing an essay. Your posts make it very clear that you have little understanding of the situation outside of the basic awareness that most of the country shares. I'm avoiding facts again here simply because it's too much time and effort.

 

To argue against this point, for example;

 

Prolonguing a war always endangers more lives. Yours, theirs, the native civilians. Yes, this is an 'anti-war' point; I don't see it ever 'ending'. Do you?

 

I'd have to go in to detail about what is known about the NATO and UIF strategies to secure the country and what steps are being taken to ensure minimal bloodshed. For this to make sense i'd also need to go in to Afghanistan's history and the history of some of the surrounding countries including political and military alliances of past and present.

 

That alone would likely take me well in excess of an hour. Then one of two things would happen. Either you'd go away and find out facts to counter my argument or you'd fight back with an inane comment like "But... war is BAAAAAD!". Basically i see it winding up like this;

 

 

As for my opinion on your point, i do think the war will end. I don't think it will mean peace for Afghanistan though. While the UIF are all buddies right now it's very much a case of "my enemy's enemy is my friend". There'll be a civil war within 5 years of us pulling out. Who knows though, after that they might finally get some stability. Either way, at least they won't be under the rule of a facist regime like the Taliban any more.

Edited July 16, 2009 by McPhee

[ipaul]

Oh yes. No other community in the world other than Scotland would involve an airport employee on his fag break punching a burning terrorist to the ground. They should have taken a picture and put it on the 'Welcome to Scotland' sign on the Anglo-Scottish border.

 

WOW you're touchy. Lighten up, I was thinking of this:

 

 

 

About 6:30 minutes in

[navarre]

WOW you're touchy. Lighten up, I was thinking of this:

 

 

 

About 6:30 minutes in

 

I actually believed my post to be light hearted. Obviously, no offense to any Scot on here. In fact, it's nothing short of a compliment.

[McPhee]

In fact, it's nothing short of a compliment.

 

That's how i took it.

 

Are you sure he realised he was a terrorist though? Maybe he just saw a lone Asian and thought to himself "Here we go! Game time!"? It is Glasgow afterall! :p

[Gizmo]

Us Scots are very proud of our terrorist-beating heritage.

[danny]

 

To make matters worse and greatly more embarrasing we're not the only nation fighting this war. Having our soldiers blown up in pimped out Land Rovers while the French (as an example) sit happily inside their armoured APCs is an embarrasment, we're showing the world that we clearly don't value the lives of our soldiers as much as they do.

 

The French are deffinatly sitting safe. There casualty rate makes it look like thye have been doing more than they truely have. The french have lost 28 troops, 23 of these in combat. And 10 of those were in one day. When the taliban pulled of a daring raid and the french got very very unlucky.

As well as our govenment other NATO members bar america, britiain, canada and denmark, possably a few others. Need to start pulling there weight. France and Germany being the two that are furthest from doing there share.

[ipaul]

I actually believed my post to be light hearted. Obviously, no offense to any Scot on here. In fact, it's nothing short of a compliment.

 

Oops, my bad!

[weeyellowbloke]

Us Scots are very proud of our terrorist-beating heritage.

 

Like Frankie Boyle says "What a bunch of morons, trying to bring sectarian violence to Glasgow. We're about 100 years ahead of you."

[danny]

Some figures being given in the media about how many of the UKs helos are fit for service.

Only 39 Sea Kings out of 95,

25 out of 70 Merlins,

18 of 40 Chinooks,

16 of 67 Apaches,

57 Lynx of 176.

 

Deployed to helmand are,

8 chinooks,

8 apaches,

and 7 sea king.

The 5 lynx which were there have returned to the UK as they cant operate in HOT tempratures. Which meant that on his recent visit General Sir Richard Dannatt, head of the army, had to be ferryed around afghan in an american helo.

[Gizmo]

Like Frankie Boyle says "What a bunch of morons, trying to bring sectarian violence to Glasgow. We're about 100 years ahead of you."

 

They don't even have a Football team!

[Pyxis]

Some figures being given in the media about how many of the UKs helos are fit for service.

Only 39 Sea Kings out of 95,

25 out of 70 Merlins,

18 of 40 Chinooks,

16 of 67 Apaches,

57 Lynx of 176.

 

Deployed to helmand are,

8 chinooks,

8 apaches,

and 7 sea king.

The 5 lynx which were there have returned to the UK as they cant operate in HOT tempratures. Which meant that on his recent visit General Sir Richard Dannatt, head of the army, had to be ferryed around afghan in an american helo.

 

The government will probably wait for the media to get bored of covering the shortage stories and then hope that we'll forget about it.

 

The amount of orders that were placed for Merlins, Apaches and Wildcats was a big mistake and it's coming back to haunt them.

[stuwii]

We should spend, spend spend, Iran is next door and Nuclear war is damn close

[The fish]

We should spend, spend spend, Iran is next door and Nuclear war is damn close

 

Wow. You've totally missed the point of why we're in Afghanistan, haven't you?

[blender]

Wow. You've totally missed the point of why we're in Afghanistan, haven't you?

 

Set up friendly bases in Iraq and afganisatan and you have Iran surrounded. I honestly think that is the bigger picture along with oil and israel.

 

The stop terrorist thing just doesnt add up. It is easy to find 30 well funded islamic radicals that could do another 9/11. Remember our terrorists are british born

Edited July 19, 2009 by blender

[danny]

The stop terrorist thing just doesnt add up. It is easy to find 30 well funded islamic radicals that could do another 9/11. Remember our terrorists are british born

 

But at least one was trained in afghansitan/pakistan if i remember correctly. So them being British born means nothing.

 

I tried to find the post about employing people from 3rd world countrys (to quote) but im being a mong and cant find it.

 

 

Rifleman Aminiasi Toge

 

Quoted from BBC linky

 

A British soldier killed in an explosion in southern Afghanistan has been named as Rifleman Aminiasi Toge from 2nd Battalion The Rifles.

 

The Fijian, known as Togey, leaves a twin brother, three sisters and his parents, the Ministry of Defence said.

 

He died on a foot patrol near Gereshk in Helmand province on Thursday - three days before his 27th birthday.

 

His death took the number of UK service personnel killed on operations in Afghanistan since October 2001 to 185.

 

The fact he was foreign makes no odds to the fact he is no longer here. And i dont think it makes it any easier politically for the people in charge.

 

O yes and finally the chinook that has been cut and shut from 2 different helos and has served in afghanistan. The front end was fron a helo crashed in Oman in 1996 and the back from a helo 'liberated' from the argentinian air force in 1982. Now im not saying that its no air worthy, i dont dobt it is. but it dosent paint a good picture the as the PM has said 'our boys are well equiped'. You woudnt drive a cut and shut car would you?

 

Set up friendly bases in Iraq and afganisatan.

 

 

Iraq ok maybe at a push.

But afghanistan? Why would the hell would they want bases in afghan? A country with no coast. A country where everything ahs to be either flown in. Or as most things are transported through Pakistan. Through the badlands that are the north of pakistan and in to the bad lands of afghanistan. logistically speaking there arnt many places on earth that are harder to re supply than afghanistan. And that fact blows this theory out of the water. The US navy is huge and it would be far easier to just sit of the coast of iran if this was the actual plan.

[navarre]

 

The stop terrorist thing just doesnt add up. It is easy to find 30 well funded islamic radicals that could do another 9/11. Remember our terrorists are british born

 

I think their place of birth is rather irrelevant. Here in the UK, it would be excrutiatingly difficult to recieve training as a terrorist, whilst in the Taliban's Afghanistan, training to be a terrorist is the norm.

[danny]

 

Just seen this and found it quite fitting.

[Shino]

 

Just seen this and found it quite fitting.

 

I don't get it, what happened there and how would a helicopter solve it?

[stuwii]

I don't get it, what happened there and how would a helicopter solve it?

 

Oh FFS mate- they would not need to be on the damn ground if helicopters were around.

 

We need more jets tbh- they cannot touch those

[navarre]

I don't get it, what happened there and how would a helicopter solve it?

 

And IED (bomb, in short), has destroyed that armoured vehicle, and the satirical message of the image is that had a helicopter been readily available for transporting those troops around in, the explosion would have never have destroyed the vehicle and the troops in the first place.

[Shino]

But don't they shoot those down all the time too?

[Gizmo]

Because surface to air missles are just as easy to get a hold of as an Implemented Explosive Device.

[danny]

But don't they shoot those down all the time too?

 

No to bring a helo down takes effectivley takes some amount of technology. The taliban do not posses this really. Apparently they do have some surface to air missiles left from the soviet period. But the chances are they dont work any more. And they dont use them as they like to show them off to there mates, like someone here would show off in a BMW.

They have got lucky in the past with small arms fire bringing down helos but they have been very lucky.

 

Loving good old gordon today. The army do have adequate equipment to do the task. But we are sending more helos this autum. Well if theres enough out there why are you sending more. WHy cant he just be honest for fucks sake.

Edited July 22, 2009 by danny

[stuwii]

Why do we use jets when the f-35 exists, it can hover, attack and bugger off quicker than an apache can

[Gizmo]

As far as I'm aware, an F-35 costs in the region of $150m, while an Apache costs more like $20m. I'd rather have 7 or 8 Apache's for this kind of thing than 1 F-35.