More Brit troops available for Afghanistan - 'if necessary'
Another Blairwar going pear-shaped
Last week Britain deployed 130 extra troops to Afghanistan to 'help protect' Kandahar airfield - which is in addition to the 3,300 British troops already deployed in Helmand.
The MoD recently stated that "We have made clear that we do not expect to achieve all the UK's objectives for Helmand within the three-year deployment announced on January 26."
It would seem to follow that if the 3,430 troops are not now expected to meet their goals within the original time frame, then perhaps - as most observers seem to agree - 3,430 is itself an unrealistic number. Would any sane person be willing to stake money on the UK government not making another announcement within the next few months that due to changing circumstances on the ground a further x hundred troops will be deployed to complete the mission - "reconstruction and stabilisation, which might include some counter-insurgency operations for defensive purposes."
There are already signs that this is exactly where we are heading - Wednesday's exchange in the House of Lords between Lord Hamilton of Epsom and Dodgy 'Lord' Drayson [was given peerage by Labour and within weeks bunged them half a million quid] seems to point in that direction.
Afghan Problem 'a Lot Deeper Than Bin Laden'
US expects more Afghan violence
In Afghanistan, bad is getting worse
Last week Britain deployed 130 extra troops to Afghanistan to 'help protect' Kandahar airfield - which is in addition to the 3,300 British troops already deployed in Helmand.
The MoD recently stated that "We have made clear that we do not expect to achieve all the UK's objectives for Helmand within the three-year deployment announced on January 26."
It would seem to follow that if the 3,430 troops are not now expected to meet their goals within the original time frame, then perhaps - as most observers seem to agree - 3,430 is itself an unrealistic number. Would any sane person be willing to stake money on the UK government not making another announcement within the next few months that due to changing circumstances on the ground a further x hundred troops will be deployed to complete the mission - "reconstruction and stabilisation, which might include some counter-insurgency operations for defensive purposes."
There are already signs that this is exactly where we are heading - Wednesday's exchange in the House of Lords between Lord Hamilton of Epsom and Dodgy 'Lord' Drayson [was given peerage by Labour and within weeks bunged them half a million quid] seems to point in that direction.
Lord Hamilton of Epsom: My Lords, few independent commentators believe that 3,300 troops are enough to make any impact on this vast province in Afghanistan. If the numbers have to be increased as a result of a review, where will those troops come from?Battles escalate in Afghanistan
Lord Drayson: My Lords, I shall not get into predicting how the situation may develop. We are confident that the force package that has been provided on the basis of the development put in place by the military planners is absolutely appropriate for the task in hand. However, as I have said several times already, we will need to review the profile of the deployment as it progresses. It is moving slightly faster than we had expected, but we are confident that, if necessary, we have the reserves to meet any of the changes. The overall deployment of the British Armed Forces is running at about 18 per cent of the total military capability. That is challenging, but we believe that we can manage it.
Afghan Problem 'a Lot Deeper Than Bin Laden'
US expects more Afghan violence
In Afghanistan, bad is getting worse
posted by exoplanet at 2:27 PM
<< Home