5,000 British troops bound for Afghanistan

[denverbill]

http://www.thisislondon.com/news/articles/19270771?source=Evening%20Standard

More British troops are to be deployed in Afghanistan, military chiefs confirmed today.

Up to 5,000 troops may help a planned US bid to re-establish order in the country, with the first wave arriving in October.

The offer of extra British manpower was reportedly made at a Nato meeting in Brussels last week.

<snip>

"Re-establish order". Hmm. I thought that war was over 3 years ago. Maybe they are coming to help us with Iran.

[truebrit71]

1. But...but...I thought Democracy had already been delivered there...

...they had elections and everything....

This will NOT go down well in the U.K.....

[Tempest]

2. Taliban attacks are increasing

As they promised, the Taliban are making a comeback.

Four U.S. troops were wounded yesterday when their convoy was hit.

[Barrett808]

3. "Complete strategic failure" - Secret UK troops plan for Afghan crisis

Secret UK troops plan for Afghan crisis
BRIAN BRADY
WESTMINSTER EDITOR

DEFENCE chiefs are planning to rush thousands of British troops to Afghanistan in a bid to stop the country sliding towards civil war, Scotland on Sunday can reveal.

Ministers have been warned they face a "complete strategic failure" of the effort to rebuild Afghanistan and that 5,500 extra troops will be needed within months if the situation continues to deteriorate.

An explosive cocktail of feuding tribal warlords, insurgents, the remnants of the Taliban, and under-performing Afghan institutions has left the fledgling democracy on the verge of disintegration, according to analysts and senior officers.

The looming crisis in Afghanistan is a serious setback for the US-led 'War on Terror' and its bid to promote western democratic values around the world.

Defence analysts say UK forces are already so over-stretched that any operation to restore order in Afghanistan can only succeed if substantial numbers of troops are redeployed from Iraq, itself in the grip of insurgency.

The UK contribution to the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan presently stands at fewer than 500, compared with the contribution of 8,000 troops to the Coalition presence in Iraq.

(more)

http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=559872005

[VegasWolf]

6. I thought it was "Strategerly Failure." "Bad as a pig in the chicken coop"

[0007]

4. Haven't the British learned a fucking thing in the last two hundred

years from fucking with the Muslims. What has Afghanistan done to the UK?

Why are we in Iraq when the terrorists are in Saudi Arabia?

[wakeme2008]

5. No in more recent times the Soviets.... nt

[cliss]

7. This is amazing. Who is paying

for this? I can't believe the UK is. I read about 2 years ago, that the british troops in Iraq were being paid for by a Trust Fund in England. That trust fund was about to expire, I think in June of 2004.

UK troops are still there. I haven't heard any more about this.

Someone has to pay for this.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. The extra expenditure for Iraq and Afghanistan can be authorised

by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, eg £4.9 billion in the past year. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2005-03-16.257.2&s=iraq+speaker%3A10068#g257.3 There's no reason to think he'll stop doing it, and Britain can afford it.

[shadowknows69]

8. but the Taliban was vanquished and Afghanistan has had elections

I can't stand it anymore

[magellan]

9. We opened the door to democracy for the Afghanis

Let them fight for it if it's what they want!

[wookie294]

11. Britain to reduce troops in Iraq, send more to Afghanistan: newspaper

LONDON (AFP) - Britain will reduce the number of its troops in
Iraq soon and send more to Afghanistan to fight remnants of the Taliban, a senior military officer said.

The Iraq contingent will decrease in "battalion chunks" following the elections expected at the end of the year, Air Marshal Glenn Torpy said, quoted by The Daily Telegraph newspaper.

By next year, the 1,000-man British force in Afghanistan is likely to be increased considerably as the army, backed by Royal Air Force Harrier jets, move into more dangerous parts of the country to combat the growing heroin trade and to hunt down remaining Taliban.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1504&e=5&u=/afp/20050614/ts_afp/iraqbritainafghanistantroops_050614071306

[expatriot]

12. Step right up! Play the Bush-Blair shell game!

While Blair can not politically manage to send more troops to Iraq, he can manage to send them to Afghanistan to free more U.S. troops to go to Iraq. Ingenius!

[Brundle_Fly]

13. they are all going to Iran.

they just want to launch out of afghanistan.


seriously....harrier jets? to stop farmers?