Afghan casualty rate at WW2 level

The war in Afghanistan is ...

  • a war agaings terrorism

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • a war that stimulates terrorism

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • simply a stupid needless war

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • just one of many American wars in the ME and central Asia

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • a noble struggle for democracy and better future of the Afghans

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

alib

LE
In a five-month period this year, there were 23 fatalities among the 5,500 British troops...
The loss of 23 soldiers in half a year is saddening but I do think the jounalist who wrote this story deserves an historical water boarding.

I can recall having nearly 100 troops killed by PIRA in one year.

During the Battle of Dunkirk 30,000 British died. In the Second Battle of El Alamein the allies had 13,500 men were killed, missing or wounded.
Get a grip.

This was the just war fought in response to 9-11. We would have been much better served if we paid it full attention.
 

W.Anchor

War Hero
My old Regiment expected to lose 10% during training let alone in combat. After the war they reduced it to 1% but that was 50 men a year killed during training alone, which is not much different to numbers being killed at the moment in Iraq and Afghanistan combined.
 

Nosher361

War Hero
But Alib, the numbers in NI peaked at around the 25-30,000 mark, didn't they?. Considerably higher than 5,500 anyway, or the three front line battalions quoted earlier. I'm not qualified to comment on what's going on at the moment, but it sounds like there's an awful lot more metal flying around than was the case in NI. Good luck to them, anyway.

But like you, I don't take a journalist's word for anything.
 
alib said:
...I can recall having nearly 100 troops killed by PIRA in one year...
And to think that we complain about civvies knowing nothing about what's going on. 52 Armed Forces personnel have been killed on ops this year - 32 in Iraq and 20 in Afghanistan. Given that we are barely halfway through the year, we ain't far off a repeat of '72...
 
It was saddening to hear on Radio 4 this morning that a company commander can authorise the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of pounds' worth of ordnance but is unable to find anyone who can provide a few hundred quid to finance schoolbooks, medical supplies or a well for a community in his area of operations. Hearts and minds, anyone? Maybe our casualty rates would then start to reduce.
 
KGB_resident said:
Bat_Crab said:
Granted hearts and minds is less dependant on numbers, but imagine what we could be doing in Helmand if we were able to add another 2500 troops to the region - that's less than half of what we have in Iraq. We would have enough to take the battle to the Taliban and win it and carry out hearts and minds with the locals. At the moment we are having to balance the two.
With additional 2500 troops you would kill more Afghans and Taliban would have even more followers.
You forgot to add; "In my opinion".

Which incedentlly is not worth that much on here as you're not in the British Army, I would rather listen to those who have served in Afghanistan, or those who are going out there shortly as to weather or not this is a worthwhile war, so please don't state your negative viewpoint as fact.

I have volunteered for the next trawl as a reservist because I see it (my opinion) as a much more worthwhile and winable war than Iraq , and from what I've been told from people who have been out there recently we are doing some good stuff, and with a few more boots on the ground and a bit more support it's winable.

I have nothing against you personally sergey but you are always posting anti-british and anti-us propaganda, albiet in a subtle way, and when people cotton on to you, you will fall over yourself to claim ignorance, if I didn't know any better I might be inclined to believe you are employed to do it.
 
Dunservin said:
It was saddening to hear on Radio 4 this morning that a company commander can authorise the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of pounds' worth of ordnance but is unable to find anyone who can provide a few hundred quid to finance schoolbooks, medical supplies or a well for a community in his area of operations. Hearts and minds, anyone? Maybe our casualty rates would then start to reduce.
For that kind of thing you need the public on side, unfortunatly the British public have little interest in what's going on, and those that do are badly informed and tend to believe your average British sqauddie eats afghan babies for breakfast
 
mark1234 said:
KGB_resident said:
Bat_Crab said:
Granted hearts and minds is less dependant on numbers, but imagine what we could be doing in Helmand if we were able to add another 2500 troops to the region - that's less than half of what we have in Iraq. We would have enough to take the battle to the Taliban and win it and carry out hearts and minds with the locals. At the moment we are having to balance the two.
With additional 2500 troops you would kill more Afghans and Taliban would have even more followers.
You forgot to add; "In my opinion".

Which incedentlly is not worth that much on here as you're not in the British Army, I would rather listen to those who have served in Afghanistan, or those who are going out there shortly as to weather or not this is a worthwhile war, so please don't state your negative viewpoint as fact.

I have volunteered for the next trawl as a reservist because I see it (my opinion) as a much more worthwhile and winable war than Iraq , and from what I've been told from people who have been out there recently we are doing some good stuff, and with a few more boots on the ground and a bit more support it's winable.

I have nothing against you personally sergey but you are always posting anti-british and anti-us propaganda, albiet in a subtle way, and when people cotton on to you, you will fall over yourself to claim ignorance, if I didn't know any better I might be inclined to believe you are employed to do it.
Mark, I never use IMO or IMHO because it is quite clear that in my posts I express my views. Anti-US propaganda? Yes, sometimes my opinions look this way. So what? Should I change my point of view?

Anti-British propaganda? You joke. Where, when, how my posts could be interpreted as anti-British propaganda? And what is anti-British propaganda exactly? Does it ever exist?

Returning to the theme and taking into account your remark IMHO the main problem in Afghanistan is a creation of a strong, popular government that is able to run the country alone. It includes powerfull army, police, special forces. And of course all ethnical groups (Pushtuns, Tadjiks, Uzbeks) should be represented.

Without strong local army NATO is doomed to be defeated in Afghanistan.

On the first steps, military suport was needed. But just now it is rather counter-productive... IMHO.
 

Latest Threads

Top