British Troops to be pulled out of Sangin.

#2
It's been suggested for a long time that the dangerous parts of the British mission would be handed over to the Americans. I suspect Brown, Milliband and the shameful Labour party cutting a deal a while back when the casualties were increasing
 
#3
This has to be a good thing. It shouldn't be seen as failure or as a retreat and especially not that the Spams are bailing us out, despite what may be construed in the press. It certainly doesn't defame the reputation of the British Army in anyway, nor make pointless the sacrifice that has been made by so of many of our soldiers.

What it does do is highlight the fact that this is an unwinnable and pointless war foisted upon us by the beligerent and useless non entity that was the previous government, who realised that public opinion was against it and ergo, them. Boommoob is right, this was orchestrated by cyclops and his cronies a long time before now.
 
#4
Didn't we rotate from a relatively safe deployment to Helmond a couple of years ago? I suppose it's only right that troops should rotate around Afg and take their share of the harder areas. It allows old sweats to affect an air of superiority when they talk about their tours "when it really was a war".
 
#5
There is more to this than meets the eye. I don't think the Americans are too impressed by the way the Britis send a new team in every six months each with it's own twist of how to get the job done and not really achieving a great deal. Not sure if the Americans will achieve more success by having a more consistent approach, but it seems they want to give it a try.

When all is said and done, the Helman deployment will go down as a poorly pla ned, poorly supported and poorly led episode in our history. The Eton educated leaders have been given too free a hand to do as they wish and the six month rotation has done nothing to help on the ground.

Nothing, however, should be taken from the immense bravery of those who fought there.
 
#6
Take a leaf out of the Israeli book, and plough the shite hole flat,
 
#7
If so it would be about time.Nobody can fail to be impressed by the tenacity and professionalism that has been demonstrated by the troops at the sharp end of this operation.The only failure has been Political with an extended period of limited commitment,vision and cohesion that has beggared belief.I hope this is the start of a total withdrawal from Afghanistan.
 

spad

War Hero
#8
cant wait to here terry take on this!! some how I think they will be making the most out of it
 
#9
There is more to this than meets the eye. I don't think the Americans are too impressed by the way the Britis send a new team in every six months each with it's own twist of how to get the job done and not really achieving a great deal. Not sure if the Americans will achieve more success by having a more consistent approach, but it seems they want to give it a try.

When all is said and done, the Helman deployment will go down as a poorly pla ned, poorly supported and poorly led episode in our history. The Eton educated leaders have been given too free a hand to do as they wish and the six month rotation has done nothing to help on the ground.

Nothing, however, should be taken from the immense bravery of those who fought there.
Are you suggesting that tours should be longer than 6 months?
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#10
I'd like to have suggest that we didnt get involved in the first place. Its a bloody mess and I often wonder if our senior officers were a bit too keen to retain operational experience after NI wound down!
I really hope I am in tin foil hat territory there!
 
#11
…and the politicians marched out in good order and with heads held high and called it 'victory'.
 
#12
So should the Secretary for Defence tell all and sundry the reasons for this withdrawal?

Personally, I don't think so as it can only aid the enemy.
 
#14
So should the Secretary for Defence tell all and sundry the reasons for this withdrawal?

Personally, I don't think so as it can only aid the enemy.


And you think Terry can't work it out for himself snoozy?
 
#16
Chuffed to fuck. Will save more than a few lives in 3 PARA who were looking to take over the Marines.
Ever the optimist, Fsj. I suspect they'll send 3 PARA somewhere even worse instead when the next Petraeus surge kicks off.
 
#17
Dingerr, from the guys I have spoken to who did the job on the ground six months was long enough. However, for some ambitious, clever senior officers, Afghanistan affords an opportunity to get noticed and with each six month rotation brings another mindset on how to approach and execute a mission very few people ever understood. From the very first deployment led by Ed Butler, now allegedly PNG, the mission morphed into something else. Criticism of Ed Butler's methods have been openly reported, less so the opinion of the Americans of the constantly changing British approach. If British strategy remain the same, six monthly rotations should not have mattered, clearly this hasn't been the case.

Basically I think the Americans lost patience and consequently moved the Brits out of the way. It is very easy to blame politicians for this mess. Please remember that they were being advised by army generals the whole time, whose misplaced arrogance/confidence to prevail has led to a bloody mess in Helmand.
 
#18
Dingerr, from the guys I have spoken to who did the job on the ground six months was long enough. However, for some ambitious, clever senior officers, Afghanistan affords an opportunity to get noticed and with each six month rotation brings another mindset on how to approach and execute a mission very few people ever understood. From the very first deployment led by Ed Butler, now allegedly PNG, the mission morphed into something else. Criticism of Ed Butler's methods have been openly reported, less so the opinion of the Americans of the constantly changing British approach. If British strategy remain the same, six monthly rotations should not have mattered, clearly this hasn't been the case.

Basically I think the Americans lost patience and consequently moved the Brits out of the way. It is very easy to blame politicians for this mess. Please remember that they were being advised by army generals the whole time, whose misplaced arrogance/confidence to prevail has led to a bloody mess in Helmand.
NIGEGILB: you are on the money: we fought for five days (on Herrick VI) non-stop to re-take Sangin and relieve the stranded Coy in the DC position there. We even needed a battery of Canadian 155s to help us beat the taliban back. We had guys killed and injured, not to mention the Afghans from the 3/205 Kandak lead by the intelligent General Muhaiyodin: every British Brigadier decided to ignore him (apart from 52 Bde who got it right...) Time after time our soldiers fought to dislodge the taliban and then handed back the area to move onto the next target that the Bde HQ had picked. As a result of the six month mentality we have no joined up plan, no real vision, and lots of dead and maimed to show for it.

We didn't do this in NI did we: 3 Bde HQ didn't up sticks at leave every six months......and as a result the battalions roulemented (remember that concept ??) through, there was no drop in ops like the current much hated RIP (farce) that takes place every six months. We could save millions and achieve better contunuity at a stroke.............

end of message before my heart rate goes too high.
 
#20
The writing was on the wall ever since the USMC came into Helmand last year. In a single morning, they exposed the threadbare state of our ops and Browns lies when they lifted in 4,000 Marines in one go using 134 heavy lift helos at a time Brown was claiming we had all the kit we needed and the grand total of 8 heavy lift helos to go around 8,000 UK troops.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top