Canadian withdrawal - Who is left in the South?

Discussion in 'Afghanistan' started by OldSnowy, Jul 6, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    Canada has ceased combat Ops in Afghanistan:
    Canadians transfer Kandahar battle command to Americans - CTV News

    Following from the withdrawal of the Dutch last year, this means that both RC South and RC SouthWest will be almost entirely US/UK areas - with the vast majority being, of course, US Forces. Certainly there are still contributions from Denmark, the Baltic states, Singapore, etc, but in practical terms RC South is now a US-only area, and RC SW is well over 60% US. What a change from only three years ago, when RC South was a joint UK/NL/CA zone, with a few token Yanks. Still, that's the way things go - and you can bet your bottom Afghani that at least one Canuck will stay in Afghanistan somewhere, to keep the ISAF flag count up!

    The Canadians have nothing at all to be ashamed about - as with the Dutch, they've taken heavy casualties, and done far more than they either expected to do, or 'signed up' for. Should we be following the CA and NL lead, and pulling out with heads held high? Or are we right to hang on for as long as possible (please don't say "until the job is done", as that is patent nonsense), as our own Military leaders want?
  2. They may have finished combat ops but a whole shedload has just arrived where I am.
  3. I personally think that we should never have gone to Afghanistan or Iraq, but that's for another thread. I do feel that we should follow their lead, but we should do it properly. We should state our objectives and fulfil them and then depart. Unfortunately, no one appears willing to state definitively what the objectives are and they change constantly.

    However, I don't see any of that happening as we are part of NATO and since the US got NATO involved and seems to heavily influence NATO decisions in Afghanistan, I can see us being there a long time.
  4. Haha, bit like US combat ops ended in Iraq, yet 50,000 troops are still there.
  5. Well someone has to clean up.
  6. On a realistic note,how long if a decision was made say tomorrow,would it take to leave Afghanistan lock,stock and barrel?
  7. i honestly dont think keeping combat troops (and reducing numbers at that) for another 3 1/2 years will make a difference.and the afghan gov are ungrateful sods so lets just pack up and do one.

    burning our camps as we leave
  8. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    Depends what we want to bring back, and what we are prepared to leave behind. It would be possible, if pushed, to get every human body out in a couple of weeks. Fold back in on yourself - first, abandoning PBs, then BG HQs, then all back to Bastion, and fly from there. This would mean abandoning every vehicle, radio, and heavy weapon - which we aren't about to do (I hope). A 'proper' withdrawal could be done in months, if again we are prepared to handove/write off/burn a lot of stuff. Mind you, even if we had ten years I think we'd still leave a lot behind - is it worth it, economically or in possible loss of lives to bring back tents, jerry cans, rations, furniture, etc? Where do you draw the line?

    There is, no doubt, an amazing amount of Staff effort going into this very subject already..............
  9. Cheers for that OS,Another quick question and this maybe me being very naive,but would it be feasible if a decision was made

    to get out of Dodge so to speak ,to make a truce with the Taliban/Insurgents for a period of say six months,a kind of 'leave

    us alone for six months and we will leave you alone' and be in a better position to get kit together and leave as little as poss

    behind? Like I say it maybe me being naive,never having been involved in anyway with the situation over there,sorry a bit of a ramble there.

  10. Let me refer you to the "Retreat from Kabul" during the first Afghan war- that was done under a flag of truce as well. We lost, off the top of my head, about 16,000 men, women and camp followers in a little over 4 days....

    I may be wrong on the numbers but I'm just saying that truces dont count for much out there. And no, things aren't different today.
  11. Thanks for that Kabulronin,I did think I was being a bit on the naive side,thanks for your input.
  12. we did negociate a truce with the taliban in musa qala which we then used to withdraw a few years ago so its not completely naive
  13. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    A truce is possible with one bunch - but don't for a second think that the TB is a monolithic, well-organised organisation. It's not. A truce in one place would mean feck all elsewhere, added to which it would simply not be possible to trust them, or frankly anyone else (I mean you, ANA/ANP....), to abide by it.
  14. if we were just buggering off you could try and negotiate truces with local groups (remembering the UK isnt as spread out as before so it would be easier to gain a concensus) although the foreign fighters are unlikely to go for it.

    there's always the chance that they're ramp up attacks as we'd be seen as vulnerable and that they could get the kudos for running us out of town, like the JAM militia did in basra when we withdrew from the city.