Militants torch Afghan supplies

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Karl_uk, Dec 7, 2008.

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. 8O

    More than 90 lorries supplying US forces in Afghanistan have been set on fire in a suspected militant attack in north-west Pakistan, police say.

    Police said at least one person was killed as about 300 gunmen using rockets overpowered the guards at a terminal near the city of Peshawar.

    Some of the lorries were laden with Humvee armoured vehicles.

    There have been a series of attacks on convoys recently - although not on this scale, says the BBC's Martin Patience.

    The road from Peshawar to Afghanistan is a major supply route for US and Western forces battling against the Taleban.

    A US spokesman, Lt Col Rumi Nielsen-Green, said the incident was "militarily insignificant".

    "So far there hasn't been a significant loss or impact to our mission," she said.

    But, with 300 lorries crossing the border each day, military officials will be deeply concerned that their supply line can be disrupted in this manner, our correspondent in the Afghan capital, Kabul, says.

    Really not a good sign is it?
  2. And of course, this in NO way was supported or condoned by the Pakistani government. :roll:
  3. A US spokesman, Lt Col Rumi Nielsen-Green, said the incident was "militarily insignificant".

    90 Trucks - It would grind our entire country to a halt :D
  4. 100% agree with you, this is obviously a signal from pakistan to declare if there's any trouble from India, Pakistan will withdraw it's troops from the khyber pass & they'll be attacks likes this on a more regular basis.
  5. I'm surprised it took them this long to have a go.....I'd have thought attacking such a soft target would have made far more sense over the last 2 years. There's so muCh less chance to spending a few hours trying to dodge JDAM from out oF the blue!

    Unless, of course, there's another reason the supply chain has not been attacked before.

  6. The rule of thumb in the Sub Continent used to be that for every two items you receive a third will simply disappear, is this still the case? If so it would explain why the supply chain has been left alone for so long.
  7. Nothing new.

    They have been attacking convoys all year not just in the bad-lands of Pakistan but un-escorted convoys in country. Hundreds of contractors kiled/MIA, huge amounts of supplies lost.

    There would be options had we (US and allies) not alienated neighbouring countries:

    Pakistan - smarting over US cross border attacks
    Iran - hmm, who's on speaking terms with them
    Russia - maybe NATO's strong stance on Georgia wasn't helpful

    Who ever said invading Afghanistan would be easy? (apart from the Liabour Party of course)
  8. Maybe invading another country was a little bit out of order ?
  9. We want to start running equipment through China, they have a small boarder with Afghanistan don’t they?
  10. I have no problems with the principle of invading countries if it is for their own or our good.

    If you are going to do it - do it properly!
  11. Very good lateral thinking. Its cant be much more than 3000 miles from ports like shanghai or hong kong to the afghan border too. Job done.
  12. Ah but there is already a very good rail link from Shanghai/ Shenzen etc. to within a couple of miles of the Afghan/Chinese border and a another one is being built. Knowing the Chinese it will be ready next year, for all those Afghan minerals. However they would want a fair few concessions in return.....
  13. Good rail link or not, its still a feckin long way and that weird little bit of afghan that sticks out to connect to China is pretty remote. There is a reason why a significant part of the logistics chain passes though Pakistan as any glance at an atlas will show. While Pakistan has been (relatively) friendly in the past then its not been a huge drama. The US spokesman might think the loss is militarily insignificant in the grand scheme of things, but we all know the yanks love to win the battles and lose the war.
  14. Grownup_Rafbrat

    Grownup_Rafbrat LE Book Reviewer Good Egg (charities)

    So can't we make our millions of quids' worth of aid to Pakistan dependent on them protecting our stuff in transit?