New Increased Troops Obama and Brown initiative... Ho Ho.

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by surelynot, Dec 1, 2009.

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. Am I being stupid, but what the hell will sending over another 30,500 troops make in Afghanistan, apart from body-bag manufacturers very happy?

    The nature of the conflict there is not suitable for troops who are not born and bred to counter-insurgency. All we do by sending out more guys is to make more targets for IED's and melt-away sniper's. Jeez, the terry guys must be super happy sandboys about having so many more sitting duck targets to slot and dismember.

    On cold nights I just wonder what the total crud Brown thinks he knows about Afghanistan and the nature of the military scene there. Does it not occur to him that if the Russian army that was totally ruthless cannot calm down a totally lunatic islamic and tribal war based country, then we have no bloody chance.
     
  2. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    Thats because you are a civvy and haven't the first clue that you are on about.
     
  3. I remember the same thing being said of Iraq.

    I asked a few months ago what it would take to make a difference in Helmand, funnily enough the reply was 30,000 bayonets.
     
  4. Ok , Sir. Take the challenge and logically explain yourself and why you believe that what I said was not valid.

    We are in a new Vietnam and that is all there is to it. Cordite crazed troops who actually believe they can change that into a victory (how wpould that be measured?) will not change that.
     

  5. No response? Thought not.The rigours of a logical and considered response is obviously too fecking hard for you!

    Thought not. Again.
     
  6. This makes no sense at all. Correct me if I'm wrong, but soldiers (especially ones in the British army) are trained to fight in all conditions and circumstances.

    You really need to brush up on your history

    What is it then?



    Yes.
     
  7. Cordite crazed troops?

    I give you an arguement - Iraq surge. It worked there, it will work here.
     

  8. Rubbish…

    The surge in Iraq surpressed the insurgeny so that the two warring factions of Iraqis could come to term with each other and hold a moderately fair election…

    In Afghanitsan, the outside insurgency has been supplanted by the locals fighting against the 'invaders'… that us. There are no 'warring factions' to bring to the table in fair elections, Kazie has shown rather graphically that he abhors the idea of democracy and just fixed the outcome.

    Iraq was a slow burn civil war, Afghanistan is another classic afghan resistance against the latest invaders.

    All we are doing is reinforcing defeat.
     
  9. Didn't everyone say the same thing when Bush announced the Iraq surge?
     
  10. Well, the surge has made a great improvement hasn't it. Still massive bombs as the Shiite and Sunnis bash ten types of hell out of each other... and our guys are sniped and IED'd as ever. Surge my ass! Splurge more like.
     
  11. Agreed

    http://countrystudies.us/afghanistan/38.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan

    and : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahadin who became:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Jihad_in_Afghanistan

    some peeps are just daft.