Whos not pulling their weight in Afghanistan?

#1
Not meant as a "Premier League" but these figures published today in the Telegraph do provide an insight to who is suffering the most in NATO.
Death Toll since 2001.

USA - 867
Britain - 219
Canada - 131
Germany - 35
France - 35
Denmark - 25
Spain - 25
Netherlands - 21
Italy - 21
Others - 63 (who dey?) Estonia, Latvia, etc?

Total 1,442

Personally I am against this 'War on Terror' dreamt up by Blair & Bush and continued by Broon & Obumsidaisy. With a son in Afghanistan at present I do have a right to make a point. My own years of service in hotspots don't count, I had no more of a choice than my son has....but I don't like it nonetheless.
 
#3
Bit older, but wiki has a full list :-

Coalition deaths in Afghanistan by country
USA: 800*
UK: 219
Canada: 130*
Germany: 39
France: 35
Denmark: 27
Spain: 25
Italy: 21
Netherlands: 21
Poland: 13
Australia: 11
Romania: 11
Estonia: 6
Norway: 4
Czech Republic: 3
Latvia: 3
Hungary: 2
Portugal: 2
South Korea: 2
Sweden: 2
Turkey: 2
Belgium: 1
Finland: 1
Lithuania: 1
 
#4
Now, lets find a formula that gives us a figure incorporating population and contingent size as well as a breakdown into combat deaths vs accidental blablabla... I hate these number games but if we want to play it, lets try and get it right, especially if we take the numbers as an indicator of "pulling ones weight". :roll:
 
#5
vvaannmmaann said:
Very interesting.Do you have a link to the article? Looked at the DT but couldn't see anything.
Not au fait with links but see page 4, Armed Forces, in today's Telegraph article, "Rebels kill 8 US soldiers in border raids." Death Toll in block above this report. Page also gives telegraph.co.uk/frontline
 
#6
how do those numbers stack up as a percentage of the total personnel for each nation?
 
#7
para_medic said:
Now, lets find a formula that gives us a figure incorporating population and contingent size as well as a breakdown into combat deaths vs accidental blablabla... I hate these number games but if we want to play it, lets try and get it right, especially if we take the numbers as an indicator of "pulling ones weight". :roll:
Too right my friend. I too dislike the numbers game, but raising the awareness of who is doing what may do something towards setting some kind of balance. F'rinstance the Canadian losses must be the highest as a proportion of their effort.
 
#10
bigbird67 said:
how do those numbers stack up as a percentage of the total personnel for each nation?
That was going to be my comment as well. Figures are only as good as their supporting information/when in context.
 
#11
Yes thanks you just helped me to see the point I was trying to come to terms with re other thread.We are being seen off surely?Why are we being asked to give so much?If the N.A.T.O. treaty has no regulation to compel the service of its members what is the point of it?
 
#12
kangorrilapig said:
Yes thanks you just helped me to see the point I was trying to come to terms with re other thread.We are being seen off surely?Why are we being asked to give so much?If the N.A.T.O. treaty has no regulation to compel the service of its members what is the point of it?
Exactly for the same reason why we dont like the EU: NATO is an alliance of sovereign democratic nations - emphasis on sovereign.
 
#13
So, "pulling ones's weight" is determined by how many body bags one receives.

That's comforting!
 
#14
If a sovereign government giving up the right to decide for themselves how a Treaty should be interpreted in light of a situation not explicitly covered by it is 'pulling their weight', then consider ours well and truly pulled.

Personally, I'd have preferred the 'Poke it, Georgy' option myself. The NAT was drafted at a time when it was an agreement on defence against aggression by nation-states, not non-state actors. That's a significant difference right there, never mind the means and ends discussion that never took place before we went into Afghanistan.

Anybody know if anyone's ever tried to invoke Articles 12 or 13?
 
#15
whitecity said:
So, "pulling ones's weight" is determined by how many body bags one receives.

That's comforting!
That's not the point and you know it.
 
#16
shagnasty said:
whitecity said:
So, "pulling ones's weight" is determined by how many body bags one receives.

That's comforting!
That's not the point and you know it.
The thread title could have fooled me :wink:
 
#17
shagnasty said:
whitecity said:
So, "pulling ones's weight" is determined by how many body bags one receives.

That's comforting!
That's not the point and you know it.
Given the body count is the only information you provided, then it seems to be precisely the point you are making.

Everybody else has followed the same theme just offered a tweaking in respect of ascertaining the relative proportion to total population size or force number deployed.
 
#18
whitecity said:
shagnasty said:
whitecity said:
So, "pulling ones's weight" is determined by how many body bags one receives.

That's comforting!
That's not the point and you know it.
Given the body count is the only information you provided, then it seems to be precisely the point you are making.

Everybody else has followed the same theme just offered a tweaking in respect of ascertaining the relative proportion to total population size or force number deployed.
*cough* the hint was in the :roll:
ie completely agree with you wc.
 
#19
So basically if we don't want to be there we don't have to?We are only in this because we kind of slid into it post Iraq?If not why are we there I mean the U.K. specifically.why can't we simply put up a token show of solidarity like say France or Germany,and stay in the 'safer' sections also?
 
#20
Number of Troopc per country 23/7/2009

United States - 31,855 United Kingdom - 9,000 Germany - 4,245
Italy - 2,795 France - 3,070 Canada - 2,830
Poland - 2,025 Netherlands - 2160 Turkey - 820
Australia - 1,200 Romania - 990 Bulgaria - 460
Spain - 1000 Denmark - 750 Belgium - 510
Norway - 600 Czech Republic - 340 Croatia - 295
Sweden - 430 Hungary - 310 Slovakia - 230
Lithuania - 250 Macedonia - 165 Latvia - 165
New Zealand - 220 Albania - 250 Estonia - 150
Greece - 125 Finland - 130 Azerbaijan - 90
Slovenia - 80 Portugal - 105 United Arab Emirates - 25
Singapore - 8 Ukraine - 10 Luxembourg - 9
Iceland - 8 Ireland - 7 Jordan - 7
Austria - 4 Bosnia and Herzegovina - 2 Georgia - 1

Think the Georgian's are trying to tell one bloke something :D
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top