Troops OUT of Afghanistan NOW - UNCONDITIONAL?

[solvitquick]

i believe our gallant troops are being slaughtered without reason in Afghanistan and am sick of politicians' crocodile tears. Apparently they are there "to turn a tribal country into a democracy" - rubbish! The once USSR lost 11,00 to try to suppress moslem maniacs but failed. Every week we hear of deaths (6 today) or so-called injuries (this means loss of legs, arms or both). We are blackmailed by armchair philososophers who say criticism of the "policy" will demoralise the our cannon-fodder heroes. Lies as usual. When I say out now I mean out now - i.e. announcement this week. Anyone agree or not?

[I.Don No]

to say that our troops being in Afghanistan keeps our streets safe is a bunch of hooooey.....as far as I am aware the 7/7 bombers were home-grown and trained in Pakistan.

If this is a sound policy then DC should meet all the flag-covered coffins when our fallen are returned to the UK.

It is way past the time for this country to stop being the world's police force. As was mentioned on question time last night our forces, much depleted as they now are, would be hard pressed to defend the Isle of Wight, let along the Falklands.

I salute our military chaps and chapesses wherever they are deployed but BRING THEM HOME NOW.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - that sounds fine in theory, but leaving aside the prohibitive costs - and the MOD will not leave them aside you can be sure - it is simple enough for a Taliban member with a mobile phone a few hundred yards away up a hill to watch the scanning device roll over the bomb, and then detonate it when the patrol follow.

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

Regarding your mention of the prohibitive costs, surely the cost of a vehicle cannot be weighed against the costs in human life?

Agree with the remote controlled setting off of the mines by the Taliban, that thought never occurred to me.

To all those that accused me of suggesting that we bomb 'thousands' of innocent women and children.

Yemen's air force seem to have some success in killing al-Qa'ida-linked fighters, without 'thousands' of innocent women and children getting killed, so why can't we have similar success against the Taliban?

No some peoples accusations are more likely be because they don't wish the Taliban killed, seeing that they are forever accusing the West for invading their lands.

http://www.independen...ilitants-7553383.html

[sandyRoe]

Perhaps Yemen doesn't highlight the civilian casualties?
Here's one of the USA's mistakes

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

[andy-hughes]

Of course the cost of a vehicel cannot be weighed against the cost of a life - but it is.

I am sure there is the technology available to do away with ground troops altogether and send robot drones in to fight - but the cost does not allow it.

Similarly, it is possible to build a vehicle that will withstand any explosion, but it will never be deployed because of costs.

In an ideal world, no soldier would ever die for lack of protection - but protection costs money - so they do, and will continue for as long as they are sent abroad to enforce our political systems on other countries who lack the will to maintain them.

[solvitquick]

Thanks all for your comments. Choosing best answer was difficult given so many well thought out answers - but andy-hughes seemed to summarise many of our thoughts. But you know whether I could have chosen you. Majority really know what has gone on and still is. These friends know you do not throw more of our OUR MEN chasing losses. 800-1000 total by 2014 maybe. Love xxx