Afghanistan: Britain goes in deeper
Just leave it to us, guys: Even more British troops are being sent to Afghanistan because not one of Britain's 25 NATO "allies" - such as France and Germany - are sending more troops there, despite NATO saying that it desparately needs them.
British commanders are trying to put together an extra battle group of between 600 and 1,000 soldiers and support specialists to reinforce UK and allied troops in their campaign against the Taliban.
The force is needed because not one of Britain's 25 allies has responded to Nato's call for 2,500 more combat troops to be sent to join the fighting now raging across four provinces of southern Afghanistan.
Britain first moved its taskforce, led by 3 Para, into Kandahar and Helmand, heart of the opium production areas, in spring. Britain has sustained 33 fatalities since then, with many more wounded in continuous fighting against the so-called Taliban opposition.
In fact, the enemy has turned out to be a mixture of Taliban fanatics from the madrassas (religious schools) across the border in Pakistan and village militias under local warlords and tribal leaders.
Britain is again involved in an overseas mission of choice, and not necessity, say Whitehall critics
British units have been involved in up to a dozen engagements a day according to the senior British commander in Helmand, Brigadier Ed Butler. Virtually no reconstruction has taken place, and no inroads made against the narcotics industry.
The extra British troops will be drawn from units such as the Spearhead battalion of the Royal Marines, and the Paras. Equipment, including helicopters and spares, has been called for too.
It is bad news for Chancellor Gordon Brown, who has strenuously tried to cap the cost of Britain's commitment in Afghanistan at £1bn over three years.
The government is expected to make an announcement about sending urgent reinforcements to Afghanistan by the end of the week.
Britain is again involved in an overseas mission of choice, and not necessity, say critics in Whitehall. As with Iraq and the Balkans, it looks as if the campaign will be much longer, bloodier and more costly than first advertised.
news.bbc.co.uk
Just leave it to us, guys: Even more British troops are being sent to Afghanistan because not one of Britain's 25 NATO "allies" - such as France and Germany - are sending more troops there, despite NATO saying that it desparately needs them.
British commanders are trying to put together an extra battle group of between 600 and 1,000 soldiers and support specialists to reinforce UK and allied troops in their campaign against the Taliban.
The force is needed because not one of Britain's 25 allies has responded to Nato's call for 2,500 more combat troops to be sent to join the fighting now raging across four provinces of southern Afghanistan.
Britain first moved its taskforce, led by 3 Para, into Kandahar and Helmand, heart of the opium production areas, in spring. Britain has sustained 33 fatalities since then, with many more wounded in continuous fighting against the so-called Taliban opposition.
In fact, the enemy has turned out to be a mixture of Taliban fanatics from the madrassas (religious schools) across the border in Pakistan and village militias under local warlords and tribal leaders.
Britain is again involved in an overseas mission of choice, and not necessity, say Whitehall critics
British units have been involved in up to a dozen engagements a day according to the senior British commander in Helmand, Brigadier Ed Butler. Virtually no reconstruction has taken place, and no inroads made against the narcotics industry.
The extra British troops will be drawn from units such as the Spearhead battalion of the Royal Marines, and the Paras. Equipment, including helicopters and spares, has been called for too.
It is bad news for Chancellor Gordon Brown, who has strenuously tried to cap the cost of Britain's commitment in Afghanistan at £1bn over three years.
The government is expected to make an announcement about sending urgent reinforcements to Afghanistan by the end of the week.
Britain is again involved in an overseas mission of choice, and not necessity, say critics in Whitehall. As with Iraq and the Balkans, it looks as if the campaign will be much longer, bloodier and more costly than first advertised.
news.bbc.co.uk
:lol: