As of today 178 of our British Armed Forces personnel have lost their lives in Afghanistan. One wonders how many of those souls would have been saved if Bob Ainsworth and his other spineless cronies, had supplied them with more up-to-date equipment and vehicles.
Equipment and vehicles that are readily available and used by our American counterparts who, by comparison, have lost fewer personnel.
Is this a coincidence?
I think not.
++++UPDATE++++
Thanks to Anti Citizen One for supplying a link to this
9 comments:
I wonder could the LDV factory could have been used to make MRAP vehicles?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8144431.stm
A fair point GOT. The defence budget is being squeezed continuously while the govt (not the country) asks more from them. If these socialist sh*tes had an ounce of nous about them they'd have seen this coming when they set about these wars. Bastard Brown's socialists are all for Glory - so long as it's not their blood or that of their children being spilled. Put the whole MOD up on your '...is a Cunt' blogpage please.
ACO
Thanks for that excellent link, have added it to the main post ;-)
GV
I'll certainly do that for you, with pleasure!
Hmmmm, the biggest scandal is sending TA to the likes of Iraq and Afghanistan and lumping them in with the regulars.
TA have their place, but in reality they are half trained civvy wannabes who should stay at home and only come out fighting when the UK is attacked directly.
As I said, they have their place, but they are to the REAL army what PCSO's are to the police.
Bob Ainsworth and his like in Labour have been sending them out to die because they are cheaper than regulars, just like the materiel side of the issue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2s4bVgWmbU&feature=player_embedded
Not much MRAP or CROWS.
Houdini has a point.
However, the TA have been used like this since they were created. They've seen action in many conflicts since WWI.
When someone joins the TA, they are told that they may see active service (which I'm sure is the main reason why most of them do it).
Also, many TA members are Reservists who have previously been in the armed forces.
Seems a bit mean to compare them to PCSO's who are nothing but useless tossers.
However, the TA have been used like this since they were created. They've seen action in many conflicts since WWI.
Quite true, but not in the way they are used today. TA were traditionally used literally to make numbers up in a Zulu company or whatever. If a battalion went on to active service they would distribute bandsmen into the various rifle companies as medics, then the whole of support company would be split up into the main rifle companies too, a mortar section and SF section, AT section and so on. This would leave a lot of men floating and so a ZULU company would be formed, and if they were needed some of the numbers would be made up from TA, if available, but we should stress that the TA was pretty much a distinctly different force with minimal input and then as a defensive force. The difference today is that the TA are used the same as regulars as an offensive force and there is little, except the skill, training and commitment, to put them apart.
Most reservists avoid TA.
The problem in Afghanistan is a lack of men, not just equipment. You cannot patrol a highly dangerous area the size of Afghanistan/Helmand effectively with only 10k men. We are being murdered, IMO, because of a lack of support for the troops from politicians who fail to realise what they are expecting the squaddies to do. How can we, with the sophisticated ECM equipment we have, or should have, keep getting blown to bits by roadside bombs? It can only be lack of men or equipment, or both.
Sorry for going on, but we need top either support this operation properly, men and equipment, or get out. Let's not forget that we would have been happy for the Taleban to still be there and in power if they had handed over Bin Laden, and we still haven't got him yet.
Labour and Brown has a lot to answer for, including that cunt Bliar.
Houdini, I bow to your superior knowledge on this subject, sir.
I do stand by my PCSO opinion though :-)
Post a Comment