Life ain't cheap

[cantaloup63]

Another soldier has just been killed in Afghanistan. This has been a 10 year coflict and the total number of British soldiers killed is tiny ( a few hundred) in comparison with wars of yesteryear. Under no circumstances am I belittling the situation.

The point I wish to raise it why, during armed clonflicts over such a long period, is there such relatively small number of "professional" soldier deaths in comparison with just a few years ago? Would this have been the case if massive numbers (hundreds of thousands) of troops had been sent over originally at the start with a more gun-ho attitude; and would the conflict all have been resolved much sooner - albeit at the price of a significantly higher number of casualties on both sides?

 

[Norcon]

If we sent 4 million combat troops to afghanistan we would still come out with our asses severly kicked.

 

[cantaloup63]

If we sent 4 million combat troops to afghanistan we would still come out with our asses severly kicked.

But how do we know? 4 million would have managed a massive sweep out of the country in a short time, surely?

 

[sooey]

If we sent 4 million combat troops to afghanistan we would still come out with our asses severly kicked.

NO, we wouldn't..........


they might..

 

[Blasphemous]

I'm struggling with the term 'the total number of British soldiers killed is tiny' but I'm willing to accept the train of though.

I'm inclined to believe that a massive initial surge would possibly have resulted in the objective being achieved in less time and with less overall casualties. However, I'm still no wiser as to what the 'objective' was/is. Also, the mujahideen never seem to get a mention these days yet in the early 80s they were armed to the teeth by the west when the Afghans were at war with the Russians. I know I'm a stickler for detail/facts/truth/the point, but our great leaders (said with tongue firmly in cheek), are a fickle lot.

 

[Mickymoody]

The means to an end of warfare has changed since the Middle ages, and the end to all that ended with the use of the H bomb.

Now it is underground tactics, in a war that can never be won, because plant a bomb or IED, wonder off. It's going to kill someone.

There are not groups of people entrenched, face to face, there are local groups, not in military uniform, mingling with the locals, taking sniper shots at us, then moving off.

Anyone suspected of being involved, is arrested, dealt with by the local police, who are corrupt, processed, and released. Even though they have been found in possessian, of arms etc. So just carry on. Russia gave up in the country..Long past the time we do to.

 

[Blasphemous]

Mickymoody

Thanks for the military lesson. You've 'learned' me a lot!

 

[big-all]

whilst i feel for our brave lads that have been mamed and killed and feel desperately sorry for there friends and family
i still have to ask what the justification is to invade another land where a few hundred people "may be acting " against our interest
i think " we" in the west are so up our arrrrses that our morals and principals are very corrupt ?? how can we justify an "island" in a third location to "avoid justice " like guantanimo bay
how can we say it fair ???

 

[Blasphemous]

1. Bad English,

Oh the irony!

2. I wasn't replying to you, I was replying to the OP.

Yes I understand that, thank you for pointing it out though.

3. I was replying to the OP.

And I was replying to your post. I think that's how this forum thing works...?

4. Your post is irrelevent, and illogical.

Could you explain your thinking to me? It may help me understand how I can improve my relevance/logic.

5. I don't know why you replied, as I wasn't addressing you

Yes, you stated that already in point 2.

6. all you post is nonsense.

I refer you to my reply to point 4.

7. Don't respond in future,

I'll respond as and when I like.

8. you are clearly an idiot.

I'm no contract lawyer but that looks very much like an infringement of rule 1 of the forum but I'll let the powers that be decide.

 

[Mickymoody]

I think you ignore the rule of excessive quoting?

Well done in that regard.

Bye. If you are unable to add, but quote, nothing, then you have nothing to add.

 

[Blasphemous]

I think you ignore the rule of excessive quoting? Well done in that regard. Bye. If you are unable to add, but quote, nothing, then you have nothing to add.

I have quoted your post 'once'. That single quote is simply broken into several sections.

 

[Mickymoody]

I think you ignore the rule of excessive quoting? Well done in that regard. Bye. If you are unable to add, but quote, nothing, then you have nothing to add.

I have quoted your post 'once'. That single quote is simply broken into several sections.

Rules is rules...and you broke them, I'm not admin, but you broke their rules. Well done!

 

[Monkeh]

Rules is rules...and you broke them, I'm not admin, but you broke their rules. Well done!

You break them nearly every time you post. You're somehow still here..

 

[Mickymoody]

I think you ignore the rule of excessive quoting? Well done in that regard. Bye. If you are unable to add, but quote, nothing, then you have nothing to add.

I have quoted your post 'once'. That single quote is simply broken into several sections.

Rules is rules...and you broke them, I'm not admin, but you broke their rules. Well done!

You break them nearly every time you post. You're somehow still here..

I think you will find I don't. proof required. If you indeed referring to me, as you don't make it clear. Excess quoting is not allowed. post an example when I break the rules?

 

[Dan Robinson]

Mickey - I am still waiting for GS Corgi and DIYNot admin to cart me off to the funny farm

i think your influence is not what you think it is. Much like your grasp of the English language.

Still. Keep trying eh?