What have we acheived in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Tony like you I did NI and the living with some of it still haunts me from time to time. British Military Training is the best in the world IMO. I would go so far as to say I would rather have a “Rockape” watching my back than a soldier from any other country.

True, you train for war to kill, let’s face it, that is what I was there for in the RAF, you were part of that chain to kill, it was the way you were trained, brainwashing is a harsh word, but that is what military training is, the indoctrination to lead if needed and advance and kill, a military where the Army do not do that are simply the losing side, there is no point having people who question going Forward as you will be screwed. Did NI etc and never went to the Falklands, my mates did and I was gutted at the time to miss out on putting my training Into practice….. It’s the living with it afterwards that is the hard bit, a lot of my mates struggle with it.

. soldiers want to go to war generally, no matter what you might think. How they feel about this afterwards is another topic.

Take these statements however you wish, irrespective of any cynicism, sarcasm or flippancy there is an element of truth in it, at what scale I do not know.

That, in the main, is of course quite true. And countless interviews with soldiers have shown that they expect to go to war at some point and accept that they might die in service. How could it be otherwise? So I see little but truth in your comment. For the families it will often be different and in many cases I have no doubt that they disagreed with their offsprings’ decision.

Any death is a tragedy for the family and friends, but the total of 179 set in the perspective of deaths in service since WW2 is extremely small. If WW2 is included then it pales into insignificance. This is not to diminish it but to put it into perspective. I am not sure what the BBC’s purpose is in publishing the table.

179 killed in Iraq
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10637526

I am sure the bereaved families are pleased they had something to do!

What have we achieved…our forces are now far better trained and therefore effective in all aspects of large-scale, tactical and guerrilla warfare. With the loss of Northern Ireland as a training ground this is important and also gives the soldiers something to do and the generals/politicians justification for the expenditure. soldiers want to go to war generally, no matter what you might think. How they feel about this afterwards is another topic.

Take these statements however you wish, irrespective of any cynicism, sarcasm or flippancy there is an element of truth in it, at what scale I do not know.

Europes fault for breaking up the Ottoman Empire. If the Turks had continued ruling, you’d have tolerance between Jews, Christians, and various Muslims..
the only cost is your young boys going to old hairy men.

Nice theory…..not sure tolerance would have lasted the 20th century.

Hi All,
Charlie I have stepped away from the Soap box :highly_amused: But I would add that as I see it in both world wars there was a definite cause and aim with Afghanistan and both Gulf Wars the reasons and aim are clouded and it is the loss of life not just on our side but all civilian in particular that I think is a waste.
I mean there was talk of boots on the ground in Syria and now it is what is America going to do about Egypt,watch this space ?

Geoff.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23651828

It seems like every day a bomb or two goes off. A few people killed here, a few people killed there.
Occasionally an allied soldier dies. In a few years time forces will be pulled out and then what?
Something has to be done globally, militarily, politically to solve this once and for all.
I fear we have just delayed a more major conflict or the middle east is destined to be at war internally for many, many more years.
Whatever happens it’s going to bite us at some point.

Europes fault for breaking up the Ottoman Empire. If the Turks had continued ruling, you’d have tolerance between Jews, Christians, and various Muslims..
the only cost is your young boys going to old hairy men.

…and Libya and Tunisia.

There has probably been more lives lost in Egypt in the last 4 weeks than we’ve lost in recent wars.

Rant over, Geoff?!:D;) No, the problems are intractable and will be debated for decades. And the West’s alliegances to various factions will chop and change…just as they always have. Every lost life is sad but remember that these lads are not forced to join up and most accept that they might pay the ultimate price. The total loss of lives is very small set against earlier and fare more terrible conflicts. We live in a more sensitive age now and there is no longer the sad acceptance of lives lost in conflict. Now evey life lost is questioned and mourned and so the perspective we have is quite different.

Hi All,
Charlie I agree with what you say,outside intervention was always a risky manoeuvre and I would think that there are other reasons for getting involved particularly the last GW’s as mentioned Oil allegedly ? as for Afghanistan what the true motive behind all this is I don’t honestly know I mean what else was to gain by the intervention if it was needed. For example in Iraq if at all it should have been when the Kurd’s were being gassed but to do so on the assumption he has WMD reminds me of another thread no proof as of yet.
In the end though like you say the different factions will keep beating each other up till the sun dies the only problem being it involves a lot of innocents getting in the way just like Egypt is going through at the moment,what people tend to forget in these types of country’s it’s the law of the Land/Tribal warfare what ever you call it that has ruled country’s for hundreds of years and will continue to do so no matter what intervention there is and it will only take a little spark.
All I can see is that we say there’s another heathen country lets take them Democracy/Fairness/Good working conditions/Better infrastructure etc.etc. but we will have to split a few heads and become ever so unpopular sure there are those in these country’s that would like the chance of all mentioned but you have to overcome the basic problems 1st and slowly introduce reforms you will not convince the tribal elders overnight nor the ruling religious party’s in Iraq’s case and of late we have seen the softer side winning through but it will take a lot longer than what we have put in so far my main problem with it all is the loss of life all those servicemen and for what to be told your Sacked/Made redundant when they cannot even recruit the new numbers they need I mean who is going to be VR sure they will do the mandatory (I think it’s three Yr’s ?)but they will not sign on again after being kicked into touch while serving in Afghanistan.

Geoff.:D

Does this advance the debate? Various sects have always fought each other in both countries, regardless of outside intervention, except that in Saddam’s Iraq non-Ba’athists were savagely repressed.

Hi All,
The excuse used was WMD initially and that we would help them achieve democracy and judging by the on going fighting between the different sects in both country’s we have not achieved this. In all the wars the British have fought in Iraq on the following occasions with varied success and reasons for doing so.
Mesopotamian campaign (1914–1918)
Anglo-Iraqi War (1941)
Gulf War (1990-1991)
Iraqi no-fly zones conflict (1991–2003)
Iraq War (2003–2011)
The same can be said of Afghanistan for the same above so we have had a varied series of campaigns and history of resentment that has built up in both country’s for generations,what surprised me were the amount of other country’s who have also fought in both country’s so it seems that for what ever reason Afghanistan is prime territory from the first to the present and will presumably be in the future.
First Anglo-Afghan War (1839–1842)
Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878–1881)
Third Anglo-Afghan War (1919)
War in Afghanistan (2001–present) – ISAF/NATO involvement

Geoff.

I think the question to ask, is WHY do we have to stick our noses into every conflict that has nothing to do with us?.
But in answer to the O.Ps question, Naff All.You just cannot change History, just hope for a better future.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

That’s the key phrase, isn’t it? You might take that view but many would take the contrary view. Many took the view that Germany’s invasion of Poland should not have justified our declaration of war…..( you are getting into your stride, gradually, aren’t you?;))

I think the question to ask, is WHY do we have to stick our noses into every conflict that has nothing to do with us?.
But in answer to the O.Ps question, Naff All.You just cannot change History, just hope for a better future.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Indeed and those that have have received a range of answers from “bring back Saddam” to ” the British and Americans saved us from hell”. Mind you there are still some in parts of Eastern Europe and Russia who would go back to the “bad/good ( insert whichever suits) old days”……..

Probably the best and only people to ask are those that live in these countries every day,preferably before and after the wars.

It’s sad that so many in the UK (and other places, but the topic here is the UK, so you’ll excuse me for pointing a finger) seem to see the world through “What’s in it for me” glasses.
It used to be nations and people did things because it was the right thing to do. Certainly, Britain had no need to go to war with Nazi Germany over Poland. Britain was a great country because of many such acts through the centuries (as well as a genuine, sincere belief that it was bringing civilization to the world through its colonies…as well as making a few quid).
Saddam was a very bad guy…gassed his own people. He admitted he had WMDs and the CIA/MI5 believed him. He was more afraid of Iran than the west so he thumbed his nose at the UN inspection resolutions.
The Taliban weren’t any better…talk about destabilizing a country. Remember the ancient Budhist statues destroyed.. or the girls that can’t go to school?
To say nothing of supporting organizations that have no qualms about blowing up innocent people on the tubes.
Sure, go ahead and say, “It’s not in the home counties, so let them live in the 11th century. As long as I have my fags and football, I’m allright, Jack”.

It’s easy to think of doing something unpleasant simply because it’s the “right thing to do” as very Victorian….and certainly it makes life easy for “comedians” spouting their opinions on television.
Rather than take an objective look at anything, it easier to impugn the motives of those who you disagree with.

The modern secular/welfare state has turned the people into a group of zombies who only want an easy life (and beer, sports and HDTV :)).
Anytime they’re confronted with something they disagree with and when the world becomes the least bit messy they concoct silly conspiracy theories…that lets them off the hook for not doing their share and letting other brave people do the dirty work.

Yes I read about that rather simplistic theory some while ago.