archie159

For most of our troops, especially the younger ones, the last thing they want is to be brought home. Anyone who has joined in the past 5-10 years has done so knowing they would go on lots of overseas operations, and did so to take part and enjoy the adrenaline. And the senior generals are keen to keep the military on ops as it keeps the budget topped up. It is generally just the middle ranks, with children at home and too many overseas tours behind them, who are less enthusiastic.

scot47

They should not be there. I do not blame them, but the politicians who cannot resist foreign intervention - which never achieves the war aims.

scrubbedexpat141

If you're talking about Mali, they aren't really. Just a few hundred supportin logistics for the Frenchies (apparently)

Millhouse

how/ what did they do exactly?

From what I can tell we have achieved nothing - listen to all the bullshit around the accelerated withdrawal. When the military (closely followed by the donor aid) leaves you will have a lot of very poor and upset Afghans with nothing to do. All those kids born into war - this is just the beginning, my friend.

scot47

I was usingv irony by saying the opposite of what most of see as obvious. Intervention in Afghanistan has not been a success. From Day One no one seemed to have defined the War Aims. If you don't know what you want to do, how will you know when you have won ?

Norm_uk

The number one complaint I have heard from a senior Army officer I know who was out there along with was that the Politicians wouldn't let them do their job. The parameters kept changing every few months. Our boys are so much better trained and equipped than the enemy and we could achieve total domination of the place if we had the political will...which we don't. The last war we entered with aim of decisively pummelling the enemy was world war 2. Since then we settle for half victories and apologies. I don't know of any power in history that lasted long with that mentality.

And the reality on the ground is the places we are going to have people who see anything other than brutal pummelling as weakness.

N.

Norm_uk

Shared defence, closer trade and co-operation are the way forward. I think we like our irregular shaped veg though

The notion that invasions had major impact genetically on the British is widely discredited by the way. The Saxons, who arguably made England may have numbered less than 25,000 people in a time where the population numbered several million - in other worlds around 1% of the population (current immigration stands at something like 10%).(http://news.nationalgeographic.co.uk...ishgene_2.html) It doesn't take a lot of people to completely change a culture, legal system and language. When you are aware of this you tend to get more fidgety about things like immigration with proper assimilation.

That and the fact that being invaded in the past doesn't mean we have to capitulate to further invasion. We've been invaded a lot less than most other nations. Europe is comprised of many nations and peoples who have the right to manage their own affairs, make their own laws and control their own borders. Until the EU makes that a priority above the needs of big, greedy companies and unelected officials I will stand against it.

N.