The brilliant military strategy of definite conditionality

jobloggss

if i were the taleban i would think that we were but then if i were the taleban i would have been thinking this for nine years

JSMill

More to the point if I were Iran I'd be over the moon

AY

One can beat Taliban with less casualties. Just use satellite/electronic intelligence, combat drones and long-range artillery.
In dangerous places like mines, radiation-contaminated, etc. - robots are working. Health and Safety of soldiers is highest prioity. In the end, if soldiers feel like sitting ducks, feel betrayed, - their morale is down, and the whole nation is in danger. Because soldiers are those, the only ones, standing between people of the West, and these barbaric hordes.

rippon

Melanie Phillips is assuming that a strategy for winning exists.

Even if such a strategy does exist, US-UK forces have had nearly a decade to implement it, something they have manifestly failed to do.

Either way, it has been established that the Allies cannot win the war.

Therefore, our departure was bound to be announced at some point; it may as well be now.

Oflife

Actually, thinking about it, surely it is better if a strategy (or lack of in public) is unclear? It was confusion and deception that helped the allies in WW2. (whether intended or not!) Sometimes too much organisation can be a hindrance. What's that expression..? "Life is what happens whilst you are making plans." So true...

Sam ARMSTRONG

We don't need to pretend we are Islamists to know which is the more confident side, us or them. It is obvious that all Islamists are convinced that the West is now feminised and unable to look after itself. And they're right.

Martin Paice

It is a NATO deployment. We do not have a choice about the date we withdraw.
Get up to speed.

Martin Paice

@AY
Never been a soldier have you?

alan stoddart

The human cost of the WW1 fell on the most public spirited rather than the skulking politicians and anti war activists....leaving behind a population overburdened with the 'Liberal' and those unwilling to fight for their nation, values and lifestyle....the sons and grandsons of which are now in charge....unprepared to take the real decision on whom to fight.

In ww11 the generals were keen to spare their men due to 1930s anti war propaganda...Major General Fuller stating many lacked ‘the brutality essential in war. whilst General Sir Alan Brooke lamented the shortage of real leaders due to ‘the cream of the manhood having been lost in the first world war.’

'Virtuous motives, trammelled by inertia and timidity, are no match for armed and resolute wickedness. Doom marches on.'

'We are in the presence of an attempt to establish a kind of tyranny of opinion, and if its reign could be perpetuated the effect might be profoundly injurious to the stability and security of this country.'

'...delight in smooth sounding platitudes, refusal to face unpleasant facts, desire for popularity and electoral success irrespective of the vital interests of the state, a genuine love of peace and pathetic belief that love can be its sole foundation, an obvious lack of intellectual vigour and a marked ignorance of europe and aversion from its problems...played its part in unleashing upon the world horrors and miseries which even so far as they have unfolded, are already beyond comparison in human experience.'

Dixon

Re Sam Armstronmg...in other words, we need a cleansing and maybe a Caliphate is just what is in order!

Thinking of all the fellow travellers of the Islamists on the secular left waking up (in a manner of speaking) to find themselves in a Sharia nightmare actually amuses me so much that I quite often hope it happens!

The most satisfying feeling in th world is summed up in the words "I told you so!"

Veracity

Nature abhors a vacuum and there were many complaints that Cameron was vague on policy before the elections . He must be overjoyed that he can now embrace all the way out policies of Clegg who never dreamed they could be seriously considered. Listen to what past British army generals are saying about this. It is true that there is modern intelligence to fight this battle in another way but all the simpering 'hearts and minds' brigade has meant the demise of hundreds of wonderful British young men trying to serve their country. Until the govrnment here and in the States recognises Islamism for the evil it is , that will go on.It is folly upon folly to think the Taliban should or could be talked to , as stupid as telling the Israelis to talk to Hizbollah and Hamas who are pledged to annhilate them and say so at every opportunity. When the Allies conquer the Taliban with their hearts and minds approach then only can they preach to Israel

elixelx

The Taleban have nothing but time, and they read it on CamBam's watch!

elixelx

rippon: do you think that jaw-jaw will do trick with ignorant brutes who put their women into shrouds and their men into graves? Who think that killing a rippon or a thousand rippons is a religious obligation?
The Catholic Monarchs didn't think so; it took 800 years of war-war to overcome what 20 years of jaw-jaw had wrought!
The Battle of Vienna, after 300 years of Arab encroachment into Europe, wasn't won by jaw-jaw, either, but by a line of soldiers who held against a huge cavalry charge. I wonder if the cannon fodder on either side stopped to ask themselves if colloquy were not a better way than spears and scimitars and guns and missiles!
Yes, rippon. I believe the Muslim onslaught upon Western values can, indeed should, be hammered into submission. Nothing says "Hey, quit it!" like a fission explosion!

TomTOm

Vietnamisation as a prelude to Rout

Daibhidh

Our military has been defeated not on the battlefield but back home politically. Its effectiveness has also been shackled by the weakening, feminising and destructive hand of political correctness. No such nonsense hinders the effectiveness of the potently masculine enemy.

GaryO

Put simply, we're fighting a wrong war in AfPak. Our enemy is fighting a war of death and destruction we're fighting one for reconciliation and construction.

If I was a Taliban, al Quaida, or any number of islamist supremacist organisation, I would be saying to myself: we threaten to kill them and they reward us with new roads, bridges, hydro electric power stations and free military goodies.

How insane a strategy is that for winning a war? If this is war, then bring it on!

Tom Brown

Clegg and Cameron have two problems to contend with in Af-Pak
1. It is militarily virtually impossible to hold Afghanistan against the wishes of the populace. Alexander the Great only managed a couple of years at enormous cost. The Soviets couldn't do it and neither could the British Raj. The locals will see us off as they have everyone else.
2, There is no public stomach for a protracted war in Afghanistan. Casualties may be dismissed as minor compared to WW1 and 2. However the public does not accept this or believe we are fighting a war for survival.

The west needs a united strategy that deals with Islamic radical terrorism and the states that support. A strategy that focuses on ensuring no nuclear weapons fall into the hands of terrorists. There seems little coherent strategy in protecting pro-Western interests in nuclear-armed Pakistan. Neither is the West addressing the imminent threat of a nuclear-Iran. Sending troops to blindly fight and die for muddled war aims makes increasingly less sense to public and militarists alike.

Carl

@AY - yes, I mean the Taliban are really going to launch an invasion aren't they?

William Hannam

Cameron's first paragraph refers to pulling some troops out next year. The second refers to the situation in five years time. The first is conditional, the second is not. This is absolutely clear. Can't people read?

Derek Pasquill

The problem is that neither the Yanks nor the Brits want to win.

They would prefer to build schools or knit yoghurt or summat.

By contrast the Afghans (not the Taleban) want to give the imperial running dogs of empire a bloody nose.

It is not difficult, therefore, to see which of the contestants has a greater chance of meeting their objective.

Let's face it, we're a democracy; we're going to debate our big strategic decisions like going to war in the House of Commons. Well, some of the time. But enough to flag up our thinking. What the Taleban think shouldn't be our prime driver, surely? It should be what we need to achieve and our options. The strategic defence review won't take long - the coalition has decided the answers already. If only they could express them clearly..

elixelx

carl, so you would say that 9/11 was just the Taleban playing defense?
Oh! wait! that was OBL! (may his bones be disinterred!) So,no connection then, nothing to do with the Talib!
Surely this is a mouse that roared, ONCE, and is now trapped, taken by the scruff of the neck, just waiting, expecting, deserving that hob-nailed boot to bear down to stamp out its verminous, poisonous life!

Tapestry

Being certain about future events is the requirement of politics, not of logical thought. on which basis is the Spectator trying to express an opinion? I'm not sure.

John.

There are two ways to win the Afghan war: (1) fence off the villages thus depriving the insurgents of food and supplies - as was done in the Boer War and in the Malayan Emergency, both of which ended in British victories (2) bury dead Muslim terrorists with pieces of pork - this put an immediate end to Muslim terrorism in the Phillipines at the turn of the 19th, beginning of the 20th century, when the Americans under General Pershing addressed the problem. But we prefer to go on wasting soldiers' lives to doing anything so politically incorrect.

Andrew

John.
July 22nd, 2010 2:18pm

"this put an immediate end to Muslim terrorism in the Phillipines at the turn of the 19th, beginning of the 20th century, when the Americans under General Pershing addressed the problem."

And remind me what the Americans were doing in the Phillipines at the time.

Rob Tonlin

In the defence of civilisation you have to be uncivilised in principle. War is fought to win ,to destroy the enemy and overcome all resistance.By its very nature it should sap the will of the enemy to continue. It has to be harsh and threaten the extinction of all who wish to harm us. There is no such thing as politically correct variations of war. Only after heart rending destruction of our enemies should we show the mercy
that is the sign of civilisation. That is the difference in Western values and their values....if our values are worth the blood of our finest young men we should make all who despise and threaten them pay dearly in their blood. To have namby pamby halfwits cosseted in luxury , insulated by status and position, threatened by no more than a bad hair day decide
how we are to prosecute war is the reason we will lose. Once the politicians have decided we will go to war let the professionals decide how to win it. Multi billion pound armies are being made a donkey's ass of by what are tribal warriors hiding behind civilians.....the west has lost its marbles and warrior statesmen who know the price we have to pay to keep wolves and jackals at bay.
Just look at what happened to the great empires before us who forgot the price of civilisation is always HIGH.

Lindsay

elixelx
July 22nd, 2010 7:15am

It is you, is it not, who showed a becoming sensitivity on the use of the term "final solution"? - You, who show such relish at the thought of dropping nuclear weapons. Are they precision bombs by some miracle - or are you highly selective about the civilian populations that deserve to live?

Mark

I think we should leave afghanistan immediately. Its not our war and the terrorist threat to our country is home grown, its not from deepest darkest afghanistan. How many Brit soldiers have been killed from our so called allies in the afghan police/army? Pull out and leave them to it.

Drakken

Rob Tolin
I could not have said that better myself, especially being a former Marine myself.I do feel for the troops who have bad guys to the front of them and lawyers to the rear, the problem lies with having lawyers instead warriors making the the rules. We can win but unfortunatly the public would have a a case of the vapors and the human rights activists would go completely bonkers over us hurting the enemy.

Yuk Yuk

@ Andrew "remind me what the Americans were doing in the Phillipines at the time."

Spring Break?

John.

Andrew: What the Americans were doing there at the time was putting an end, in a very bullying way, to the last vestiges of the Spanish Empire - 1898 is indelibly etched upon the Spanish historical memory as the year of the loss of Cuba and the Phillipines. Having taken over these countries the US then set about imposing order and installing efficient administrations, which, in the case of the Phillipines, involved dealing with Muslim terrorism in the southern islands - then as now. The pork stopped it, not the rifles!

Andrew

John.
July 24th, 2010 9:31am
"Andrew: What the Americans were doing there at the time was putting an end, in a very bullying way, to the last vestiges of the Spanish Empire" So it was in the noble cause of anti-imperialism! "In a very bullying way"!

"Having taken over these countries the US then set about imposing order and installing efficient administrations, which, in the case of the Phillipines, involved dealing with Muslim terrorism in the southern islands" "Imposing order"! "Installing efficient administrations"! (For the good of the indigenous population , you understand.) "Dealing with Muslim terrorists"!

As fine an example of doublespeak as to be found in any victor's history!

I am sure the indigenous population was overjoyed to throw off the yoke of imperialism and eternally grateful to America for imposing order.

John.

Andrew: To some extent I agree with you. however the locals probably were genuinely glad to be rid of the terrorism. And they have abandoned Spanish for English - if that signifies anything.

Andrew

John.
July 24th, 2010 1:30pm
Read Mark Twain on the subject of the Phillipines. Read Brigadier General Smedley D. Butler on the function of the Marines. They are two of the select few who will explain how Manifest Destiny works in reality. I think people tend to learn the language of power - for most of the world English and then American English.

Drakken

Well Andrew you just can't argue wit success. Unfortunately the muslims are doing the same thing again in southern PI, and drastic action is going to be required to put the savages in their place.

AY

Carl:

You try to deceive by that half-baked irony of "Taliban invasion", but it's too transparent.

It's already not a first year of propaganda divas singing that Al-Qaida doesn't exist, and if it does it's marginal, and even if it's essential, it only portects innocent indigenous people from Western imperialism.

However, these righteous tenors forget to mention, that by "Western imperialism" they mean any deviation from Sharia as interpreted by their fellow practitioners in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sudan, Iran, Yemen and what else might be a happy corner of the Greater Mordor.

From a viewpoint of free Westerner everyhting is more than clear - the barbarian monsters with totalitarian ambitions, who enslave their women, kill schoolteachers for educating girls, and provide cover for terrorist muss-murderers - they only desreve to be beseiged and hit, as "hosti humani generis".

There are already more than 1000 mosques in the UK, and what is told there is defined by the character and advance of Sharia in the greater context. There is no question that it is retrograde and inhumane, but with every success anywhere, it becomes more aggressive, intolerant, and expansionist here in the UK; - and that's to the question of "invasion". So yes they must be stopped, first of all in places where they can advance.

Rob Tonlin

Drakken ,
I totally agree with your insight.
The "Public" will have more than vapours when the 5th column here starts ramping up its terrorism.
We are in for decades of trouble Europe wide,of course the gloves wont come off till our PC politicians start wetting themselves as they are targeted....we will see what happens when they need conscripts to do their dirty work and the kids here tell them to get stuffed and die themselves first. We have a generation of soft people who only perceive a warriors life on Xbox...god help us we have gone soft in mind and spirit.
One can only hope that the will to survive is still deep within.
It is despairing to see our leaders grovel and pander to our Enemies.
RT

Andrew

"Well Andrew you just can't argue wit success"

- more especially when it comes in the form of rapacious and murderous assault.

Gary

The revealed War Logs make for fascinating reading:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/series/afghanistan-the-war-logs

Further proof the Pentagon is incompetent. Sun Tzu says that prolonged warfare means defeat, but for the Pentagon, it means more money for their greedy, parasitic staff.

Drakken

PSSSST Andrew I'll let you in a on a little secret, it's called warfare. See I made it so simple and easy that a simplton like you can get it.
Rob Tonlin I do a agree with you, but when push comes to shove, and it will, I have to believe that even the most lazy of the couch potatos will have to do something for they will be forced by circumstance and lo and behold the terrible repercusions will come bursting through the gates.

Andrew

Drakken
July 26th, 2010 12:16am
Something the US and its allies struggle with as much as anyone - it is only "war" under very specific conditions - otherwise it is terrorism or aggression - both of which practised by the US as much as anyone - and neither of which legal or morally neutral or acceptable.

Drakken

Andrew
I really have to ask. What color is the sky in your little world? Please spare me the specious moral equivilance arguements of how warfare should be conducted. To state that we in the US conduct terrorism really takes the cake. If you must know I am a huge fan of the total war concept versus the limited warfare ideal. I am a huge fan of the Gen. William T Sherman, how to coduct warfare plan. Yes I know Andrew, anything more than throwing marshmellows and rainbows at the enemy constitutes a warcrime to you, pathetic.

Andrew

Drakken
July 26th, 2010 6:58pm
I believe it was you complained about a comment on an earlier thread that omitted to express the required amount of outrage at the bombing of US marines in Beirut (after the US had bombarded the city killing civilians, and the President of blessed memory had announced the marines were there to shore up the Phalangist government).

Is the total war you relish allowed only to the forces of "freedom and democracy" (as defined by us)? If attempted by anyone the forces of "freedom and democracy" stipulate is not a force of freedom and democracy, then it is terrorism. Is that how it works? If they do it, it's savage barbarism. If we do it, it is the noble fight against the forces of darkness, even when, as in the Phillipines and elsewhere, the good fight was for purposes of pillage and of exploitation of the lesser races. I am sure there are many in the southern states who still have a soft spot for Sherman and his scorched civilian tactics.