Camp Bastion is handed over. Was it all worth it?

Gaz J

Gaz J

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,294
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
No
Now that Camp Bastion is about to be handed over the Afghans and British troops brought home, apart from some advisors, was the loss of 453 service personnel in the last 13 years worth it. Is Afghanistan a safer place for its people and for the rest of the world? Will the Afghan army be able to control the Taliban or will we see them gradually gain control of the country again.

Will military intervention in these countries ever safeguard our shores or would the effort be better expended close to home.

Let's hope the sacrifice those brave soldiers made has left a permanent positive legacy.
 
Last edited:
Personally I was never for either invasion, but I guess that discussion has been done enough. So on a more objective level was it worth it? I suppose it depends on whether the original objective of going there was met. I'm not sure what the objective was so had to say. In terms of is it safer, I guess only the local population could really tell you from a day to day living perspective compared to how it was before.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of going in, you'd certainly hope some things had changed for the better. I guess we'll only truly find out in 5-10 years.
 
This will probably turn into a very argumentative thread, people from both sides will have strong views. Whatever those views are, I hope that people remember the troops that we sent out there did a damned good job in difficult circumstances.Many did not come back,some of those that did so were badly damaged.Those people did their job very well and deserve a bit of respect,whether you agree with the reasons why they were there or not.
 
It will go back to where it was in a than a year or two at most IMO. A total waste of time , but more importantly, a total waste of lives and a lasting legacy for those in the forces unfortunate to have been wounded - some terribly.
 
I hope it doesn't turn into a for or against the military intervention. That's had it's day. We decided to send in military personnel and now we are bringing them home.

Have updated the original.
 
won't know for a few years wither or not it was worth it. ultimately it what the afghan people think not us.
 
Al1944 said:
It will go back to where it was in a than a year or two at most IMO. A total waste of time , but more importantly, a total waste of lives and a lasting legacy for those in the forces unfortunate to have been wounded - some terribly.
Click to expand...

I think you are correct. It may collapse sooner. Probably depend on how long the Americans (who have lost many more fine young people than the UK) hang around. The allies casualties have been grossly unacceptable IMHO. Al Q has merely relocated and the Taliban will be back (probably content to stand off for now and let us leave). Heroin production continues unabated. Afghan casualties (civil and mil) are increasing and they have a desertion problem.

Interesting article here:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-29761100
 
Gaz J said:
I hope it doesn't turn into a for or against the military intervention. That's had it's day. We decided to send in military personnel and now we are bringing them home.

Have updated the original.
Click to expand...

It is essential to examine that, Gary, and reach a conclusion. Simply to accept that our folks are now coming home leaves open the route to sending them into another foreign adventure where more get killed and maimed for what ?
 
All I know is I saw two many of boys & girls past through our little towns high street, when people ask where are you from I say a town known for all the right reasons but wrong reasons.
 
arclight said:
It is essential to examine that, Gary, and reach a conclusion. Simply to accept that our folks are now coming home leaves open the route to sending them into another foreign adventure where more get killed and maimed for what ?
Click to expand...
Exactly this.


If we fail to recognise and learn from our mistakes, then we will keep on making mistakes.
Anyone who thinks that our mission (whatever that was supposed to be) inside Afghanistan was a success, should watch this sobering edition of Panorama from last week.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04mm88n/panorama-inside-the-taliban

There are schools inside Afghanistan, funded by our financial aid, which are educating young people - not boys and girls, just boys. These are not ordinary schools, with ordinary teachers, teaching ordinary subjects, they are Madrassas - religious schools, and they are brainwashing young boys to follow a particular, extremist, fundamentalist form of Islam - Wahhabism.
Last week, there was also news from the Taliban, that they hope to ally themselves to ISIL in Iraq/Syria in order to create a Caliphate.
Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria (not to mention Libya, Yemen and Egypt) - places where we have invaded/intervened in the last twelve years.
 
andy700 said:
Exactly this.


If we fail to recognise and learn from our mistakes, then we will keep on making mistakes.
Anyone who thinks that our mission (whatever that was supposed to be) inside Afghanistan was a success, should watch this sobering edition of Panorama from last week.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04mm88n/panorama-inside-the-taliban

There are schools inside Afghanistan, funded by our financial aid, which are educating young people - not boys and girls, just boys. These are not ordinary schools, with ordinary teachers, teaching ordinary subjects, they are Madrassas - religious schools, and they are brainwashing young boys to follow a particular, extremist, fundamentalist form of Islam - Wahhabism.
Last week, there was also news from the Taliban, that they hope to ally themselves to ISIL in Iraq/Syria in order to create a Caliphate.
Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria (not to mention Libya, Yemen and Egypt) - places where we have invaded/intervened in the last twelve years.
Click to expand...

It is actually very shocking to learn how often the UK has been involved in foreign fighting. Back in the summer on the run up to the 100th anniversary of the start of WW1 I heard, on the radio, a list of all the conflicts in which the UK has been involved since 1914. There has not been a single year since 1914 when we have not been fighting somewhere.
 
Last edited:
arclight said:
It is essential to examine that, Gary, and reach a conclusion. Simply to accept that our folks are now coming home leaves open the route to sending them into another foreign adventure where more get killed and maimed for what ?
Click to expand...

But there is no finite conclusion sadly. It's an opinion. For every reason not to go to war someone somewhere will find a reason to go. Over the years what the armed forces in Afghanistan have been fighting for and when to judge it a success seem to have become blurred.

I really hope that these men and women who are prepared to lay down their lives for this country don't find themselves in another unwinable military situation somewhere else.

I sincerely hope that the British public would not stand for another military deployment on dubious information and reasoning and I hope it never comes to that.

I would rather more effort and money was put into stopping these people entering the country or if they leave to take up arms against the UK making sure they never come back in. And cobblers to their human rights.
 
There has Doug, 1969.

Was it worth it?
Depends on what you define as the point.
As I understand it, it was to debilitate Al Q. That seems to have worked up to a point. There hasn't been a rash of attacks on the West, apart from the odd low level self organised effort. So, in that respect it has worked. Sadly, the job of the forces is to defend the Civilian population of the UK, and in doing that they often get killed. It doesn't make their sacrifice any less important, in fact it is the greatest sacrifice anyone could give.

From the Afghan point of view, yep, it was a waste of time. The Country will go under whoever has the most toys, be that the Taliban or the current Government or some other group. Either way it isn't going to be helpful to most Afghans.

But no one has yet been able to sort that Country out to the point where it can Govern for all, and that to be sustained.
 
was it worth it NO

bush should have nuked the *inappropriate phrase removed* right after 9/11 ,job done and cheaply to .

Edited by Staff
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It never is 'worth it'. We are a belligerent country, almost always at war with someone, somewhere.

The only solace here is that the figure is not much greater than 453.
 
I have to say IMHO NO.. i do not think it was worth it.. The lives we lost the people that were so badly hurt and injured and their families. for what ??? A country that will be back to the way it was. Just as Iraq did. As for Bush and Blair well that is another debate.
 
andy700 said:
Anyone who thinks that our mission (whatever that was supposed to be) inside Afghanistan was a success, should watch this sobering edition of Panorama from last week.

.
Click to expand...

But the reason the mission wasnt a success was down to the gutess politicians not giving the boys on the ground a propper war fighting agenda (and ROE) and pulling out too soon. As ever we've managed to win the war but lose the peace that followed.

If we'd gone heavy originally, with a clear mission and propper support and with a commitment to stay until the tallitubbies were properly dealt with , it could have been a success. Iraq is more of the same , had we not pulled out too early for political reasons we wouldnt be having to go back and deal with ISIL.

Politicians are terrified of casualties and thus tend to pull out as soon as it looks a bit sticky - in my experience soliders arent half as worried by casualty figures per se, as they are by them being pointless because some halfwit politico has sent them into battle with no clear end in mind and one hand tied behind their back

UKSF know how to win an insurgency - look at Malaya or Oman , you have to win the hearts and minds of the people on the ground and seperate the terrorists from their popular support. Part of that means being sufficiently foreceful that you can protect people who support you, so that the populace know its safe to support you. US on the other hand demonstrated perfectly how to f*** it up in the 70s in Vietnam ... and unfortunately we've been following the vietnam model in the war on terror
 
Last edited by a moderator:
the black fox said:
was it worth it NO

bush should have nuked the *removed deleted quote* right after 9/11 ,job done and cheaply to .
Click to expand...


So, you think that a whole country should be nuked - men, women, children - because terrorists from ANOTHER country take refuge there.

You are braindead.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
andy700 said:
So, you think that a whole country should be nuked - men, women, children - because terrorists from ANOTHER country take refuge there.

You are braindead.

I also wonder if you are American, because it is common to hear them use the racist term - "rag heads" to describe any brown skinned person who wears a turban.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if black fox is 'joking', but the worrying thing, other than the language used, is I've seen this mentioned about just killing people many times when this topic comes up. The value of a british soldier's life vs that of civilians in that country is shocking at times in it's difference.
 
Program on Afghanistan was just starting now on BBC2.
 
IMHO no its wasn't worth in, I was lucky I was out well before this one kicked off, but I do know some lads who have been out there,

I just hope the Politicians give the troops a very long rest, before they send them of again before they are sent to another war

there has been only one year - 1968 - when a soldier of the Crown has not been killed while on active service somewhere in the world.
 
akr said:
Program on Afghanistan was just starting now on BBC2.
Click to expand...

Well that was depressing. It's called the Afghanistan - Lion's last roar? Will no doubt be on Iplayer for those that missed it. There will be a part 2.
 
simon ess said:
Just watched it.

SNAFU

Actually, I can't find words to express my anger at the political and military leadership.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more. Of course I'm sure there is another side to the story as always, and selective quotations used, but it really makes you mad the decisions and reasons (or lack of) for areas as serious as this.
 
Gaz J said:
.

I really hope that these men and women who are prepared to lay down their lives for this country don't find themselves in another unwinable military situation somewhere else.
Click to expand...

the sad thing is it should have been winnable ( and techincally it was - we helped the northern aliance beat the taliban and pushed them out of power... it was just that having done that we werent clear on what we were trying to do next... iraq was the same , we kicked sadams armys ass and forced him out of power , we also kicked the madhi army's ass and stopped them taking over... but we didnt have a clear idea on what to do next.

I
 
The good news, as I understand it, is that politicians have said that British troops will NEVER return. BBC radio.
 
The good news, as I understand it, is that politicians have said that British troops will NEVER return. BBC radio.
Click to expand...

They should have muttered the words "For a while" under their breath!

HMG wont be resting troops for very long, next stop NATO v ISIL.

As for the program last night, lots of soundbites from people who I wouldn't trust, and a big well done to some former Senior Army Officers for growing some and saying how badly HMG let them down. The sad thing is that both their comments and the lessons will be ignored.
 
Bernie174 said:
There has Doug, 1969.

Was it worth it?
Depends on what you define as the point.
As I understand it, it was to debilitate Al Q. That seems to have worked up to a point. There hasn't been a rash of attacks on the West, apart from the odd low level self organised effort. So, in that respect it has worked. Sadly, the job of the forces is to defend the Civilian population of the UK, and in doing that they often get killed. It doesn't make their sacrifice any less important, in fact it is the greatest sacrifice anyone could give.

From the Afghan point of view, yep, it was a waste of time. The Country will go under whoever has the most toys, be that the Taliban or the current Government or some other group. Either way it isn't going to be helpful to most Afghans.

But no one has yet been able to sort that Country out to the point where it can Govern for all, and that to be sustained.
Click to expand...

The Troubles (Ireland), Bernie 1968 - 98.

You are right about Afghanistan. Probably impossible to stabilise that country. Afghan society (if it can be so termed) is fragmented and polarised with different ethnic groups engaged in multiple internal struggles which, from time to time, gain support of external powers. Eventually the external powers leave when they realise it was a mistake to get involved, but they simply get replaced by others destined to repeat the mistakes.
 
I was listening to some mothers on the radio who had lost sons over there.

It's a pity that the self serving politicians who sent them there didn't have a fraction of the courage and integrity that those women displayed in talking about their sons.
 
Gaz J said:
I was listening to some mothers on the radio who had lost sons over there.

It's a pity that the self serving politicians who sent them there didn't have a fraction of the courage and integrity that those women displayed in talking about their sons.
Click to expand...

Politicians children go there too. I mean Prince Harry even went there so I don't think you can say they lack courage or integrity when they are making big decisions like that. It took courage and integrity to make a stand.
 
was it worth it - my opinion no.

however everyone who signs up to join the armed forces, takes the Queen's shilling and should realise the potential consequences. That goes for TA etc / reservists as well. Still doesn't make it worth it.

Afghan seems to have a pretty good "home record"... USSR 79 etc... Geneva convention to somewhere lawless is not worth the paper it is written on.

Same old though, politics and religion, causing most grief around the world.
 
Apart from the obvious cost in human life, the cost to the UK in money now stands at £37bn and counting. Money is still flowing to very corrupt people over there. I reckon that sort of money could have made this country about as safe as it is possible to be against terrorism without the loss of any services personnel.
 
You can't just pull up the drawbridge and think you're safe. The money spent will be a drop in the ocean compared to what the world would have to deal with if we let these Islamic jihadists gain and retain power or establish and harbour terrorist training camps.
 
Laudrup said:
You can't just pull up the drawbridge and think you're safe. The money spent will be a drop in the ocean compared to what the world would have to deal with if we let these Islamic jihadists gain and retain power or establish and harbour terrorist training camps.
Click to expand...

But the point is that we have spent the money and the problem groups have not remotely been eliminated. That makes it a waste. They have just hopped over the border plus sprung up in a number of other places. Spending on checking who comes and goes from the UK/ monitoring those here who could be a threat etc. would seem to achieve better value without 453 personnel being dead and 2000 plus maimed and wounded.
 
13 years and no permanent solution / remedy / stability.
Total waste imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top