Lessons will be learned

arclight

arclight

Oooh that burglar's a cutie
Suspended / Banned
Messages
11,633
Name
Doug
Edit My Images
Yes
Dreadfull and sickening news today of 3 soldiers killed in Afghanistan.

Prime Minister David Cameron said: "This tragic incident again demonstrates the very real risks that our brave soldiers face every day. We will do everything possible to find out how this happened, and learn any lessons for the future."

I get absolutely cheesed off when I hear people in power trot out the "lessons will be learned" gambit every time things go awry. Do they think we don't notice that is their first reaction to every catastrophe. They all seem to be incapable or unwilling of learning lessons from anything.
 
That was said a few years ago, how long does it take to learn that we should get out troops home?
 
I have to say this really annoys me - it's almost akin to 'friendly fire'..........and unfortunately it isn't the first time.

Just who is 'learning' the lessons Cameron :bang:
 
Please don't get me started on this subject, dreading the names being released.
The worst of it is the lessons as we know are not being learnt.. how many have been injured? Grrrrr send their family out there see how they cope the way the military families cope. let alone the guys on the ground.. sodding idiots. (sorry)
 
Last edited:
I say we should pull them all out and let them get on with it.
 
My hearts go out to them, as said on here, there is about 9 seriously injured for every one killed (those aren't based on official figures, but what I have seen with my own eyes)
 
I know its an unpopular viewpoint but I dont agree with the 'bring them home' contingent.

I , and a number of my freinds in uniform i might add, feel that if we leave now with the job incomplete then those who have died (or been wounded) so far have been for nothing. Imo stay , get the job done properly , then bring the troops home, don't run scared because we have taken casualties - thats what a war entails and the soilders knew that going in.

The lessons we do need cameron et al to learn are

a) They are fighting a war so give them a war fighting rules of engagement - they can't be expected to fight effectively with one hand tied behind their back

and

b) give them the kit and resources they need to do the job - e.g enough body armour to go round (preferably body armour that actually works), guns that don't jam in desert conditions, sufficient air support, and enough men to do the job without being short handed.
 
samems said:
I say we should pull them all out and let them get on with it.
Click to expand...

That, of course, will eventually happen - after needless lives have been lost

The whole adventure was a fool's errand from day one.

Did someome not, in respect of the troops, say of WW1 "Lions led by donkeys".
Not much has changed.
 
you carnt learn lessons from people that fight with no rules
they will always find a way to get you when your least expecting it
 
Read in the newspaper we have to follow new procedures,do not fire unless fired upon.
This from the American top brass ,as they are killing to many civilians.
Now I know this is a catch 22 situation, but how do you return fire when you are dead or wounded.:shrug:
 
towershot said:
Read in the newspaper we have to follow new procedures,do not fire unless fired upon.
This from the American top brass ,as they are killing to many civilians.
Now I know this is a catch 22 situation, but how do you return fire when you are dead or wounded.:shrug:
Click to expand...

That is not strictly true, I won't go into rules of engagement on here, but if you need to you can.
 
big soft moose said:
The lessons we do need cameron et al to learn are

a) They are fighting a war so give them a war fighting rules of engagement - they can't be expected to fight effectively with one hand tied behind their back

and

b) give them the kit and resources they need to do the job - e.g enough body armour to go round (preferably body armour that actually works), guns that don't jam in desert conditions, sufficient air support, and enough men to do the job without being short handed.
Click to expand...

Rules of engagement are out there, and are good. Trouble is its not about find the enemy and kill them, the battlefield is complex, rebuilding, old phrase but hearts and minds.

b) The kit that is issued is brilliant, best body armour currently on the ground, rifles are good and work in anger, air support is more than good, both rotary and fast jets.
Boots on ground, ok I agree we need more.
 
andyscott said:
My hearts go out to them, as said on here, there is about 9 seriously injured for every one killed (those aren't based on official figures, but what I have seen with my own eyes)
Click to expand...

The VSI/NOTCAS ratio is running at 1:14 according to today's figures.
 
That's the total since 2006, so there are going to be annual, and more importantly seasonal, fluctuations.

The worst figure is the mortality to deployment ratio of 1.2%, which is huge in relative terms.
 
Forbiddenbiker said:
The only lesson we shold be noticeing is why is it that our politicians dont seem to have any insentive to get our lads out? :gag:
Click to expand...

Yes, and another lesson that none of them have learned is that it is infinitely easier to get into trouble than it is to get out of it.
 
big soft moose said:
I know its an unpopular viewpoint but I dont agree with the 'bring them home' contingent.

I , and a number of my freinds in uniform i might add, feel that if we leave now with the job incomplete then those who have died (or been wounded) so far have been for nothing. Imo stay , get the job done properly , then bring the troops home, don't run scared because we have taken casualties - thats what a war entails and the soilders knew that going in.

The lessons we do need cameron et al to learn are

a) They are fighting a war so give them a war fighting rules of engagement - they can't be expected to fight effectively with one hand tied behind their back

and

b) give them the kit and resources they need to do the job - e.g enough body armour to go round (preferably body armour that actually works), guns that don't jam in desert conditions, sufficient air support, and enough men to do the job without being short handed.
Click to expand...
My father served in that region between 1926 - 1931, back then the locals would sacrifice their lives for the chance of killing a British soldier, or getting hold of his Lee Enfield. On one occasion someone walked almost right up to my dad and threw a home made grenade at him, knowing that my father would shoot him before the grenade exploded, which fortunately it didn't. Another one charged at him with a knife, again knowing that even if he lived long enough to reach my father, he would be shot by other soldiers. Eventually, we realised that the war couldn't be won and brought those of our lads who survived home.

Many years later, the Russians invaded and thought that they could run the country. They found out that despite their numbers, technology and weapons, they were losing because the locals were unbeatable, and left.

And now we're back once again, we have still learned nothing from history, and our people are again dying in a war that they can never win. My view is that it's their country, their problem and their solution, not ours.
 
Garry Edwards said:
My father served in that region between 1926 - 1931, back then the locals would sacrifice their lives for the chance of killing a British soldier, or getting hold of his Lee Enfield. On one occasion someone walked almost right up to my dad and threw a home made grenade at him, knowing that my father would shoot him before the grenade exploded, which fortunately it didn't. Another one charged at him with a knife, again knowing that even if he lived long enough to reach my father, he would be shot by other soldiers. Eventually, we realized that the war couldn't be won and brought those of our lads who survived home.

Many years later, the Russians invaded and thought that they could run the country. They found out that despite their numbers, technology and weapons, they were losing because the locals were unbeatable, and left.

And now we're back once again, we have still learned nothing from history, and our people are again dying in a war that they can never win. My view is that it's their country, their problem and their solution, not ours.
Click to expand...

W.H.S
^^^^
You can never win against a guerrilla army.You just don't know the enemy.
If the Russians with terror tactics cannot beat them ,why in hell did the Yanks think they could,
Did Viet Nam not teach them anything.
 
The reason we're their is to take the heroin off the taliban, just like the Russians tried too, ...tis very proffitabel dont you know... like oil or derivative markets, the next most profitable job is theft (banks again ) murder (banks again) and drugs...( banks again lol)

And I aint joking neither, the lives of our soldiers are just another commodity to get what is necessary to feed that out of control financial monster.

Do the maths, how much do young people spend on drugs? ... How large an amount of their annual wages is that? 20%, 30% huge right!? ..well big enough to consider a key financial asset ..illegal or not, its worth a fortune to someone

..so who is that someone going to be?

;)
 
Last edited:
Garry Edwards said:
And now we're back once again, we have still learned nothing from history, and our people are again dying in a war that they can never win. My view is that it's their country, their problem and their solution, not ours.
Click to expand...

We have learned loads and still do, thats how we are beating the insurgents. The situation is better, lives are being changed and bettered, and the majority of the locals has seen huge benefits of us being there.

It is our problem as the country previously harboured terrorists and funded the activites. This is a global problem.

FWIW GIROA asked us to be there, we are not an invading force, we can be asked to leave at any point and would.
 
Forbiddenbiker said:
The reason we're their is to take the heroin off the taliban, just like the Russians tried too, ...tis very proffitabel dont you know... like oil or derivative markets, the next most profitable job is theft (banks again ) murder (banks again) and drugs...( banks again lol)

And I aint joking neither, the lives of our soldiers are just another commodity to get what is necessary to feed that out of control financial monster.

Do the maths, how much do young people spend on drugs? ... How large an amount of their annual wages is that? 20%, 30% huge right!? ..well big enough to consider a key financial asset ..illegal or not, its worth a fortune to someone

..so who is that someone going to be?

;)
Click to expand...
As I understand it, the Taliban were 100% against drugs and executed anyone growing or in possession of - until the Americans invaded them, so I'm not sure that your argument holds much water

We have learned loads and still do, thats how we are beating the insurgents. The situation is better, lives are being changed and bettered, and the majority of the locals has seen huge benefits of us being there.

It is our problem as the country previously harboured terrorists and funded the activites. This is a global problem.
FWIW GIROA asked us to be there, we are not an invading force, we can be asked to leave at any point and would.
Click to expand...
They may have done, but do the insurgents recognise the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan? And anyway, surely one man's insurgent is another man's freedom fighter?
 
Forbiddenbiker said:
Yeah people like Blair told us that dint they, and we can trust them right? But since the Americans invaded heroin production is up from like a few hundred tons a year to several thousand. ..where has the opium smashing gone too now?
Click to expand...

I disagree, factories etc are being broken, 90% of the worlds heroin comes from southern Afghanistan, that's a hell of a lot to smash ;)
 
Garry Edwards said:
As I understand it, the Taliban were 100% against drugs and executed anyone growing or in possession of - until the Americans invaded them, so I'm not sure that your argument holds much water
Click to expand...

Indeed but the Taliban of old is not what we here in the press as Taliban, in fact most locals are offended by calling insurgents Taliban.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top