Taliban attack UK troops four times a day
British troops in southern Afghanistan came under Taliban fire 1279 times in the 11 months to the end of August - an average of four attacks a day - The Herald has learned.
The level of violence exceeded that of any conflict since the Korean War in the early 1950s and is in marked contrast to the average 15 major incidents a month - three a week - logged against UK forces during 38 years of counter-insurgency in Northern Ireland.
A total of 34 soldiers died in Helmand and Kandahar provinces during the period for which figures are available, with eight further deaths since then. Overall, 82 British service personnel have been killed there since 2001.
A further 245 have been wounded in action since last year, including 68 with life-threatening injuries.
The Royal Anglians, who returned to the UK last week after six months as a spearhead battalion in Helmand, suffered nine dead and 114 wounded and fired almost 400,000 bullets during their tour of duty.
Most of the Taliban firepower was aimed at fewer than 1500 men acting as the forward battlegroup contingents in Sangin, Kajaki and Gereshk. More than 500 incidents took place during the winter "ceasefire" months when Afghans traditionally abandon military activity because of the weather.
British soldiers have fired an estimated two million rounds of rifle and machine-gun ammunition and killed more than 1000 of their opponents since 2006.
A Parachute Regiment source said: "The Taliban are not well-trained and they tend to do things that get them killed. But they're undoubtedly courageous and they have a natural instinct for using the ground to their advantage."
Brigadier Andrew Mackay, one of Scotland's most experienced infantry officers, yesterday took command of the Helmand task force along with the 50-strong staff of the Edinburgh-based 52nd Infantry Brigade
In Afghanistan yesterday, gunmen armed with machine-guns opened fire on people praying at a mosque in Wardak province, killing two and wounding 12 others.
And a German engineer and four Afghans taken hostage in July were freed yesterday in exchange for five imprisoned criminals.
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Graham, Glasgow on 12:18am Thu 11 Oct 07
Thats what the religious idiots do. Brainwashed from cradle to grave.[bold]bold[/bold] They have to be confronted. Support our soldiers.
Thats what the religious idiots do. Brainwashed from cradle to grave. They have to be confronted. Support our soldiers.
Posted by: Helen, Oxnard CA us of a on 2:28am Thu 11 Oct 07
[quote]A total of 34 soldiers died, fired an estimated two million rounds of rifle and machine-gun ammunition and killed more than 1000 of their opponents since 2006, 245 have been wounded, nine dead and 114 wounded and fired almost 400,000 bullets, under Taliban fire 1279 times in the 11 months to the end of August - an average of four attacks a day[/quote]
Keep counting!
A total of 34 soldiers died, fired an estimated two million rounds of rifle and machine-gun ammunition and killed more than 1000 of their opponents since 2006, 245 have been wounded, nine dead and 114 wounded and fired almost 400,000 bullets, under Taliban fire 1279 times in the 11 months to the end of August - an average of four attacks a day
Keep counting!
Posted by: Yok Finney, Ross-shire on 6:30am Thu 11 Oct 07
When you invade and occupy a country, people will fight back. They want us out. It's their country.
When you invade and occupy a country, people will fight back. They want us out. It's their country.
Posted by: donald, glasgow on 7:07am Thu 11 Oct 07
and twice on Sundays
Posted by: IJ on 9:17am Thu 11 Oct 07
I wonder whether it was the United Nations or the Afghan government who decided to bar neighbouring states from helping to bring order to Afghanistan. This decision obviously costs the lives of NATO troops.
The CSTO (central Asian) military alliance have been offering to help since 2004. Moreover it was suggested in the weekend news that the Afghan government, which reportedly includes many drug lords, does not want order.
I wonder whether it was the United Nations or the Afghan government who decided to bar neighbouring states from helping to bring order to Afghanistan. This decision obviously costs the lives of NATO troops.
The CSTO (central Asian) military alliance have been offering to help since 2004. Moreover it was suggested in the weekend news that the Afghan government, which reportedly includes many drug lords, does not want order.
Posted by: Bikerbabe, in the thick mist ?ru on 9:29am Thu 11 Oct 07
[quote]A total of 34 soldiers died, fired an estimated two million rounds of rifle and machine-gun ammunition and killed more than 1000 of their opponents since 2006, 245 have been wounded, nine dead and 114 wounded and fired almost 400,000 bullets, under Taliban fire 1279 times in the 11 months to the end of August - an average of four attacks a day[/quote]
I like being reminded of what's happening in Afghanistan, therefore the need to quote Hele's quote.
A total of 34 soldiers died, fired an estimated two million rounds of rifle and machine-gun ammunition and killed more than 1000 of their opponents since 2006, 245 have been wounded, nine dead and 114 wounded and fired almost 400,000 bullets, under Taliban fire 1279 times in the 11 months to the end of August - an average of four attacks a day
I like being reminded of what's happening in Afghanistan, therefore the need to quote Hele's quote.
Posted by: Bb in the thick mist, beginning to lift up on 9:54am Thu 11 Oct 07
[quote]I like being reminded of what's happening in Afghanistan, therefore the need to quote Hele's quote.[/quote]
correction:
I like being reminded of what's happening in A. therefore the need to quote Helen's quote not Hele's.
What does it take to end the war? Another atomic bomb?
It's such a beautiful country with beautiful people.
I like being reminded of what's happening in Afghanistan, therefore the need to quote Hele's quote.
correction:
I like being reminded of what's happening in A. therefore the need to quote Helen's quote not Hele's.
What does it take to end the war? Another atomic bomb?
It's such a beautiful country with beautiful people.
Posted by: Alan Shore, Glasgow on 11:01am Thu 11 Oct 07
"It's such a beautiful country with beautiful people."
Would that be the "good" Afghans, or the "bad" Afghans? Luckily, we have hi-tech armaments, that can distinguish between them, which is why we only kill "insurgents", not civilians - they must be so grateful.
"It's such a beautiful country with beautiful people."
Would that be the "good" Afghans, or the "bad" Afghans? Luckily, we have hi-tech armaments, that can distinguish between them, which is why we only kill "insurgents", not civilians - they must be so grateful.
Posted by: Colin B, Bearsden on 11:06am Thu 11 Oct 07
Just shows why John Reid resigned -he got that one wrong -spin was reconstruction -god help Celtic
Just shows why John Reid resigned -he got that one wrong -spin was reconstruction -god help Celtic
Posted by: The West Awake, Argyll on 1:17pm Thu 11 Oct 07
The Soviets had 130,000 men fighting in A at the hight of their war. They gave up in the end, having come to the (correct) conclusion the war was unwinnable.
While US and British technology may be better I do not believe the attitude of the soldiers is much different, I have read books by ex-Soviet soldiers, - it was a filthy war, with little quarter asked and none given.
Even their proxy puppet Babrak Karmal was an almost indentikit image of Karzai. He ended up hanging from a lamppost shorty after the Soviets left (I suspect Karzai will be cleverer and probably has already bought his Beverly Hills mansion).
Those Soviet soldiers may have been lacking motivation, but we question their bravery and toughness at our peril.
Whether we like it or not this war is also unwinnable, Afghanistan is not like a European nation, to be "beaten" like one and "regime changed" afterward.
The Soviets had 130,000 men fighting in A at the hight of their war. They gave up in the end, having come to the (correct) conclusion the war was unwinnable.
While US and British technology may be better I do not believe the attitude of the soldiers is much different, I have read books by ex-Soviet soldiers, - it was a filthy war, with little quarter asked and none given.
Even their proxy puppet Babrak Karmal was an almost indentikit image of Karzai. He ended up hanging from a lamppost shorty after the Soviets left (I suspect Karzai will be cleverer and probably has already bought his Beverly Hills mansion).
Those Soviet soldiers may have been lacking motivation, but we question their bravery and toughness at our peril.
Whether we like it or not this war is also unwinnable, Afghanistan is not like a European nation, to be "beaten" like one and "regime changed" afterward.
Posted by: Yok Finney, Ross-shire on 2:39pm Thu 11 Oct 07
[quote]The Soviets had 130,000 men fighting in A at the hight of their war. They gave up in the end, having come to the (correct) conclusion the war was unwinnable.[/quote]
The Taliban were brave enough, but without Stinger Missiles supplied by the USA they couldn't have successfully tackled the USSR's gunships. From the Russian soldier's viewpoint, it just got worse the further South they went.
[quote]A former CIA official suggests the US emissaries met directly with bin Laden, and that it was bin Laden, acting on advice from his friends in Saudi intelligence, who first suggested the mujaheddin should be given Stingers.” [Reeve, 1999, pp. 167, 176] The CIA begins supplying Stinger missiles to the mujaheddin in 1986 (see September 1986). After 9/11, the CIA will state, “Numerous comments in the media recently have reiterated a widely circulated but incorrect notion that the CIA once had a relationship with Osama bin Laden."[/quote]
The Soviets had 130,000 men fighting in A at the hight of their war. They gave up in the end, having come to the (correct) conclusion the war was unwinnable.
The Taliban were brave enough, but without Stinger Missiles supplied by the USA they couldn't have successfully tackled the USSR's gunships. From the Russian soldier's viewpoint, it just got worse the further South they went.
A former CIA official suggests the US emissaries met directly with bin Laden, and that it was bin Laden, acting on advice from his friends in Saudi intelligence, who first suggested the mujaheddin should be given Stingers.” The CIA begins supplying Stinger missiles to the mujaheddin in 1986 (see September 1986). After 9/11, the CIA will state, “Numerous comments in the media recently have reiterated a widely circulated but incorrect notion that the CIA once had a relationship with Osama bin Laden."
News
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (11)
