Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Sunday, 6th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Troops home to say they back Afghan war



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 03 April 2008
SCOTTISH troops have returned home from six months of bitter fighting in Afghanistan to tell of their "wholehearted" support for the war on terrorism, in which they feel they are making real progress.
Members of 52 Brigade arrived back at their Edinburgh barracks days after Alex Salmond, the First Minister, said Scots soldiers and their families were against the war in Iraq.

The SNP has also claimed that the initial objectives in Afghanistan were destroyed by the invasion of Iraq, and "a fundamental reappraisal" was required.

Although the soldiers of 52 Brigade claimed British troops were "stretched" and more investment was needed to help Afghan farmers diversify away from opium poppies, they were positive about their contribution to the nation's stability.

Captain Andy Richards, 33, whose role involved training Afghan police officers, told The Scotsman: "We are wholeheartedly behind what we are doing. I think Afghanistan is the war of our generation and if we fail, the consequences will be absolutely catastrophic."

He said losing would leave the country a "haven for terrorism" and send a signal to those who wanted the West "wiped out".

The brigade spearheaded the fall of the Taleban stronghold, Musa Qala – the largest Nato operation in recent years.

It was in command of 7,000 multinational troops in Helmand Province and under its stewardship, 11 British servicemen have died, the most recent two on Sunday.

Captain Andrea Magowan, of Lancaster, who dealt with media operations in theatre, said: "I look back over the last six months and I know we have had 11 fatalities and we have to say to the families: their lives – it has been worth it for the cause."

She said the average Afghan just wanted to get back to a normal life, but they were beset by terrorists who would murder a 12-year-old boy for having an American dollar in his back pocket, seeing it as a sign of collusion with the West.

She, too, insisted the troops were behind the cause and keen to serve their country.

The 32-year-old said: "Guys want to deploy. They didn't join to stay in barracks. That's when you have problems – soldiers living side by side with friends on civvy street who are taking drugs and drink driving. We need to get those guys out there and a medal on their chest."

For Corporal Daniel Mackenzie, a 27-year-old signalman from Stornoway, the suggestion that Scots soldiers were not behind the war on terror was "completely untrue".

However, he said, there was a feeling that more assistance was needed from other countries. He admitted the British troops were "stretched".

"Not many countries, with the exception of America, put in as much effort as us or take up the responsibility we do," he said. We take up more responsibility than others. Whether that's forced on us or we take it gladly, I don't know."

Capt Richards, of Edinburgh, said more investment was required to stop farmers growing the poppies that are fuelling the world's heroin trade and account for about 90 per cent of crops grown in Afghanistan.

"For the farmers, they don't have any option but to grow opium," he said. "It is the only crop which will allow them to feed their families. The big issue is whether you can provide them with alternative livelihoods. At the moment, I think we are failing to do so, but the farmers are willing to try and grow melons or vegetables.

"At the moment we are not reaching them with programmes that will help them. We need to invest in training them and in irrigation systems and improve the farming practices and that will be one of the big challenges."

The Ministry of Defence has already said that troops will be in Afghanistan for some considerable time and Squadron Leader Simon "Tats" Tatters, a 39-year-old father of three, admitted: "No doubt the majority of us who came back last night will see Afghanistan again."

Returning Scots troops back prince's frontline role

SCOTTISH servicemen and women last night defended Prince Harry's decision to deploy to Afghanistan, where he fought alongside some of them.

Edinburgh-based 52 Brigade has spent six months in charge of Helmand Province, where the young royal's regiment, the Household Cavalry, was engaged.

The first group of soldiers from the Infantry Brigade returned on Tuesday night, to be greeted by relieved and delighted family members.

Prince Harry would have been on the same flight had his presence in the war zone not been leaked and his tour stymied.

Harry served in the troubled country from December last year until February. A news blackout on his presence was agreed by UK media outlets.

However, foreign publications revealed the story and Cornet Wales, as he is known in the army, was swiftly sent home.

Questions were raised on whether the third in line to the throne should have been allowed to serve on the front line, but the servicemen and women from 52 backed his decision to deploy, feeling his frustration at not being able to serve in Iraq.

Captain Andrea Magowan, 32, who lives at the Colinton base, said: "I don't think anything was done above and beyond any soldier on the ground. He was treated exactly like another cornet.

"But at the end of the day, he's third in line to the throne and people are interested.

"The fact that he didn't go to Iraq was a shame. He joined the army and wants to do the job he's doing."

Captain Andy Richards, 33, served with the prince for about a month in Garmsir. "I was glad he got to come across because I think all of us felt his frustration at not being able to do his job," he said.

Army hosts phone-in show that is top with terrorists

IN SOME ways, the evening radio show is little different to many others across the world – there are regular news bulletins, music requests and callers who want to give a "shout-out" to their loved ones or simply get their opinions on air.

Except at Musa Qala FM, broadcasting from inside the fallen town that was once a Taleban stronghold, the bulletins are translated by Afghan interpreters, the production is by the British Army – and sometimes the callers are terrorists.

Since Nato forces took the settlement at the end of last year, Corporal Daniel Mackenzie of 52 Infantry Brigade has been helping run the station.

While it is predominantly there for entertainment, playing music from 6am each day, it also has an important role in "broadening the horizons" of the locals, providing information on worldwide happenings.

Cpl Mackenzie said: "We play music from 6am. The locals phone-in and request music. They do shout-outs for the families.

"There are times when the Taleban have phoned up and started giving the interpreters abuse. We get some right banter going on, because the interpreters aren't scared."

International news, such as American election coverage, also features.

Cpl Mackenzie said: "It's not something you would expect them to be interested in, but it's about broadening their horizons."


The full article contains 1195 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 03/04/2008 00:27:15
I wonder what Mr Salmond and Ms Sturgeon have to say about this; whilst I endorse their right to oppose government policy on Iraq and Afghanistan they have absolutely no right to speak for armed forces personnel.
2

Fifi la Bonbon,

03/04/2008 01:39:53
Excellent to read what Scots soldiers are actually thnking and saying. We don't get anything like enough coverage like this. That's one of the reasons why glib politicians - of all parties - get away with speaing on their behalf. Soldiers are brave, loyal, optimistic, positive and committed to their job and the people they've been sent to help - who'd have thought it if we listened to our wonderful leaders?
3

Richardinho,

03/04/2008 01:44:08
#1 they'd probably say that what Alex Salmond actually said was that the views of the troops probably mirror those of the country-Salmond never said that no soldiers support the war.
He might add that cherry picking a few quotes is a long way short of conducting a scientific poll.
4

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 03/04/2008 01:55:42
Pardon my unpardonable folly of daring to criticise the Blessed Alex. I do not know what "he might add" do you speak for him?
5

Richardinho,

03/04/2008 02:07:05
I don't speak for him, but I did make the effort to find out what he had actually said rather than speaking from ignorance as you just have.
6

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 03/04/2008 02:37:53
#5 All I said was he had no right to speak for armed forces personnel either directly or by imputation
7

frank mcbride,

lusitania 03/04/2008 02:47:09
Mercutio, Fifi.

You wouldn't be trying to make political capital out of our service personnel. Would you?
8

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 03/04/2008 02:56:02
#7 NO
9

W Smith,

Middle East 03/04/2008 04:24:54
Alex Salmond's snivellling excuse for not supporting the Scottish soldiers in Iraq is that its an 'illegal' war.

Stoning womem to death in Iran is 'legal' and the law even specifies the size of stones to be used. To prolong the agony for the victim the stones shouldn't be too large. How thoughtful, eh Salmond?

In his wee conversation with the Iranian ambassador Angus Robertson never complained about the treatment of women in Iran but the SNP are quick to demonstrate outside the American Consulate in Edinburgh over the "illegal" treatment of terrorists suspects in Guatanamo Bay.

The war in Afghanistan is not "illegal" Mr Salmond but no doubt you'll think up another excuse not to support the Scottish lads serving there as you prefer the company of people like Osama Saeed and the Iranian ambassador.
10

Pilrig.,

Livingston 03/04/2008 06:11:46
I'll bet the RSM was standing within earshot of the interviewees
11

Pilrig.,

Livingston 03/04/2008 06:17:08
9 - what's Iranian law got to do with the war in Afghanistan ? The Saudis practice the same law and we and the Yanks still sell 'em weapons.
12

Castaway,

03/04/2008 06:38:57
#1 The FM has the unquestionable right, and indeed duty, to express himself on any issue that concerns the welfare of the people Scotland this includes our (Scottish) servicemen and women.
#2 Excellent to read what Scots soldiers are actually thinking - if Captain ......or any soldier criticized the Government stance in Afghanistan or Iraq they wouldn't be in the Army for long so you can never tell what the Scottish soldiers are actually thinking because they cannot give a honest opinion until they leave.
#10 I agree.
SAS soldier quits Army in disgust at 'illegal' American tactics in Iraq, former SAS Trooper Ben Griffin said "I did not join the British Army to conduct American foreign policy - Telegraph 11/03/2006

13

Reckless,

Propaganda 03/04/2008 07:52:01
Pre-going home briefing: you will tell everyone that you enjoyed your time in Afghanistan. The war of terror is good, and President Bush and PM Brown are great leaders, or else...
14

Bob Christie,

03/04/2008 07:59:07
The snapshot of soldiers interviewed for the article may well support the war in Afghanistan, which is currently being lost.
Support the New Labour Brownshirt war is still a minority view as far as the people of Scotland are concerned.
15

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 03/04/2008 08:30:48
Number 1 is right, the Armed Forces are a apolitical it is an unwritten rule that no poltician tries to prescribe political viewpoints to them. Salmond broke that rule and should apologise. The overwhelming majority of UK forces are in favour of Afghanistan, Iraq is slightly different.
16

jdships,

03/04/2008 09:04:09
Whatever was said or wasn't said and whatever my feelings about the war ( i don't agree)I find it rather sickening that posters should choose to criticise our servicemen to make political capital
"I'll bet the RSM was standing within earshot of the interviewees"
"....so you can never tell what the Scottish soldiers are actually thinking because they cannot give a honest opinion until they leave."
"Pre-going home briefing: you will tell everyone that you enjoyed your time in Afghanistan."

Wow !!
Not a mention of thanking them for doing their dangerous work or how glad we all are to see them home .
Small minded in the extreme methinks !

Regardless of what , I thank them and welcome them home : for those that haven't come back RIP

17

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 03/04/2008 09:18:37
#16
The ultra nats see sevice personnel as evil extensions of George Bushes foreign policy. They cry about saving the Scottish regiments but that is as far as they go in support of our brave service personnel.
18

Lets get a grip,

livingston 03/04/2008 09:35:59
Whilst the Iraq war may or may not have been illegal, the current fighting in Afghanistan is sanctioned by the United Nations.
This article is about the return of Scottish troops from Afghanistan. Welcome home and glad to see you all made it back safely.

I also read the "reported" words from the Executive and disagreed with them then and still do now, they do not speak for the Scottish soldiers they are only trying to score points over Liarbour.
How do I know this? Simple, I am the father of a seving soldier and I asked him and his comrades-in-arms, and I can assure you that Mr Salmond nor his friends have not.
19

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 03/04/2008 09:38:43
I wonder what the chances are of getting an apology from even one nat on this thread. Salmond would look good if he cam out and said sorry to the boys.
20

Lets get a grip,

livingston 03/04/2008 09:40:50
# 15,
Have to agree with you on that, I would also like the FM to apologise to the troops, however, there is as much chance of that as me building a golf course in Aberdeenshire.
21

jdships,

03/04/2008 09:48:40
18 Lets get a grip,livingston

Good post !
Trust your lad is safe and well.
Good luck to him .
22

Nellie,

Liverpool 03/04/2008 10:28:20
# 2 What soldiers or airmen think about their work in Afghanistan is irrelevant. They joined up to have a fight and the politicians have given them one. That's what they care about, that is their motivation - to be in a war. They are not turned on by the politics or ethics of this war or any other. They are not trained to think politically or ethically but to fight. So, their views AS WARRIORS, on whether or not the war they are fighting it right ethically or politically, isn't relevant.
23

Guga II,

Rockall 03/04/2008 10:34:24
The Hootsmon, once again, misquotes wee Eck to try and denigrate the SNP. He did not say that Scottish soldiers and their families did not support the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said that the views of the troops mirror the views of the country.

Why does the Hootsmon lie so blatantly about the SNP. Have they been getting their instructions directly from the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party?

Moreover, a few selected quotes from a few selected captains, and one corporal, is hardly representative of the views of every soldier. Most of them will not state their true feelings until they are out of the services as, apart from anything else, stating what they really felt would destroy any promotion prospects they might have.

Those of us who are against the illegal war in Iraq, and against the interference in Afghanistan, do not denigrate our soldiers. It is the lying war criminals like Broon, Bush and Bliar that we have denigrated. Just as we consider that these liars and war criminals, especially Broon and Bliar, sent our troops to fight in these wars with poor, shoddy and limited equipment. They also treat them badly by not providing proper health care or even decent accommodation for the troops. Again, it is not that troops that people are against, it is our lying, crooked politicians.
24

donald,

glasgow 03/04/2008 10:35:55
Change from my National Service days when we spent more time gang fighting English regiments than the people they were oppressing.
25

jdships,

03/04/2008 10:53:57
23 Guga II,Rockall

The Hootsmon, once again, misquotes wee Eck to try and denigrate the SNP

How about trying to write something original ?
Notice you too have not managed to say thankyou and welcome home to the troops - so tied up in defending your political ends it seems . Sad
Although I do not support either of the wars that in Afghanistan is sanctioned and supported by the UN
which is completely different to the illegal Iraq farce.
26

PJ,

Edinburgh 03/04/2008 11:06:27
#22

So you are saying members of HM Forces don’t think, well that is great coming from a civilian with no comprehension of combat or combat situations who thinks you know everything behind the Military, it is always unfortunate when the Armed Forces become involved in an armed conflict.

The dispute about the legalities or rights/wrongs of the Iraq conflict or the war in Afghanistan should not detract from the fact that this country has a proud military history which has secured the very freedom on more than one occasion that allows yourself to spout endless nonsense. Any disregard for that shows a total disrespect for those who lost their lives, not to mention the families who have lost someone in any war.

Where you are right in the respect that soldiers trained to fight, that is what the job is about it goes with the uniform. There are guidelines sat are set down for Rules of engagement, the directives issued by military authority which delineate the circumstances and limitations under which UK forces will initiate and/or continue combat engagement with other forces encountered.
27

Freedom for Scotland,

03/04/2008 12:15:49
I am absolutely delighted that these troops have come home safely BUT I will not thank them. Why should I. They have been engaged in warring activities at the behest of the Labour Party.
I will be even more delighted when every last one of them is brought home and I still have nothing to thank them for!
28

Castaway,

03/04/2008 12:52:38
#16 - I wrote this....so you can never tell what the Scottish soldiers are actually thinking because they cannot give a honest opinion until they leave." I standby that statement.
I don't like our servicemen and women being used to score political points which I feel the above article is trying to do by linking the SNP and Afghanistan with no negative comments by the soldiers because that is forbidden.
#19 - Your comment was out of order I would say that Blair is the one who should say sorry WMD's etc.
Our FM has the duty to express himself on any issue that concerns the welfare of the Scottish people.He didn't order our soldiers into Afghanistan those are the ones who should be meeting and thanking our troops when they come home.
I am sure any servicemen and women given the chance would rather not be in Afghanistan or Iraq.They are all very brave men and women.
I am ex British Army.
29

Miss H,

03/04/2008 14:24:59
Mercutio Alex Salmond's comments are a matter of public record.

I can't speak for any troops, I can only give my personal opinion which is that UK forces have become bogged down in a conflict which is utterly pointless.

I am sure they carry out their duties in a professional way but it is pointless nonetheless.

The UK Government is already engaged in talks with the Taliban. They are looking for a way out because they know it is pointless too.
30

A Clamper,

Edinburgh 03/04/2008 14:38:16
#23
Spot on. A few quotes from a select few Captains and a corporal tell us very little about what "the troops" really think. The war in Afghanistan is unwinnable and sooner or later the army will pull out.
31

frank mcbride,

lusitania 03/04/2008 14:45:08
The cant and hypocracy of this article is unbelievable.

The juxtaposition of the statement of the FM regarding Iraq, a matter of record, with troops returning from Afghanistan is deliberate in its attempts, to usw service personnel as political pawns.

Anyone who believes that this article brings approbrium, on any other than the Scotsman, has not listened to the whole story.

I am delighted to see the troops back, but that pleasure is clouded, by the 11 dead and the injuries suffered by the 52nd.
32

PJ,

Edinburgh 03/04/2008 14:47:57
#27

No-one is asking for your thanks! I never asked for thanks after two tours of Northern Ireland and I certainly never asked for any thanks after the first GW.

You ask any soldier that has served or any soldier is serving are they doing it for their country, you will get told no! They will tell you they are doing it for their friend, who is next to them no civilian can understand that, it is comradeship something that you are probably lacking in.

Cannon fodder in Afghanistan/Iraq or insulted, abused, and treated as moral lepers because they wear the uniform in the UK or vilified by armchair theorists who have no comprehension of the real world outside of a book.

Speaking as an ex-service man, I know where I would rather be.
33

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta; . CA.....a place in the Sun 03/04/2008 14:54:39
11
Pilrig.,
Livingston

-------------------------------------

Right on Dude.

The Arabs are one of our US biggest customers for military equipment. Especially fighter planes and missiles, and land mines.

They are the same people who do not allow their women to vote, wear mini skirts, drive cars, walk alone in the Malls to shop etc. Drink alcohol.

Disgusting behavior , nearly as bad as the Chinese CCP/PLA.

Like I say Dude:

ITS ALL ABOUT MONEY.

Hey that's a great photo of the Soldier and her black lab.

Happy Haggis Day (make it a Non-Donald Trump day)

GC
34

GalacticCannibal.,

VOTE FOR OBAMA 03/04/2008 14:57:57
Hillary Clinton Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior

So says her boss on the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate hearings, Jerry Zeifman. I haven't had time to digest it all, but Ed Morrissey reports on a column by Dan Calabrese that is based on Zeifman's account, supported by his own contemporaneous notes:

When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.
Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”


The allegations are explosive, and they come from the one person in the best position to know that they are true, Hillary's then-boss.
35

GalacticCannibal.,

VOTE FOR OBAMA 03/04/2008 14:58:31
Happy Clinton day


G.C
36

Freedom for Scotland,

03/04/2008 15:48:20
#32 " I know where I would rather be. "

I know where you should be too!

Idiot, you know nothing about me
37

PJ,

Edinburgh 03/04/2008 15:57:55
#39

Woo! I am an "idiot" brilliant & snappy comeback, well thought out and with enough vehemence and fortitude and more cutting than a bullet...not!
38

IanfaeClerrie,

Cardiff 03/04/2008 16:08:47
What a great picture. The next time Captain Magowan comes home, I offer to go and welcome her home, with her dog.
39

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta; . CA.....a place in the Sun 03/04/2008 16:34:20
38
The Spook in Leith,
Leith,

Hey Dude, Posts #36 and # 37 are NOT my posts.

I did not post #36 and #37.


A person unknown(imitator) has been aping some of my posts recently, and #36 and #37 are not mine.

As to Ur comment and I quote:
"most Americans seem to prefer the Republicans and their illegal wars"

U are dead wrong Dude.

Democrats are the largest mass of voters in the US. Unfortunately they do not always vote , unlike the REPS who do.

And in 2008 76% of Americans are against the WAR in Iraq .

But back in 2003 Bush and his gang hyped the fear level to a point where they conned the American public into believing IRAQ had WMD etc .
So Congress gave Bush the go ahead to attack IRAQ ,

happy Haggis day (Make it a non-D. Trump day)

And try not to sound so nasty, it will cause your blood pressure to rise into a danger zone.

Swallow a chill pill and relax.

GC
40

Freedom for Scotland,

03/04/2008 17:09:37
#40

"well thought out and with enough vehemence and fortitude and more cutting than a bullet..."

Seems I WAS correct then!
41

Reckless,

Engineered banking crisis 03/04/2008 17:10:23
"With less money in circulation, people can buy less and so businesses need to produce less. This leads to big increases in unemployment, bankruptcy and people losing their homes because those businesses and people are no longer able to earn the income necessary to service the loans they took out during the ‘good times’.

But, of course, when they accepted those loans of non-existent ‘money’ they had to sign over as security their wealth that did exist - their home, car, business or land - and so when they fail to ‘repay’ their ‘loans’ of credit the banks seize their wealth that does exist in exchange for not paying back ‘money’ that has never existed, except in theory."


http://www.infowars.com/?p=1257#comment-94111
42

Richardinho,

03/04/2008 17:17:22
'All I said was he had no right to speak for armed forces personnel either directly or by imputation'

Actually, he has every right to express an opinion since it's a free country.
43

jdships,

03/04/2008 17:20:56
32 PJ,Edinburgh

Thanks !
Couldn't have put it better myself
Ex Navy 20 yeqrs - would do it all again !!
44

Bird of Prey, Will watch what i say.,

03/04/2008 17:34:06
#42 G.C

Oh im going to tell spook on you, he will shroom you alive..just you wait??? Man your dead meat
45

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 03/04/2008 18:48:35
As much as I enjoyed my time in the army I have to admit that it took a bit of time before I was a free thinker again.

The army tells you what to think. I likened it to Eastern Europe in my day. The army tells you that you are doing a worthwhile job and your mind obeys that instruction. It is military propaganda.

There for a purpose. However, it also means that you are not allowed to talk if you disagree. You just get on with it.

Collective morale is what counts and what shows more in recruitment/discharge figures than staged photo shoots and selective interviewing. Do we forget the threat to the Soldiers speaking out about the disbandonment of the Scottish regiments?

In this respect I would say that the propaganda being displayed by the Scotsman is on a par with the propaganda which was displayed by Salmond.
46

Alba Abú,

Edinburgh 03/04/2008 18:51:20
#32 PJ ..."I never asked for thanks after two tours of northern Ireland" Why should you get thanks for interfering in the affairs of another country.87% of the people on the island of Ireland reject English interference in their country.However you saw fit to go to that country to protect the interests of a minority of elite unionists and to maintain English rule in Ireland.England never had any right to interfere in Ireland and never will have any right to interfere in the affairs of the Irish people. So!Get real! and keep your nose out of other peoples affairs.In 1921 the English government partitioned Ireland against the wishes of the vast majority of the Irish people,( see the results of the 1918 elections) so that they could get mugs like you to go over there and enforce their rule in a country where they are not welcome as invaders.
47

Alba Abú,

Edinburgh 03/04/2008 18:53:55
#46... " would do it all again" Thats because you are a brain washed idiot!
48

PJ,

Edinburgh 03/04/2008 19:41:53
#49

Thanks for the Irish History lesson muppet, but if you are going to quote Irish History, try going back further than the obvious 1960's 1921 and or 1918.

#46 Freedom for Scotland you wouldn't know what Freedom was, if it came and bit your well fed behind and the only fight or struggle you have been in was the one to get up in the morning!
49

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 03/04/2008 20:07:02
It is pleasing to know that our troops are having a jolly good time in Afghanistan risking life and limb at the British taxpayer's expense. Some people gain satisfaction from taking extreme risks, so who am I to criticise the troops?

Yet I am curious. Terrorism, by its very nature, is unpredictable. Are our troops truly preventing terrorism, or are they merely guarding fixed installations, roads, and most of all themselves? Are our troops really there to present alternative targets to the Taliban et al. How does one actually prevent throat slitting in the allies of Kabul? And is it not true that Islamic extremists are actually being drawn into Afghanistan and Iraq, attracted by the prospect of fighting "the West"?

And then what are the Afghans doing to protect themselves? Surely if many Afghans are motivated to fight in the Taliban, then they also have the gumption to fight against it? Why, after 5 years, can the Afghans still not defend themselves and beat the Taliban themselves? Is it because the Afghans actually aren't interested in doing so? After all, there has to be a reason why men will give up their lives in the protected urban areas of Afghanistan and take to the countryside, foresaking a comfortable life for an extremely difficult one, simply in order to terrorise people? Or maybe their goal isn't terrorism at all. Maybe these men actually believe fervently in their own culture and their own country, and view our troops as foreign invaders? Perhaps they join the Mujahedin to fight us, because they believe that it's the right thing to do?

50

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 03/04/2008 20:12:08
And perhaps there's another reason why the Afghans can't fight their own battles. Maybe the AmerUSAn and British governments have had enough of Stinger missiles and what-not falling into the hands of extremists, and in a truly insulting manner, they have no faith in the fighting ability of the Afghans, preferring to deny them sufficient materiel and training to undertake their own fighting.
51

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 03/04/2008 20:23:39
In the case of Iraq the Mujahedin is composed almost entirely of Iraqis: Iraqis whose relatives were buried alive as young conscripts by AmerUSAn bulldozers in Kuwait, whose relatives were massacred by coalition pilots in the Mutla Hill traffic jam (it was butchery -so much so that coalition pilots finally threatened to stop flying rather than commit more atrocities), Iraqis whose children were killed by the criminally stupid UN sanctions, Iraqis whose children died due to war-linked cancers in the blitzed cities (child cancer rates were up to 20 times the normal rate in the most heavily attacked areas), Iraqis whose children died due to the breakdown of sewerage and water plants under the coalition bombing, Iraqis whose relatives died simply because they were at the wrong place at the wrong time in front of trigger happy coalition troops, Iraqis whose relatives died in the uprising against Saddam urged by the USA, only to discover that the AmerUSAns were liars unprepared to support the uprising as they had promised. If I were an Iraqi who had suffered due to the the sheer, unbelievable and catastrophic stupidity of the British and AmerUSAn governments, right now I would be fighting our own troops in Iraq with a literal vengeance. Happily I am not, but a mere stroke of fortune determines where and when we are born.

52

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 03/04/2008 20:50:13
Let us look at depleted uranium. On a weight basis it is 0.0008976% U-234, 0.2% U-235 and 99.799% U-238. It undergoes alhpa-decay with energies of:
U-234: 4.774 and 4.722 MeV
U-235: 4.401 MeV
U-238: 4.196 MeV
Its radioactivity approximately doubles within a few months after it has been removed from the uranium enrichment facility, at which point its activity is about 37.5 kBq/g, i.e. 37500 decays per second per gramme. Now depleted uranium is used in extremely high velocity weapons, so that it breaks up on impact forming fine sherds and dust. Let us say that we have a depleted uranium dust particle with a diameter of 3µm. This can penetrate deep into the lungs. Its density is 18.95 g/cc, and mass is 2.679e-10 grammes. Therefore the radioactivity of this dust particle is 1.00e-5 decays per second. In one year this spherical depeleted uranium particle deposits 3600 x 24 x 365.25 x 1.0046 x 10-5 x 4.3 MeV = 1363.2 MeV in the surrounding lung tissue. The range of these alpha particles in the tissue is roughly 0.003 cm, i.e. 0.03 mm. Now a sphere of tissue of this radius has a volume of 1.130796e-7 cc, and a density of approximately 1 g/cc. Hence the annual local tissue dose around the depleted uranium dust particle is approximately:

1363.2 x 1 million x 1.60219e-19 J x the relative biological effectiveness (RBE)/1.130796x10-7g =1.931e-3 x the RBE Gy/g or 1.931 x RBE Sieverts/year.

The RBE is debatable, but alphas are high LET radiation. An RBE of 1.1 is used for proton therapy and it's likely to be a little greater than this. So we'll take the local tissue dose to be 2.3+/-0.3 Sv/year. Of course the dose to the whole body is negligible, but this local tissue dose is very difficult to assess. This annual dose is of the same order as a fraction of radiation delivered to a target volume in radiotherapy within seconds to minutes, but unless the particle is removed from the lungs, it goes on throughout the victim's life. And there are likely to be thousands of suc
53

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 03/04/2008 20:54:10
Part 2: ...And there are likely to be thousands of such depleted uranium particles in the lungs of one person, and what is more, Iraqi children played with parts of the coalition troops munitions that were coated with depleted uranium dust, and then sucked their fingers and ate food without washing their hands. On balance, I would say that the risk of depleted uranium causing cancer should be very thoroughly investigated. But you know what? When the British government was told about the rash of child cancers occurring in Iraq, it displayed not the slightest interest whatsoever. In fact the UK government basically told the journalists to get stuffed, instead of sending a scientific team to get to the bottom of the problem. Why? Either because the government actually didn't give a stuff about Iraqi children, or because the ministers were too goddamn stupid to understand the implications.
54

PJ,

04/04/2008 16:15:00
Caora Dubh

Another armchair theorist!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.