stevelcfc Posted 24 October 2012 Posted 24 October 2012 Royal Marine and British soldier killed in Afghanistan More than 400 British service personnel have been killed in Afghanistan A Royal Marine and a British soldier have been killed while on patrol in Afghanistan, the MoD has said. They died from injuries sustained in the Nahr-e Saraj district of Helmand province on Wednesday. The personnel were from 40 Commando Royal Marines and 3 Medical Regiment. Their families have been told. The BBC's Caroline Wyatt reported that according to one Afghan source it was a "green on blue" attack but added that other local sources disputed this. Our defence correspondent said there were very sketchy details of what happened and an investigation was ongoing. More information was expected from the Ministry of Defence on Thursday, she added. Green on blue attacks are when coalition troops are killed by their Afghan allies. Maj Laurence Roche, spokesman for Task Force Helmand, said: "I am extremely sorry to announce the deaths of a Royal Marine from 40 Commando and a soldier from 3 Medical Regiment serving with Task Force Helmand. "This is dreadful news for all of us serving in Afghanistan. Our sincere condolences go to their families, friends and colleagues at this time of grief." A total of 435 British military personnel have been killed in Afghanistan since operations started in 2001 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20077291 On the day the british legion started their appeal, RIP and thoughts with their families.
Parafox Posted 24 October 2012 Posted 24 October 2012 Another 2 pointless deaths. We should be gone from that place. It's unwinnable. RIP
Guest MattP Posted 24 October 2012 Posted 24 October 2012 Another 2 pointless deaths. We should be gone from that place. It's unwinnable. RIP I agree, no idea why we are still there. A great shame of our time.
Parafox Posted 24 October 2012 Posted 24 October 2012 I agree, no idea why we are still there. A great shame of our time. Part of the "war against terrorism", otherwise known as American revenge for 9/11. If the Americans weren't hell bent on this conflict we wouldn't be there. If they're that desperate to wipe out Al-Queda why don't they invade Pakistan?
Guest MattP Posted 24 October 2012 Posted 24 October 2012 It was always a farce, can't remember the exact numbers but I'm sure the vast majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi's. I suppose whilst Bin Laden was "hiding there" you could make a case for us being in, you couldn't offer anything now, still makes me laugh after 10 years of searching the Americans finally found him.......in his house.
ithuriel Posted 24 October 2012 Posted 24 October 2012 We should pull our poeple out, stupid war to get involved in that was badly planned and with no exit strategy.
Parafox Posted 24 October 2012 Posted 24 October 2012 It was always a farce, can't remember the exact numbers but I'm sure the vast majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi's. I suppose whilst Bin Laden was "hiding there" you could make a case for us being in, you couldn't offer anything now, still makes me laugh after 10 years of searching the Americans finally found him.......in his house. Yes. In Pakistan! It's progressed now from just "the war on terrorism" to "the war against drugs... and terrorism". Neither will ever be eradicated and I can't think of a solution. If I could I would be doing something else for a job. I just don't think the answer is killing people. Unlike the terrorists. Religion has so much to answer for. Without getting into ANOTHER debate, the apologists for religious wars have a lot of explaining to do before i will ever see any sense in it.
Reynard Bleu Posted 25 October 2012 Posted 25 October 2012 Its the peace that is unwinnable. The place is too fracured and corrupt to deliver a stable and just regime (by western standards). Our presence in Afghanistan (and that otf the US and other NATO allies) has plenty to do with the fact that Pakistan is a member of the nuclear family. The border between the two countries means nothing to the Taliban, its a paper border. Their tribal and family regions cover both sides of the border. An unstable Pakistan and a Taliban led Afghanistan makes the west feel very twitchy about the integrity of the Pakistan nuclear arsenal. Combat tropps will pull out, but the US and the UK will still offer air and drone assets to support the ANA/ANP well past the pull out. There is more blood to be shed yet. This loss is every bit as tragic as all the others.
flowwolf Posted 25 October 2012 Posted 25 October 2012 As an ex Army service man I feel for the families of these soldiers but when you join up you know that shit happens and it could be you. Soldiers who are killed on active duty are not victims . I well remember during my training seeing old recruiting posters in the N.A.A.F.I one of which said JOIN THE ARMY AND SEE THE WORLD ! to which some wag had written underneath it " yes and the next one " that summed up Army humour. If it happens it happens it's the chance you take.
purpleronnie Posted 25 October 2012 Posted 25 October 2012 I don't think anyone is blaming the soldiers, as you say they sign up and know that they may fight in a conflict that they might not believe to be just, its more a criticism of the government and their questionable reasoning behind sending our troops to iraq and Afganistan.
flowwolf Posted 25 October 2012 Posted 25 October 2012 Thing is though Ronnie when you sign up you are to all intent and purpose a mercenary. Sure they give you a uniform and a badge and swear allegiance to the queen but you do not have a choice in where they send you or who you are going to fight , you forgo that right and all legal rights that a ordinary citizen has. Believe me you do not question the rights or wrongs of a deployment you just do as your told. That is how they train you that is how they break you down as an individual until you become an unquestioning and obedient tool. A concept such as a just cause or unjust cause would never get in the way of staying alive and making sure you do everything to help you and your buddie stay alive that is how narrow a horizon a soldier sees any battle situation. We used to have a saying " your here because your here " if you can't take a joke you shouldn't have joined.
MooseBreath Posted 26 October 2012 Posted 26 October 2012 Nothing to do with terrorism, that was just the excuse, the real reason for this ongoing conflict is because GWB wanted Saddam's head, but having got it they can't just up and leave the region in tatters so we've ended up commiting thousands of lives and billions of dollars to fulfil the ****ed up fantasy of one American tosser.
flowwolf Posted 26 October 2012 Posted 26 October 2012 Sorry Moose but if you think it was down to Bush you are mistaken. He did not have the intelligence to go to war just on his say. The president of the U.S.A is a figurehead for a particular party that's all. You will never know who the real movers and shakers are and we shall probably never know the real reasons for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. It could have been for economic reasons , political reasons or simply get them before they get us. One thing is for sure Bush was just a glove puppet it was the hand up his arse that called the shots.
MooseBreath Posted 26 October 2012 Posted 26 October 2012 While I agree that the President is a just puppet on most issues, I think he still has the final say, and he had personal reasons for going after Saddam. I get the impression that that was pretty much the one and only thing he really wanted to do with his power, everything else was just the means to get to saddam.
flowwolf Posted 26 October 2012 Posted 26 October 2012 While I agree that the President is a just puppet on most issues, I think he still has the final say, and he had personal reasons for going after Saddam. I get the impression that that was pretty much the one and only thing he really wanted to do with his power, everything else was just the means to get to saddam. Ok with you so far mate but what were Bush's personal reason for going after Saddam ?
MooseBreath Posted 27 October 2012 Posted 27 October 2012 Ok with you so far mate but what were Bush's personal reason for going after Saddam ? Saddam had a feud with GWB snr and tried to have him assassinated Bush jnr is quoted somewhere as describing Saddam with "this is afterall the man who tried to kill my father"
flowwolf Posted 28 October 2012 Posted 28 October 2012 Saddam had a feud with GWB snr and tried to have him assassinated Bush jnr is quoted somewhere as describing Saddam with "this is afterall the man who tried to kill my father" Ah with you, I did not know that.
stevelcfc Posted 30 October 2012 Author Posted 30 October 2012 Yet more death in Afghanistan today, by a local Afghan dressed in police uniform. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20138614
Reynard Bleu Posted 31 October 2012 Posted 31 October 2012 Yet more death in Afghanistan today, by a local Afghan dressed in police uniform. http://www.bbc.co.uk...d-asia-20138614 There will be more before we finish. These attacks sum up what a ****ed up place Afghanistan is and how diffcult it is to discern friend from foe.
flowwolf Posted 31 October 2012 Posted 31 October 2012 There will be more before we finish. These attacks sum up what a ****ed up place Afghanistan is and how diffcult it is to discern friend from foe. It is THEIR country and the only thing ****ed up about it is OUR presence in it . They have no trouble discerning friend from foe we are the invaders therefore their foe. And if anyone did to my country what we are dong to their country I would use every trick in the book to get them out . For fvck sake what is there not to understand ? :mad: :mad:
flowwolf Posted 31 October 2012 Posted 31 October 2012 There will be more before we finish. These attacks sum up what a ****ed up place Afghanistan is and how diffcult it is to discern friend from foe. Ps what do you mean by " there will be more before WE finish " who the fvck do you mean by we ? Like you are going to get personally involved ? pc warrior :huh:
I am Rod Hull Posted 31 October 2012 Posted 31 October 2012 Ps what do you mean by " there will be more before WE finish " who the fvck do you mean be we ? Like you are going to get personally involved ? pc warrior :huh: Oh dear. He`s a veteran, he`s been there.
flowwolf Posted 31 October 2012 Posted 31 October 2012 Oh dear. He`s a veteran, he`s been there. Yes I have .
ADK Posted 31 October 2012 Posted 31 October 2012 Thing is Afghanistan is ****ed up. Its a lawless society. Its ok saying we shouldn't be there, but who should run the country? I would imagine the majority of people would not like to be run by the Taliban or the drug lords. I don't think we can win so i think we shouldn't be there.
I am Rod Hull Posted 31 October 2012 Posted 31 October 2012 Yes I have . I was talking about Reynard.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.