Conference seems a long time ago.  I remember travelling home on the train sitting next to David Willets and Cheryl Gillian, full of optimism.  A great Conference.  Never underestimating the task ahead, key was that everything was pointing in the right direction.  George Osborne had just enjoyed the Conference of his life and delivered a speech which tackled the big issues and underlined the economic competence of the Conservatives.  David Cameron had delivered a barn storming speech which left all with hope, (yes that great word that Obama anchors campaigns around), that we were en route to a better future.  This was off the back of a dreadful Labour Conference that saw a less than half empty hall wearily trudge through a week of depression, until Lord Mandelson rallied their spirits, (and his future career prospects), with throws of inspiring rhetoric for the Labour faithful to finally have a sliver of hope themselves.

Things are bleak for this Government.  Indeed, for the country.

And yet…..opinion polls are throwing up mixed results.  Trending is that Conservatives are not dominating as much as we should be.  Local council by election results, are ‘disappointing’,(in the words of ConservativeHome’s Jonathan Isaby.  Iain Dale also asks the question why by-election results are not going our way).  Yes, there are always localised reasons at play at by-election results, and their impact can never be dismissed.  But we are not dominating.  Opinion polls are patchy and not as inspiring as the recent 17% lead polls.  Tim Montgomerie on ConservativeHome has alluded to a drop in Conservatives support post Lisbon Treaty ‘U-Turn’.  Many seem to agree with that sentiment on that blog site.  But there is more to it than Europe.

What is fundamentally true is that the Conservatives have so much ammunition at their disposal, the question why polls are not moving stronger in our favour is a valid one to ask!

Consider what’s happening around us…..

  -           The economy.  First into recession, last out.  And the deepest recession in Europe.  We hurtle catastrophically towards a £1 trillion debt that our children will still be paying off in years to come. Brown has got away with the biggest lie in Political history.  That lie?  That debt has been built up because Brown states he was saving the UK from recession, (actually he would say saving the world from recession but scrub that).  That’s like Tiger Woods saying he had 10 birdies in a round and his wife believing he was talking about Golf!   Brown was building debt way before this recession even started.  In the good times he was spending like a manic gambler at the roulette table, hoping the ball will end on black.  In the words of the IMF:  ‘Imbalances and balance sheet strains had emerged even before the recent global shocks triggered a sharp decline in economic activity’.  ie we were heading into recession and spending too heavily BEFORE the Global shocks took place. 

 -           Unemployment heads towards 3 million, (that’s by official figures), unofficially claims of 6 million seem more accurate.  That’s people’s lives wrecked, on hold, dignity stripped.  Benefits and dependency culture set in.

 -           Class War.  Entrepreneurs discouraged.  Bankers bashed.  Top talent packing their bags to work abroad as UK thumps those very people who can bring us out of slump, create jobs for others and generate tax revenues, pummelled to the ground, with more ferocity than an uppercut from Mike Tyson in his prime, by punitive tax rates.  50% for top earners.  40% threshold frozen.  More on NI.  VAT back up 2.5%.  Penalties on companies that reward bankers who make money, (the very people we need to save and keep in this country, not incentivise to work and benefit New York’s Stock Exchange). 

 -           The Unions start to flex their muscles.  Just as the nation was free from the strangulation and choking hold of the Unions, like in ‘The Shining’ ‘They’re back’!  Strikes on the increase, Union militancy.  Bob Crow back on the telly chanting his monotone messages like a failed XFactor auditionee.  The Post Office, on the brink of collapse, wont modernise, cancerously pumping money into its bottomless pension pit, faced by striking members, and growing competition.  The RMT, getting the Tube drivers out on strike, more often than we enjoy a boiling hot summers day that we can take off our shirts and bathe!  And that comes before the pending winter of discontent as Unions rally against Darling’s 1% pay rise limit for public sector workers.  Who will be out striking first?  Rush down Ladbroke’s and place your bet tonight. 

 -           Our population continues on its inextricable path towards 70 million.  Immigration remains unchecked.  Asylum seekers lost amongst the population.  Our open borders burden the UK putting huge strain on over stretched public services, with the NHS groaning under the weight, school classes getting bigger, new houses being built on green belt, predicted power shortages for the years ahead as we don’t have the power stations to support our surging nation, public transport wheezing and roads at a standstill. 

 -           We are in the midst of a deeply unpopular war.  Over 200 brave soldiers have been returned home in a coffin.  Debates over strategy have been rife.  More concerning than that, real questions over the equipment troops are issued with and the lack of protection eg helicopters, have undermined this Government.  There could not be a more inept and ‘uncaring’ Defence Minister in Bob Ainsworth.

 -           The Iraq enquiry is rapidly tarnishing the reputation of ‘Labour’s greatest Leader’, Tony Blair.  We hear daily about the lack of credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction and the inability of Saddam Hussein’s regime to produce workable ones.  Coded language comes from the Iraq Enquiry that George W Bush wanted a hard line and pushed Blair into it.  Bliar indeed.

 -           A House of Commons with politicians so morally corrupt that make even Ronnie Biggs look respectable.  Yes, you will retort that Conservative politicians have been just as bad.  BUT the Government have been poor in taking any lead in cleaning up this sh*tstorm of a mess.  Cameron, has pushed Brown all the way.  Even this week we hear of Prime Minister Brown repaying £500 for painting a shed!

 -           Europe.  The continued enslavery of the British people continues to the faceless unelected bureaucrats of Europe.  Now we have the dreaded Lisbon Treaty with the instantly forgettable, but powerful. President of the European Union, (Herman Van Rompuy), and Foreign Minister, Cathy Ashton, (a Brit who was as vocal in British politics as Sooty was to Children’s TV!).  Blair and Brown promised a referendum for the British people but it never ever emerged.  Yes, Cameron took some hammering on his so called U-turn but a referendum on a Treaty in force is daft.  Another referendum on whether we have given too much power away, hell yes.  The blame for our European ills lay firmly at Brown’s door.

-           Education, Education, Education.  Blair’s famous pledge that education was his first, second and third priority.  A memorable catch phrase that was almost Turette’s by nature, proved to be as reliable as Amy Whinehouse sticking to drinking coke in a bar all night !   Education failures rack up.  50,000 A-level students miss out on a place at university.  This year 52,000 more people applied to University but only 13,000 extra places were made available.  The number of young people not in employment, education or training (Neet) has leapt by more than 100,000 in the past year.  Government statistics show there are now almost 960,000 16- to 24-year-old Neets in England, more than 230,000 of whom are aged between 16 and 18.  Oh and the flagship policy, SAT’s…teachers aim to boycott them next year!

-           A big brother state that worms its way into every aspect of our lives.  Want to help out at your local school?  Drive friends Children to their Cubs or Girl Guides?  Got to be checked on the anti paedophile register first.

Quite literally I could go on all night listing failure after failure after failure.

Fertile ground to be in Opposition.  Too much to choose from.  Should be Christmas all year round.

Opinion polls should be absolutely hammering Labour for their incompetence.  Criminal incompetence.  But they aren’t.

Some recent polls have put the difference between Conservatives to 10% difference.  Labour commanding a mid – late 20’s position.

Who the hell is being polled?  Who is supporting this shower?

As we head towards an election, the most important in many a lifetime, Conservatives need to open up the gap and generate clear blue water.  This is the ‘Schumacher’ moment when we need to be so far ahead of the field, we need to be lapping not only the back markers but coming up to lap the entire field.  Schumacher never slowed up.  He pummelled his fellow drivers into the ground.  As we must do now.

So what is wrong?

Why are we not opening up more of a gap?

Many commentators say that Conservatives Agenda is not yet bought by the British people.  Voters don’t quite trust us as yet.  They don’t understand what we stand for.  They like nice Mr Cameron but don’t have a feel for what he would do.

Much of this can be brought out in the wash in an election campaign say Conservative campaign team leaders.  Maybe…in them we have to trust!  We are not privy to the campaign they intend to use to convince the people.

But one suggestion I would impart onto David, Eric, George & William is that the key word around the campaigns table must be emotion.  Emotion is what politics lacks.  Emotion means getting personal.  It means relating to the ordinary person in the street.  Emotion creates and bonds loyalty and trust.

Politics today is too focused on debating statistics or policies.  As we all fight the election in the middle ground, choices get confused, differences misunderstood by the public, whose political antenna is not as attuned as Westminster politicians think.  I say we all fight in the middle, the key word is that all parties want to be perceived as in the middle, to attract the largest number of voters.  Matters not that policies may be more left or right wing, the centre is where we all will fight, (rightly or wrongly in your opinion).

Margaret Thatcher and Norman Tebbit had their finger on the pulse of the people.  They spoke in terms that people understood.  They personalised and humanised issues that people could relate to.  Politicians are forgetting that, just as any film director tries to do, it is about getting someone to believe in what they see.  Emotion is created by personalising issues.  Remember when Margaret Thatcher turned complex economic issues into the language that people understood.  On spending she equated the state to the family.  We cannot spend what we cannot afford.  When we are at home, if we cannot afford it, we save and then we can afford it, we buy it.  Simple language but the people loved it.  The housewife spoke!  Powerful and it resonated.  More so that today’s debate which quotes pure stats and percentages that Joe public does not understand…or will try to understand as they worry whether Joe, Stacey or Olly will win the XFactor!

Unemployment is not about a statistic of 3 million people it is about Mr Jones, who worked all his life, bought his own council house, can’t find work, wife fallen ill, daughter can’t afford University, a man depressed, lost his dignity but wants better for his family…and is fighting to earn money.  In him we respect and want to see him do well.

The health service is not about dirty corridors, increases in disease, rising cancer death rates, it is about Mrs Hughes, a mother who has a family of 3 beautiful daughters, husband died at war, who is diagnosed with cancer and facing life’s hardest choices.  How do we help her and her daughters.

Afghanistan is so more more than a statistic 200 dead, it is about John, a brave soldier on the front line who died by roadside ambush, a wife pregnant with his unborn daughter, a family torn apart.  How we help that family of a man who gave the ultimate sacrifice for all of us.

Public debt is not about a figure of trillion pounds.  It is about Mary, who is struggling to pay her mortgage, close to repossession, working for a company that is struggling to get credit, that is laying off workers, (her friends).

Violent crime is not about a percentage.  It is about 8 year old Sarah, whose father went to pick up a takeaway for the family, but never came home as youths taunted him, attacked him and used a knife in a savage unprovoked attack.

David Cameron is a thoroughly decent man.  Post the tragic death of Ivan the public saw a different side to the Politician.  They related to him.  A family man.  A bereaving dad.  A loving husband.  And they could associate with that.  We see less of the personal side of David of late.  That loving family man, the dad, the husband, has been less visible.   The emotion of the man not emanating out.

Some may shout this down.

But just sit and watch ‘Britain’s Got Talent’ or ‘The X Factor’.  Watch how contestant’s are introduced.  How emotion is used to get that tear welling up in your eye.  Get that lump in your throat.  Make you leap our your chair and vote for them because, for that moment in time, ‘they’ matter to you more than anything else.  You support them.  You don’t care paying a phone vote because you feel better in yourself for supporting them.  You feel you are making a difference.  We can all point to stories used on shows like this.  The daughter who was told by her dad to audition for Britain’s Got Talent by a dad, who died suddenly and she is now doing this for him.  Who did not feel emotional.

So, David Cameron, more than anyone, realises the election is not in the bag.  By a long way.  It’s not over until he faces the cameras on election night after Gordon Brown has conceded defeat.

So dangerous waters lie ahead.  Gordon Brown has been getting more confident of late.  The last two PMQ’s have been his strongest for a long time.  Iain Dale even concluded that Brown beat Cameron in one of them.  Unheard of!  The economy will start to turn round in the new year.  Brown must sit by the fire at No.10 with Sarah over a mug of hot chocolate and array of biscuits, (as he can’t decide his favourite), and really laugh.  ‘Sarah, look at how bad a mess everything is and yet look at those polls.  We are only 10% behind!  Even with the state of the UK as it is the Conservatives can’t kill us off.  We could still win this Sarah!’…..as she forlornly and adoringly looks into the eye of her ‘hero’! 

And things can change in politics.  The nightmare scenario still exists.  What if Gordon Brown steps down early next year?  A new Labour Leader emerges, be it Johnson, Miliband, Purnell or Mandelson, and starts to distance themselves from Brown’s policies, as the economy picks up and as they benefit from a honeymoon period in the polls, that any new leader always does.

Could Labour win the next election.  Yes.  The public may do a 1992 and shock and keep an ‘unpopular’ Government in.  Better the devil you know.  ‘Oh well things are getting better let’s stick with Labour’.

Worst case, as Ken Clarke would say, a hung Parliament.  The best of no worlds.

Election loss.  Conservatives would tear themselves apart.  Many keeping their lips sealed now for Party Unity would feel empowered to state their case.  Something none of us ever wants to see ever again.

So let’s see more spark to our Opposition.  Let’s see our front bench hammering the Government ever harder.  Let’s see emotion, personalisation and humanisation used to bring issues closer to the public, so they understand what really is going on.

We cannot afford, as a Great Nation, to see Labour in again.

Did you see this?

Flight Lieutenant Victoria Anderton ruffled some feathers yesterday, adding to Gordon Brown’s woes.  She raised her hand to ask a question then stated:  “I’m actually going out to Kandahar to serve with the Tornado GR4s next year and can I say how much more confidence I have now in my chain of command than I had after Prime Minister Gordon Brown was here a couple of weeks ago.”   Listen to the reaction from the audience, top military and watch the face of the USA’s top military commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, during his visit to London.   Brown must feel depressed!

Let’s stop beating about the bush.  The situation in Afghanistan is getting very unstable.  It is deteriorating.  As we hear of another British soldier being killed on patrol, we learn that the Taliban, (and by Association Al Qaeda), are back into mass recruiting phase, especially from the bloated prisons in Afghanistan.  Terrorist networks and training are in growth mode….not declining.  Who tells us this…not our own Generals, silenced by our Prime Minister but by Gen Stanley McChrystal, who took over as US Military Commander in May.  he has stated in an in depth report that the US mission in Afghanistan will “likely result in failure” unless troops are increased within a year.

If the USA are worried about failing.  So must we.  Will we be required to send more troops.  How many?  What if we don’t?  Will the Taliban be able to take control again in Afghanistan?  All questions that our politicians must be asking today. 

More than 30,000 extra US troops have been sent to Afghanistan since May – almost doubling the US contingent.  The number of US troops in Afghanistan is already set to rise to 68,000 by the end of the year.  American citizens question this war and strategy as much as UK public.

In his latest assessment, Gen McChrystal is quoted by the Washington Post newspaper as saying: “Failure to gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum in the near-term [next 12 months]… risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible.” He warned that “inadequate resources will likely result in failure”. “Additional resources are required,” the general states in the summary of the report. He said that failure to provide adequate resources “risks a longer conflict, greater casualties, higher overall costs, and ultimately, a critical loss of political support”. “Any of these risks, in turn, are likely to result in mission failure.”

What is more fascinating is observations that McChrystal made about how the enemy, far from being on the run, are getting more sophisticated and back into growth mode.

The assessment offers an in depth critique of the failings of the Afghan government, stating that official corruption is as much of a threat as the insurgency to the mission. “The weakness of state institutions, malign actions of power-brokers, widespread corruption and abuse of power by various officials, and ISAF’s own errors, have given Afghans little reason to support their government,” McChrystal states.  The result has been a “crisis of confidence among Afghans” . “Further, a perception that our resolve is uncertain makes Afghans reluctant to align with us against the insurgents.”

As a summary, in the report Gen McChrystal:

- Provides new details about the sophisticated nature of the Taliban insurgency

- Criticises Nato forces for focusing more on tackling insurgents than protecting Afghan civilians

- Censures the Afghan government for lack of action on widespread corruption

- Warns that Afghanistan’s prisons have become a sanctuary for active insurgents

This must be a worry to all of us.  Not least to the families and friends of soldiers serving in Afghanistan.  We need to review strategy, equipment, squad numbers.  The enemy are on the move, starting to re-build, recruit new members.  If the purpose of the war is to promote democracy and ensure that we protect our citizens back home, then the strategy is not working.  Turnout at the recent election was low.  Electoral rigging widespread.  Corrupt politicians.  Terrorists back training, growing their numbers, new camps springing up…..time for action Mr Brown.

This has been playing on my mind late at night.  Its implications are far reaching, yet our politicians are not grasping its seriousness.  Even our media are not delving deep into this issue.  The axing of ‘Star Wars’ is a monumental decision by Obama.   Obama has played sop to the Russians and ditched America’s nuclear missile shield in Europe, as part of a wild card gamble.  The UK feels a little less safe tonight with this decision, do you agree?

‘Star Wars’ / SDI was the £20 billion deployment of a system of radar and missiles to protect the West from nukes, particularly from the rogue states like North Korea and Iran.  Any missiles launched in anger against the West would have been intercepted from Poland and the Czech republic and smashed into millions of pieces in mid flight.

So why has Obama done this?  Some have stated that Obama and the US people were so pissed off by the betrayal by the UK by releasing Megradhi, they destroyed this plan.  Unlikely, but who can say that this was not a contributory factor.  More likely, is that as some state that this is Obama playing a clever game of cards with Russia, to gain their support, in ensuring Russia go back on their friendship with  Iran and agree sanctions, hence slowing their nuclear ambitions.  Back home, Obama’s right wing critics are stating this shows a sign of weakness in Obama and if Russia don’t support the USA in pressuring Iran, and getting the result of Iran denouncing its nuclear weapon ambitions, (like Libya), then Obama would have failed and made the world a lot less safer.  Obama’s brand is diminishing in the US, what with the health service reforms, this gamble could have implications on his Presidency back home.  Brave man…..or foolish….you decide.

Many dangers abound.  What if Russia sells Iran missile to protect its nuclear weapons labs from Western or Israeli jets.  Not beyond the realms of possibility.  This may prompt of course Egypt or Saudi Arabia to seek nuclear weapons.  So Obama’s decision could have wide seeking implications.

Obama’s policy is unquestionably a gamble.  Remember his campaign slogan, ‘no drama Obama’.  Well this is ‘lets take a gamble Obama, with cards open on the table, ready to see Russia’s hand and desperately hope they fall into line with us’!

The problem with Obama’s policy is that he is also taking the gamble that it will take states like Iran a long time to build and be operationally able to deploy long range nuclear missiles.  Yes they can deploy short and medium-ish range weapons now.  But long range, Obama calculates that is years away.  This is based on intelligence assessments.  Ah yes, intelligence assessments.  The same type that stated that Saddam Hussein had ‘weapons of Mass destruction’?  Trustworthy then I guess! 

So what if intelligence assessments are wrong and in the short term, states like North Korea and Iran generate long range weapons? America will have short range systems ready for deployment but not long range.  It takes time to get long range missile defence systems in place.  It’s not like going to McDonald’s and ordering a quarter pounder & fries!

If I were advising Obama, I would be stating the optimum defence policy is one that covers all bases.  All eventualities.  Our duty as public servants is to ensure the protection of our citizens.

Of course, if Obama gets a big win and Russia pressure Iran to drop their nuclear weapons ambitions, that would be seen as a win.  We are nearing endgame with Iran.    On October 1st, Iran meets with the US at a world summit of top leaders.  If Obama’s team fail in those talks to get Iran to drop its nuclear weapon ambitions, then Obama has stated he will table a new sanctions resolution before the UN Security Council.  America, most likely, will target Iran’s oil and gas industries, (Iran’s lifeblood vein), most likely with a UN ban on investment in this industry. 

Hence spotlight on Russia.  Will they allow such a resolution to pass.  Obama is gambling since ‘Star Wars’ is dropped, Russia will feel obliged to pay back, and support a resolution.  But if Russia vetoes or dilutes a sanctions resolution, this will backfire on Obama and leave the West with Iran continuing to develop and enrich Uranium for nuclear weapon production, and leave the West more vulnerable to attack.

Tonight, on a key foreign and defence issue, Obama has gamble on the winning hand of cards running his way……!!!!

But what the media and politicians are forgetting is that Iran is not the only state with nuclear ambitions. Obama is too preoccupied with Iran.  North Korea are as unreliable and unpredictable a nation as you can get.  Who knows what Kim Jong will do next?  Hardly the most stable of Leaders.  Old, poor health, fighting for power and wanting to secure his place in infamy & history.  What has he got to lose by firing a missile?  What about Pakistan? A very volatile regime.  With a growing Al Qaeda influence in Pakistan, who can dismiss a coup d’etat one day?  Afghanistan.  Again, all sorts of possibilities.  What if the Taliban can buy or steal a nuclear weapon?  Afghanistan is a home to drugs….a great revenue generator for whoever has control!  What if the Afghanistan War becomes so unpopular, the USA & NATO pull out and the Taliban take control again?  So many possibilities.  Now, no defence shield to protect Europe, (and the West).

Europe feels a little less safe tonight…..!  The decision to axe ‘Star Wars’ is a gamble…will it pay off?

Always great when we have a guest blog on the site.  John Laity is a great friend to this site and again has written a very thought provoking piece on what more can be done in Afghanistan.  Thanks John.  Keep them coming. 

Over to John.  Let him know your views…..

——————————————-

Afghanistan

Trueblueblood has been very active in highlighting issues with resourcing and strategy in Afghanistan. Under which you will usually find a ranting (badly spelt) comment from me. The PM’s Friday’s speech drew me out a bit earlier  than usual :0)

On Friday Gordon Brown announced that the UK’s aims in Afghanistan are “realistic and achievable” in a speech defending the government’s strategy.

Prior to this speech and in a move reminiscent of Robin Cook’s resignation Ministerial aide and ex-army Major, Eric Joyce (MP for Falkirk) quit, questioning the government’s strategy.

I salute Eric Joyce for being honest and having the courage to speak out.

WE MUST HAVE A CLEAR AND UNWAVERING STRATEGY FOR AFGHANISTAN.

Eric Joyce is wholly correct that such a strategy must address public opinion and recognise the courage and sacrifice of our UK Armed Forces and their families.  Any strategy we devise is built on their sacrifice:

“The number of UK troops killed on operations in Afghanistan since 2001 stands at 212 after the death of a soldier from 2nd Battalion The Mercian Regiment due to a gunshot wound sustained while on patrol in Helmand province on 3 September.” BBC Website

Even as I type, this statistic is already out of date! So please check for yourself:

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8040620.stm

This site details all UK casualties in Afganistan and Iraq…It is a troubling site where the face of nearly every casualty has been recorded. A reminder of the cost of the conflict, but  also a chance to remember.

To date we have been fighting a “search and destroy” action, to break down organised Taliban forces. Panthers Claw illustrates how our conventional forces can successfully clear an area of insurgent forces. Albeit at a high cost.

Here is the bad news, fighting a group of insurgents is an achievable task for a superior force, but it drives the enemy into smaller fragmented units…Harder to find, harder to stop. Denied open movement these groups will now employ guerrilla and terror tactics…with time on their side.

IED’s, Sniping, Poisoning, mines, traps, trip wires, suicide bombs, rocket attacks, kidnapping, rape and intimidation.

It is at this point of the conflict that the Government has to truly commit to the “long haul” with a clear strategy for when to withdrawal. Failure to do so will simply create a meat grinder, where the lack of a clear objective and timetable gives advantage to the guerilla’s fighting tactics.

The long haul means MORE troops and MORE money to be spent. It also means MORE casualties and MORE fatalities. All this will be over a long, long time.

Let’s be clear, if you have children aged 10 – 12 now, they could be serving in a police action in Afghanistan by the time they are 18. This is not a guess, you can look at the world’s history on guerrilla conflicts:

Examples of successful guerrilla warfare against a native regime;

Cuban Revolution

Chinese Civil War

Sandinista Revolution

Uganda

Liberia

Vietnam

Cambodia

Foreign forces intervened in all these countries, but the power struggles were protracted and eventually all resolved locally. I.E. Foreign forces did not “win” they moved out to allow for a local reconciliation.

Lest we forget, we can also specifically consider Afghanistan’s own history of guerilla action:

First Anglo-Afghan War of 1838–1842

Second Anglo-Afghan War of 1878–1880

Third Anglo-Afghan War 1919 – where the Afghan people gained independence from the British Empire

Soviet invasion of Afghanistan 1979 – 1989

So can a strategy of “Regime Change” establish democracy and a fairer society? Will this really establish a safer western society? Will it eliminate terrorist training grounds?

Possibly, but the creation of a new regime, lawful state and stable society will take at least a generation…Look to Northern Ireland to understand how difficult such things are and how long things will take to establish peace…Also, in this case you must factor the enemy’s resolve.

“Why does the guerrilla fighter fight? We must come to the inevitable conclusion that the guerrilla fighter is a social reformer, that he takes up arms responding to the angry protest of the people against their oppressors, and that he fights in order to change the social system that keeps all his unarmed brothers in ignominy and misery.” Che Guevara

Social reform may not seem to the case with the Taliban, but by imposing religious beliefs and religious law, the Taliban believe they are improving the lives and well being of their people in this life AND the next one! As such you have to consider the fact that the general population within Afghanistan may not like the Taliban regime, but are driven by faith not to question huge parts of Taliban belief.

In stopping the Taliban our strategy moving forward has to be to deny popular support from the civilian population. This has to be done by improving the lives of the population…A population that has been in conflict for over 3 generations.

A friendly population will be of immense importance to the Taliban fighters, providing shelter, supplies, financing, intelligence and recruits. The “base of the people” is thus the key lifeline of their guerrilla movement. Bullets, helicopters and personnel vehicles will not “win the fight against the Taliban”. Education, Schools, healthcare, water, roads and commerce might…Most of which we can’t seem to get right for our own citizens!

Simple things we should be seeing and asking of the Government:

1. The deployment of dog handlers – Trained dogs can locate explosives and those individuals who handle them

2. The deployment of bomb disposal teams and robots – Technology proved in Northern Ireland!

3. The deployment of large numbers of UAVs – safely monitor roads, recon remote areas and  prevent the planting of IEDs

 4. The deployment of scout aircraft and helicopters  – to monitor roads and patrol remote areas

Question: Hey be radical… Why can’t this extend to inclu de £20,000 Microlights?  Below is a picture from a trial in  Iraq.

They can fly at 110 mph well above the effective range (365 m /1200 ft) of the AK-47…Quite happy at 6000 ft

 Lastly, some simple lessons we should have learned by now:

Painting a landrover defender a sandy colour and adding some steel plate does not
make it armoured or safe from IEDs…

Helicopters are a good thing to have deployed in large numbers if you don’t want to drive from A to B…

The 1 – 3 rule: If we loose one soldier a day, then we have to deploy one solder a day to remain at the same level of operational strength. However, this also means we need to place another soldier in reserve and then recruit and train another to remain at the same level of operational readiness. 

 The 1 – 10 rule: Casualties draw down far more resources than fatalities, so have a greater impact on operational effectiveness.

Lastly, The Total Bullshit rule: “we are raising troop numbers from 8,300 to 9,200” …Total spin! When this was announced, 2,469 UK personnel had been aeromedically evacuated on medical grounds and 212 deaths. Casualties mean smaller numbers in units, which means our combat effectiveness must be reducing.

We can only raise operational effectiveness by deploying a greater number of active units and reserve personnel. These aren’t individual policemen patrolling on street corners, they are fighting units.

Stop quoting big numbers about troops on the ground. Fighting units are teams! How many teams are on the ground at full fighting strength?

“Just point at them like this, they don’t like it up em you see.”

As we relax and enjoy a Bank Holiday, spend time with our family and friends, enjoy a pint at the local pub, spare a thought for our soldiers in Afghanistan, toiling away in immence heat and in perilious conditions that could see their lives snuffed out in the flash of a roadside bomb.

Two more British soldiers from The Black Watch, 3rd Battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland, have been killed in Afghanistan, whilst on foot patrol.  Their deaths take the total number of deaths of UK service personnel since operations began in 2001 to 210.

How many more must die before these questions are answered by Brown & Ainsworth?

Don’t we owe it to our soldiers and their families to answer them?

-    What are our current mission objectives in Afghanistan?   (These have to be specific & measurable, not vague rhetoric of stopping terrorists reaching UK or provide democracy to the region….it could be argued that bringing democracy to the region will be achieved through the elections this month…but we know that troops won’t be pulled out post these elections as the region is still unstable, hence why we need more specific objectives).)

-    When do we know when the mission goals have been achieved?  Again, have to be specific so people can judge if we are achieving them.

-    What is our exit strategy?   When is this estimated to be?  Do the Government agree that, as reported by a Leading Army General, Britain will need to be there for 30/40 years, in what capacity and what numbers?

-    Do the Government agree with President Karzai that the Taliban and terrorist groups should be brought to the negotiating table today?  Would the UK Government negotiate with the Taliban?

-    What successes have been achieved thus far in this campaign?  Is Operation Panther’s Claw a success as Sky News on the ground reports demonstrate an enemy that is still very well organised and able to attack at will.  Why was Panther’s Claw judged a success?

-    On election day, the terrorists will be planning a series of atrocities.  What contingency plans have been made to protect citizens and British Troops?

-    How can Britain and the USA ensure a fair burden of military operations with NATO in this campaign?  We know that NATO partners have token forces in presence and those that are there are placed in more remote areas of Afghanistan with less chances of direct conflict.  Why is the Government silent on this issue and allowing Brits & Americans to shoulder the main bulk of the military offensive? 

-    How has the Government reviewed whether military equipment used by soldiers is fit for purpose?  Why do military top brass criticise their equipment if it is fit for purpose??

-    Are their enough Army helicopters to get troops in and out of the theatre of battle quickly enough?  Can the Government see any evidence of troops entering the battle theatre in slow moving vehicles leaving them exposed to enemy attack?  Why did a now dead army soldier report back on video that US Soldiers were taking the piss out of British Military equipment for being so bad?  Is cost the key influencing criteria for issuing military equipment into the Theatre of battle?  If so, has cost led to any cutbacks of equipment thus far and in what?

-     Has opium production increased or decreased in Afghanistan in the past 12 months?  What evidence does the Government have when reports indicate Opium production has radically increased?

-     Has Taliban geographical control increased or decreased in past 12 months and will the Government map out their perspective of the locations of Taliban spheres of influence, (including that of Pakistan).

-     If there was a terrorist attack in the UK by Al Qaeda would that then signify a failure of mission objectives in Afghanistan?

-     How many terrorist attacks have been foiled by Scotland Yard in the past 2 years by groups linked to the Taliban/Afghanistan/Al Qaeda? 

-     How many terrorist sympathisers are being monitored/tracked in the UK at this current time?

-     How many people from Afghanistan & Pakistan entered the UK under a student visa and cannot currently be tracked?

The helicopter situation has again worsened in Afghanistan.  Nato forces have been forced to destroy a crashed British Chinook helicopter to keep it out of the hands of the Taliban for the second time in 10 days. 

Before the two crashes there were thought to be only 10 twin-rotor Chinooks, (key transporters), deployed in Helmand.  The loss of the latest aircraft will leave British forces even more dependent on American Black Hawk helicopters.

Never before have we been so under prepared for a war…we are letting down the finest forces in the world.