Afghanistan, what now?
- Thread starter weltweit
- Start date
Chris P Duck
Well-Known Member
So were going to pay for these new helicopters by closing/mothballing existing bases in the UK.
The first of the helicopters arrive in 2012 ... the last in 2018. So were planning to be around in Afghanistan until at least 2018 then...
The first of the helicopters arrive in 2012 ... the last in 2018. So were planning to be around in Afghanistan until at least 2018 then...
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It's fair to say though, that even post-Portillo, the MoD still has a lot of under-used "real estate", especially with amalgamations of regts and ongoing consolidation of the air force.
In other words, I think that they've got room to play with, if they play wisely.
I suspect that even if we fully intend to be out of Afghanistan before then, the chief of staff is looking at having better long-term air-mobile capacity that can be deployed anywhere in the Middle East, so it would make sense to still be having new fleet rolled out in 2018.
Cast your minds back to the last major “real-estate” sale….. the MOD housing portfolio, and lets hope that they’ll be as
successful this time around.
For those with short memories….(briefly)….
in 1996 Nomura's PFG (Principal Finance Group) bought 57,000 married servicemen's quarters from the UK Ministry of Defense
for Stg1.7bn. Most of the properties were then leased back to the MoD at below-market rents.
The MoD in turn guaranteed a minimum rental stream, agreed to an UPWARDS-ONLY rent review schedule, and undertook to
release an annual quota of properties back to Nomura which could then sell them, or rent them on the open market
By 1997 the estate was valued at Stg3.2bn. and by 2002, after continued property price rises, the estate had an indexed
valuation of Stg4.44bn.
By Aug 2004 the estate was valued at Stg6.35bn despite the sale of properties in the interim. Meanwhile the entire estate
had also undergone rent reviews, and Annington (the Nomura securitization vehicle) had achieved average rental increases
of 49% since 1997
You couldn't make it up could you ?
successful this time around.
For those with short memories….(briefly)….
in 1996 Nomura's PFG (Principal Finance Group) bought 57,000 married servicemen's quarters from the UK Ministry of Defense
for Stg1.7bn. Most of the properties were then leased back to the MoD at below-market rents.
The MoD in turn guaranteed a minimum rental stream, agreed to an UPWARDS-ONLY rent review schedule, and undertook to
release an annual quota of properties back to Nomura which could then sell them, or rent them on the open market
By 1997 the estate was valued at Stg3.2bn. and by 2002, after continued property price rises, the estate had an indexed
valuation of Stg4.44bn.
By Aug 2004 the estate was valued at Stg6.35bn despite the sale of properties in the interim. Meanwhile the entire estate
had also undergone rent reviews, and Annington (the Nomura securitization vehicle) had achieved average rental increases
of 49% since 1997
You couldn't make it up could you ?
weltweit
Well-Known Member
22 new Chinook helicopters from £900m redirected money from cutbacks in other projects.
Helicopters to arrive in Afghanistan in 2012.
RAF loses Harrier squadron.
Helicopters only arriving in 2012 seems a bit late, surely it does not take that long to build a helicopter? And anyhow are we not supposed to be starting to leave in 2012?
Helicopters to arrive in Afghanistan in 2012.
RAF loses Harrier squadron.
Helicopters only arriving in 2012 seems a bit late, surely it does not take that long to build a helicopter? And anyhow are we not supposed to be starting to leave in 2012?
weltweit
Well-Known Member
French troops spearhead assault in Afghanistan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8419645.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8419645.stm
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
It's like the entire thing is being planned by 13-year-old boys.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Indeed. I love the fact that the 'sovereignty of Afghan security forces' is to be secured by, um, French soldiers.
And 'International Security Assistance Force' is a marvellous euphemism for 'occupying foreign armies'.
Can any of the fools who spout this crap actually believe it themselves?
And 'International Security Assistance Force' is a marvellous euphemism for 'occupying foreign armies'.
Can any of the fools who spout this crap actually believe it themselves?
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Britain's first Afghanistan death of 2010
Explosion in Helmand kills soldier from Royal Anglian Regiment, while four Americans die in separate attack
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/04/first-afghanistan-british-death-2010
Explosion in Helmand kills soldier from Royal Anglian Regiment, while four Americans die in separate attack
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/04/first-afghanistan-british-death-2010
Mr. Shaman
New Member
Obama had implemented a tactic, foreign to the Bush Admin...Thinking Things Through.
Superdupastupor
fun to funky
Number crunching: Afghan GDP (2008) $21Bn Vs. US war effort in Afghanistan cost (2009) $171Bn
So every 6 weeks or so the US spends the equvilent of the entire Afghan GDP.
Madness
So every 6 weeks or so the US spends the equvilent of the entire Afghan GDP.
Madness
weltweit
Well-Known Member
I am surprised it is as much as that.
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
It's interesting but there are a few problems as far as a complete withdrawal is concerned (not to mention to contradictory opinion poll results they quote)
If the US etc pulled out, I would imagine the Taliban would try to regain control, and stand a very good chance of succeeding. What do Afghans want asks the article, well 96% don't want the Taliban back and if we twist the figures regarding opinion on the length of time Afghans want foreign forces to stay even more than the authors of the article have twisted the figures, then 49% of Afghans presumably want a continuation of the "occupation" (not to mention that 63% of Afghans support the presence of US troops there).
But this war was never about what the Afghans want. It was always about the security of our own countries (despite what the conspiracy theorists think about oil motives). Allowing the Taliban back into power, even sharing power, unless they can somehow give reassurances they will no longer give shelter or support to international Islamist terrorists then that would be unacceptable and should not be allowed to happen.
It seems that what the US/UK governments and Afghanis are in perfect agreement that the Taliban must not be allowed to regain any kind of power in Afghanistan...
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
Ah yes - the latest 'big push' against the viet cong, taliban whatever.
What utter bollocks. They'll 'capture' huge swathes of empty space and isolated towns and villages. The 'taliban' will melt away until the operation is decalred 'a huge success' (oh and sorry about the dead civilians) then the NATO forces will pull out, the taliban will stroll back and they'll be back to square one.
What utter bollocks. They'll 'capture' huge swathes of empty space and isolated towns and villages. The 'taliban' will melt away until the operation is decalred 'a huge success' (oh and sorry about the dead civilians) then the NATO forces will pull out, the taliban will stroll back and they'll be back to square one.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
Its already telling. How long has NATO been there now?
Every 6 months we have a big military operation to 'clear out the taliban' - but unless your gonner swamp the coutnry indeinfintely with 100 of thousands of troops (which the USSR did for 10 years before giving up) it will never work.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
Indeed. It jsut pisses me off that these big military offences are depicted as like WW2 style operations - set peice battles agaisnt an ememy army defending fixed positions - when they're fighting a gurrilla war where they can huff and puff and capture as much empty space as they wish but it achives nothing (other than pissing off the locals).Its meaningless beyond giving NATO the oppourtunity to look to like its doing somehting other than running around in circles getting perodocally wasted by IEDs.
DexterTCN
Troy and Abed in the morning
It's already a PR disaster. 12 civvies killed on the first day by a 'stray NATO rocket'. (Or as everyone else calls it...the Americans)
Why are we there? To prop up that arsehole Karzai?
Of course, 2 weeks ago all the talk was abut giving them money! This week we're back at war. Embarrassing. Dare I say futile?
Why are we there? To prop up that arsehole Karzai?
Of course, 2 weeks ago all the talk was abut giving them money! This week we're back at war. Embarrassing. Dare I say futile?
Fuchs66
Ring a ding
It might be worthwhile to consider the way the Soviet Union went about it and the losses they suffered and inflicted on the country
(I know it's Wiki but the figures look ok)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#Soviet_personnel_strengths_and_casualties
It was a totally different war and a totally different situation not comparable with what is going on now.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
So you say... "It might be worthwhile to consider the way the Soviet Union went about it "
But then you say:
So are there lessons to be learnt or not?
Fuchs66
Ring a ding
Of course there were and are lessons to be learnt and a lot were, one of the reasons why the losses both military and civilian are much less. My main point is that there is no direct comparison between the 2 conflicts apart from the geography.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
win -go away -start again -
(military stuff)
(military stuff)
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
"we"?
Fuck off
Fuck off
weltweit
Well-Known Member
When the Afghan army is populated and trained, I would agree with you.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
