Dannatt's Army: Understrength. Overstretched. And fully behind their General

Lance Corporal Matt Carse, of the Royal Military Police, thought he would be pursuing his normal duties when he was sent to Afghanistan. Instead he found himself fighting for his life.

Describing one occasion on which his patrol was ambushed, L/Cpl Carse said: "There were about five of us fighting - it showed how under-strength we were. We were in 50-degree heat, running over open ground being fired at. During this ambush we picked up three serious casualties, and we had to extract them from a cornfield. We knew the Taliban were there, but we had to go in.

"We were continually taking fire - the bullets were literally millimetres away from our faces. Rockets were landing in the canal next to us, causing huge splashes; it had been about eight hours of intense fighting and I hadn't eaten yet.

"We heard word that the helicopters were coming to get us, but they were being fired at as they were landing to pick up the bodies and casualties. The pilot did a great job getting us home - I have every thanks for him. When we got back to base, we then had to work on policing duties for the rest of the night."

L/Cpl Carse scarcely needed to add that he felt "very lucky" to be alive. "Everyone comes back with a story of luck at how they survived," he said. "That's all it can be put down to - luck."

Stories like these, told by soldiers returning after the most bitter fighting the British army has seen in more than half a century, help to explain why the Chief of Staff, General Sir Richard Dannatt, publicly confronted the Government last week. At the same time as the 3 Para battle group was relating what it had been through in Helmand, British soldiers in southern Iraq were being shown on television, painting the walls of schools in Basra in a half-hearted "hearts and minds" campaign. It encapsulated the frustration Sir Richard and other senior officers feel at being entangled in Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time, without the personnel or resources to succeed in either.

Though Sir Richard did not utter the word "overstretch" in his latest remarks, it was clearly implied. His outburst has been warmly welcomed by many soldiers, both serving and retired, who felt that his predecessors were too ready to accommodate a generation of New Labour politicians who know nothing of military sacrifice, yet are happy to throw forces at an ever-widening range of crises.

Military chiefs say it was made clear to the Government when the Afghanistan deployment was proposed that troop levels would have to be reduced in Iraq, yet 3 Para completed its six-month tour in Helmand with no "drawdown" of the 7,200 soldiers still posted in southern Iraq. For more than a year these troops have remained largely confined to their bases in and around Basra, after a spate of roadside bombings in the autumn of 2005 killed several soldiers in a matter of days, but there continues to be a trickle of losses, the most recent earlier this month.

In the wake of the roadside bombings too, most movements between bases in Basra were carried out by helicopter. In May this year, however, a helicopter was shot down over the city, killing five on board, and since then most flights have been at night.

This appears to lie behind Sir Richard's comment that we should "get ourselves out [of Iraq] some time soon, because our presence exacerbates the security problems". Tony Blair responded that while Basra remained difficult, we had quit two of the four provinces in the British zone of south-eastern Iraq. What he did not mention was that they have scarcely any population, and the situation in the remaining province, Maysan, demonstrates why commanders are seething.

In August this year the British base in the provincial capital, al-Amara, was handed over to the Iraqi army, with flag ceremonies and bands playing (and was promptly looted by local people). The hope was that this would allow 3,000 British troops to be withdrawn from theatre, but after complaints from the US and the Iraqi government that Maysan's border with Iraq would be exposed, the forces were simply redeployed to the border.

In this context, the sight of British troops mending playground swings and doling out pastel-coloured satchels to primary schools in Basra last week is revealed as little more than public relations, despite the announcement that 1,000 British soldiers in southern Iraq are taking part this month in "Operation Sinbad". In practice they remain in each district of the city for no more than 48 hours before moving on.

Many of the troops on the ground in Iraq, and their commanders back home, believe that they are remaining there almost exclusively for political reasons. Their main role, in this view, is face-saving for the Iraqi government as well as their own, not to mention relations between London and Washington. This opinion was reinforced by news that the British army chief's comments had prompted a flurry of calls from the White House to Downing Street.

A succession of middle-ranking officers in Iraq have told visitors that the welcome from the local population is fast wearing out. Or as Sir Richard put it, "You can be welcomed by being invited in a country, but ... the military campaign we fought in 2003 effectively kicked the door in."

Some of the soldiers now returning from Afghanistan fear that the same process of hasty intervention, with a lack of clear and achievable objectives, is being repeated there. One senior officer, who asked to remain anonymous, said: "We went there to carry out reconstruction, and we ended up fighting a war ... Helmand is a military vacuum. We were going into the unknown. More could have been done to prepare the public better for the kind of war we're facing. I'm not sure that we really sat back and tried to work out the level of fighting that we'd have to sustain."

During three months of intense combat, nearly half a million rounds of machine gun ammunition, more than 4,000 rounds of high explosive, 7,500 mortar rounds, 1,000 hand grenades and 85 anti-tank missiles have been used. In September, pilots got through nearly 500 bombs and rockets as they gave air support to troops on the ground in what has been the RAF's largest bombing operation since the Iraq invasion in 2003.

"You can literally hear the battle through the troops' radio, the sound of the bullets flying past their head," said Wing Cdr Ian Duguid, 39, who led a Harriers squadron. "You are talking to them, and if they ask you to get them out - you have to get them out."

Like the infantry, the Harrier pilots arrived expecting "peace enforcement", but found the reality very different. "Much of our work was at a low level, arriving overhead and talking to the troops on the ground," said Wing Cdr Duguid. "We had a live feed to the troops, and if they are in armed conflict then they need our support, so we provide it very quickly.

"I have 14 years of operational experience, but this situation is unique because it is close air support - it's personal. If the weather is poor, it might take time to identify the target. You have to be sure, you are under pressure, but you have to focus your efforts on that. You lose all track of time."

Possibly the pilot talked to 23-year-old Sam New, a bombardier from 7th Parachute Regiment, Royal Horse Artillery. His role involved bringing in air strikes - in some cases just 40 metres away. "Taliban fighters were getting within 10 metres of our position," he said. "I had about three and a half weeks of intense fighting, with many ambushes - one day we had four. One time we were ambushed and the driver got shot. The whole tank had bullets put through it - we were lucky to survive."

The fortitude of people like Bombardier New and even younger soldiers prompted the returning commander to say: "If anybody tells me that the youth of today cannot hack it, then that is complete bloody nonsense. They showed courage in spades out there, and have done us all proud. These guys faced an intensity of combat we have not faced for generations. It's been quite hairy, but the guys pulled through."

But military pride cannot disguise the feeling at higher levels that British troops are being asked to do more and more with less and less.

Additional reporting by Lauren Veevers and Jonathan Owen

Interesting? Click here to explore further