World

Mostly Cloudy with Showers 11° London Hi 14°C / Lo 8°C

Public support 'crucial' to Afghan success, says general

By Gavin Cordon, Press Association

Public support is "crucially important" to the success of mission in Afghanistan, the senior British commander in the country warned today, as the death toll among British troops rose to 231.

Lieutenant General Jim Dutton, the deputy commander of the international forces in Afghanistan, spoke out as the MoD announced the death of a soldier who died in a blast near Sangin, Helmand Province, yesterday, on the eve of Remembrance Sunday.

Lt Gen Dutton said people needed to understand that British troops were not being sacrificed simply for the sake of the government of President Hamid Karzai.

"British soldiers are not dying simply to provide an electoral opportunity for Afghans," he said in an interview with the BBC1 Politics Show to be broadcast later today.

"There is much more to the provision of stability in this area of the world, which is a project for which I have to say, yes, it is worth some soldiers having to die for because the consequences of it going wrong are far greater."

The serviceman who was killed, from the 2nd Battalion, The Rifles, was praised by Task Force Helmand spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel David Wakefield, who said: "He died a soldier, doing his duty and among his fellow soldiers. He will not be forgotten."

The soldier's family have been informed.

On Friday, Gordon Brown issued a warning to the Afghan president that he must do more to tackle corruption and build good governance if he was to continue to receive the support of the international community.

Lt Gen Dutton said that he believed the public would continue to support the campaign in Afghanistan provided that they understood what it was trying to achieve and how it could be done.

"I think I can say without any doubt that support back home is crucially important but I don't sense any lack of support for soldiers back home," he said.

"I think the British people, and indeed all our populations back home, will put up with the cost of this sort of operation, and I mean the cost in human and financial terms, if they believe two things: one that we're right and two that we can win.

"We have to convince them of that - that we have a good plan, that we're right to be doing this. We have momentum along that path and they have to believe that we can win."

However, a ComRes opinion poll for the programme found that almost two thirds - 64 per cent - now believe that the war is "unwinnable", while a similar proportion - 63 per cent - wanted British troops to be withdrawn as soon as possible.

Lt Gen Dutton acknowledged the mission was not making as much progress as they would like and that the situation was, as the US commander General Stanley McChrystal had warned, "serious and deteriorating".

"It's not necessarily going backwards, it's certainly not going forwards and certainly not at the speed we would wish," he said.

He said that under Gen McChrystal's proposals - currently under review by the US administration - the international forces would "suppress" the Taliban insurgency over the next three to four years, while they trained up the Afghan security forces to take over from them.

While he said that it would be "extremely helpful" if more could be done in this area, it was important not to rush the process.

"We don't want to build an inefficient army," he said. "We want to build a good army and a good police force and that takes time and that's why we need international forces to cover that gap."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Nobody supports this illegal war
[info]freddyfresh wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 09:51 am (UTC)
Especially if they knew that the only reason we are there is to build and protect the Trans Afghan Pipeline, which will then pump natural gas from the huge reserves in Uzbekistan. The positions of the the US troops currently in Afghanistan are on the exact same route as the proposed pipeline. It's very much the same as Iraq, where the US invaders immediately protected the oil fields, allowing people to loot and destroy all the museums and hospitals. Let's not forget those museums contained sacred artifacts from the birth of civilisation. All in all, this fake war on terror is just a strategic resource grab from the Middle East.
Re: Nobody supports this illegal war - I DO
[info]saxontimes wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 01:11 pm (UTC)
Clearly you are wrong I support it and so should every decent minded person who values their freedom support this war. There is nothing illegal about Afghanistan we are there under a UN mandate, so lets have no more rubbish about an illegal war. It shows gross disrespect for our armed services today of all days.
It is not the war that is the problem it is the way that the war is being conducted by Labour whose half hearted efforts are just getting some of our lads killed needlessly. We need to go there and do it in a way that will get the job done and if that means 10,000 more troops then so be it. They also need to have the right equipment something this government has sadly denied them.
Yes I believe in this war because I believe in freedom and stopping the Islamists in their backyard and not on the streets of Britain. Unfortunately we have let these Islamists into this country so we need to hunt them down and root them out too otherwise Afghanistan would become pointless. So lets come together on this day of all days and once again say as the British people we will fight evil and fiercely defend our democracy.
Nobody supports this illegal war except saxontimes
[info]freddyfresh wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 01:56 pm (UTC)
Your entire comment reads like an agit prop Daily Mail sound byte. There is no real threat to the UK from Afghanistan, that's an effin ridiculous thing to say, even the ex MI6 chief admits that.. 'Our lads' are being killed for the Trans Afghan Pipeline, it's nothing to do with 'freedom' or 'democracy'. The Afghan women are worse off now than under the Taliban, the amount of heroin reaching the streets in the UK has increased exponentially since the invasion; due to the fact that the Taliban had clamped down on the opium trade.
Re: Nobody supports this illegal war - I DO
[info]llienomot wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:13 pm (UTC)
"I support it and so should every decent minded person who values their freedom support this war." What about freedom from being told how one should think saxontimes?
Cannot convince me...
[info]coochrisyorks wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 10:36 am (UTC)
Yes I support out TROOPS. Let me get that clear from the start, however I do not and never will support the idea of an illegal war, brought on by NeoCon bastards out to control the worlds resources for themselves.
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]llienomot wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 10:57 am (UTC)
Our troops have a duty not to obey illegal or immoral orders. If you feel the war is illegal how can you support the troops who accepted the orders to wage it?
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]coochrisyorks wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 12:14 pm (UTC)
Oh please. "They have a duty not to obey illegal or immoral orders"
What planet do you live on?
I support troops as human beings, not cannon fodder. You got children? If yes..you wanna send em over?
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]llienomot wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 03:55 pm (UTC)
I live on planet Earth coochrisyorks, where I wish no harm to anyone. There is a difference, however, between not wishing harm on someone and supporting their actions. In my opinion the continued presence of our troops in Afghanistan is immoral. I can not support troops who follow immoral orders.

And yes, I do have children but I would not send my, or anybody else's children, to fight an immoral war.
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]coochrisyorks wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:59 pm (UTC)
Thats what I was saying. I cannot support the whole thing. Full stop, however I DO support the fight for our troops to get them out. Sorry if it was not clear, hope it is now.
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]llienomot wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:19 pm (UTC)
Thanks coochrisyorks, glad we cleared up the mis-understanding.
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]saxontimes wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 01:17 pm (UTC)
The Army in AFGHANISTAN is not, repeat not, fighting an illegal, I wish people would read the facts instead of inventing lies.
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]llienomot wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 03:45 pm (UTC)
I have read the facts saxontimes, and as I understand them the war in Afghanistan (only one capital letter required saxontimes) is immoral.

Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]saxontimes wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 01:13 pm (UTC)
How is Afghanistan illegal it is supporting the UN, do not get confused with Iraq
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]freddyfresh wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 02:08 pm (UTC)
Bush went to the United National Security Council to get a resolution authorizing the use of military force against Afghanistan and Al Qaeda. He failed. You have to remember that. This war has never been authorized by the United Nations Security Council. If you read the two resolutions that he got, it is very clear that what Bush, Jr. tried to do was to get the exact same type of language that Bush, Sr. got from the U.N. Security Council in the late fall of 1990 to authorize a war against Iraq to produce its expulsion from Kuwait. It is very clear if you read these resolutions, Bush, Jr. tried to get the exact same language twice and they failed. Indeed the first Security Council resolution refused to call what happened on September 11 an "armed attack"--that is by one state against another state. Rather they called it "terrorist attacks." But the critical point here is that this war has never been approved by the U.N. Security Council so technically it is illegal under international law. It constitutes an act and a war of aggression by the United States against Afghanistan.
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]coochrisyorks wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:00 pm (UTC)
Hooray.
Re: Cannot convince me...
[info]llienomot wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:05 pm (UTC)
I think we know the difference between Iraq and Afghanistan saxontimes.
Nurse! Nurse!
[info]hippydroog wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 10:49 am (UTC)

"Lt Gen Dutton acknowledged the mission was not making as much progress as they would like"

If only the simple-minded dead and crippled suckers had worked it out for themselves that donkeys like this general had led them astray, they might just have had the guts to tell him to piss off.

The tipping point in Vietnam came when the troops refused orders and began killing their officers (fragging). When this news spread to fresh troops, they also refused order to go out and get themselves killed for no good reason. This was never reported as cowardice.

Rationality beats futile bravery any day of the week.
BEST GORDON BROWN JOKE EVER?
[info]sidsnot wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 12:06 pm (UTC)
"Gordon Brown issued a warning to the Afghan president that he must do more to tackle corruption and build good governance". Now I seem to remember something about the Kettle, Pot and Black.
Re: BEST GORDON BROWN JOKE EVER?
[info]saxontimes wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 01:19 pm (UTC)
Excellent post love it
Never never land
[info]tovasco wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 12:31 pm (UTC)
"We don't want to build an inefficient army," he said. "We want to build a good army and a good police force and that takes time and that's why we need international forces to cover that gap."

The second world war was fought in far less time than this conflict has been going on. How on earth given the training progress chart on the Afghan national forces did the huge armies of that time get trained, fight, win or lose that conflict? Those guys were taken from factory, school or field and turned into warriors. How come the Afghans can't be trained in multiples of the time taken to train those armies? Does one get the sense that it is just one huge pointless waste of time to try?


Re-think Afganistan
[info]givesometruth wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 02:59 pm (UTC)
Watch American filmmaker Robert Greenwald's film RethinkAfganistan.com for free online, for interviews and testimonies with real Afganies about what they would like for their country.

Reboot, the system is corrupted and failed.
[info]kingofmumu wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:40 pm (UTC)
Why would anyone, except for a brainless moron, support these illegal wars. "WE" the people of the UK are not brainless morons(well most of us are not), and we would like you to stop murdering our fellow human beings.
Insane
[info]lkdamo wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 04:49 pm (UTC)
"Public support is "crucially important" to the success of mission in Afghanistan,"

When Uri Geller says stuff like that, people say he is mad.

Altoughter now, touch the screen and bring the boys home.
They would say that.
[info]chippychap wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 05:15 pm (UTC)
Politicians and warty-old warmongers WILL support this war.
Politicians are scrabbling for power and resources whilst the seat-polishing military heads are scrabbling for, er, power and resources.
They wish to Empire-build at the cost of lives on both sides of the conflict.
Shovel up the body parts whilst these despicable bastards swan from banquet to sumptuous banquet congratulating each other.
Powerful scum are still scum
Time to go
[info]iunomoneta wrote:
Sunday, 8 November 2009 at 06:34 pm (UTC)
General Jim has just put the case for withdrawal, he says the war needs public support but every poll shows that the public are more and more fed up with the conflict. If it cannot be won without public support then we may as well leave now.

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date