Vote!
Is the US/UK decision to send more troops to Afghanistan too little too late?
- 63% are saying yes
- 37% are saying no
comments from readers
- Carl Jones
18 June 2008 - yes
The US/UK and now NATO occupation of Afghanistan was never intended to reach a speedy resolution. Afgahanistan is all about the projection of power and second, ensuring the West gets the illegal drugs it craves.
The US military requested 200,000 men for Iraq, they got 130,000 (now 150,000). There was no intent to secure post invasion order. Its the same in Afghanistan. 35,000 men is a joke. Its amazing that in Iraq, US/UK forces were confined to base most of the time. It appears that Afghanistan is an in the dust real time training camp....training for what?
- left888
19 June 2008 - no
Sending less troops would be a better idea. But they won't do that until they've built their oil pipeline.
Its all US/NATO imperialism, remember the US were the ones who propelled the Taliban to power. - giraffe11
20 June 2008 - no
There does not seem to be any real issue in sending troops to Afghanistan at any time. How can it ever be too late surely the military contingent is kept 'topped up' regularly? Isn't it? As for numbers sent whose counting/ The Afghans?Surely not!!
- swatantra nandanwar
20 June 2008 - yes
What and odd question! I had to put 'yes' just to post a comment, but would rather have put 'they shouldn't be there in the first place!'
20 June 2008- no
No, what is needed to make progress in Afghanistan is for all Nato countries to play a full part in the operation. An alliance is only worthwhile if all members are willing to fight. Perhaps, after this debacle we should reconsider our membership of NATO.
Alan Briggs - suell
20 June 2008 - yes
Not only that, but the 'war is as unwinnable as that in Iraq - do they never learn from history? Vietnam is still within many decision-maker's memory!
Sue Lloyd
- woopflying
20 June 2008 - yes
This just the 3rd Afghan war, it will end as the other two.
- Broga
20 June 2008 - yes
This will merely accelerate the rush to leave the army. Does anyone know what we are doing there.? Apart from allowing Brown to strut his stuff in the wake of Blair.
- ChrisCummins
20 June 2008 - yes
Of course, the issue of whether there should be troops in Afghanistan in the first place warrants an entirely different response...
- Noor786
20 June 2008 - yes
I am not sure why the Taliban are being killed in their thousands along with many innocent women and children. Are the Taliban not the children of the Mujahideen and we know who created those to fight off the Russians. Yesterdays friends are todays enemies. Anyway the Taliban were willing to hand over Osama Bin Laden to a neutral country once proof was given that he was responsible for 9/11. People do not beleive the official 9/11 story about the 19 Arabs being responsible any more.
- Bryan Pepperell
23 June 2008 - yes
Shouldn't be there!
- Serosch
23 June 2008 - yes
Let the yanks do what they want, we should get our troops out asap.
- graham196565
23 June 2008 - yes
dirty murdering labour party, sending privates onto the streets of afganistan or in snatch landrovers, while the ex sandhurst cowards are safe indoors
- Jane Greene
23 June 2008 - no
It's not a question of too little, too late but whether we should be there at all. We seem to be doing very little good!
- Helen Heenan
25 June 2008 - no
This is a tribal war that we cannot win. We are there for the wrong reasons. The majority of opinion on this page would appear to agree, whether voting Yes or No.
- william.ford@live.co.uk
25 June 2008 - no
Still haven't quarantined this seasons crop for home use.
