From: Adam 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1995868,00.html

An interesting read esp gven the crap HMG has been spinnning wrt the lads
having everything (inc enough lads) to do the job.

"We should and can win in Afghanistan but we need to put more military
effort into the country - the Afghan Army is developing pretty well but
needs another year to grow and train to the point that it can confidently
take over primacy - including that all important Reserve force that we Nato
commanders first asked for 18 months ago."

i.e. not enough troops.

& to repeat the point....

"Whilst we have stablised the security situation - there has been a
huge reduction in the number of incidents across the country (no bombs in
Kabul for many months, for example) and frustrated the Taliban's professed
intent to maintain a 'winter campaign' for the first time - it has been
against the odds and is a result of some exceptionally skilled and brave
fighting by the soldiers of many nations, of some poor decisions by the
Taliban leadership, yes I like to think too of some good leadership by HQ
ISAF and, of course, of a healthy dose of luck - but a good general is
always a lucky general! But all this has been achieved with less troops
than are really needed and I am concerned that Nato nations will assume the
same level of risk in 2007 believing they can get away with it. They might,
but its a dangerous assumption to believe the same ingredients will exist
this year as they did last. And anyway, a stabilised situation is not a
good enough aim."


Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5