From: "Rich Gauszka" 

I see Poland has pledged 1,000 troops. They had previously announced a
desire to reduce forces in Iraq so I wonder if they'll just move them from
there.  European support would seem to be getting a bit tapped out with the
conflicts in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Congo, Iraq, Kosovo, and Lebanon.


"Adam" <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the
field.near the bridge"> wrote in message
news:450915d5$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> Yup......
>
> A) WRT Machinery.....the Germans have lots of "transport & support
> systems" e.g. A good range of helos (CH53, BO-105 etc) & a superd range
> of armoured vehicles esp of the light/air transportable & wheeled variety.
>
> They also have a very good new 155 artillery system.
>
> So no need for German PBI shoving sharp bits of metal into beardy
> Afghans in the dark but they can still be of great use (& indeed thus
> free up UK service people thus improving the UK/Canadian/Dutch "teeth to
> tail ratio").
>
> see :
>
> http://homepage.eircom.net/~steven/german_army.htm
>
> etc.
>
> B) I have little interest in poorly
> equipped/trained/experienced/integrated  ppl turning up "just to show
> willing" e.g 100 Belgians mooching round the cafes of Kabul. So in
> essence there is a reasonably short list of credible players vs those
> who really did join NATO as a "Defensive Alliance" as an insurance
> against invasion by an outside force.
>
> & Guess what....the players are basically the same whether it's Iraq,
> Afghanistan or Lebanon.
>
> Note that last country. We were within inches of having much worse
> trouble in Iraq than occurred because of 2 missing Israeli soldiers &
> now we're picking up yet more problems as a result because guess who is
> going to Lebanon? Oh Yes the Italians, French, Germans etc who would
> otherwise be in line for.....going to Afghanistan. Well done Bush,
> Olmert & Blair.
>
> It is time for the US to step up as it was their decision to declare
> victory a bit too early & then turn their attention to Iraq.
>
> Sorry but the extra troops can really only be US troops in one way or
> another i.e. if UK PBI then the UK will have to drawn down in Iraq & the
> US will have to send troops to cover, or they'll have to keep UK PBI in
> place & send US PBI to Afghanistan.
>
> Hopefully the snows of Winter will be coming soon, giving the
> "Atlanticists" a breathing space.
>
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> Rich Gauszka wrote:
>>  'glimmer of hope' ?
>>
>> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2356883,00.html
>>
>> NATO failed yesterday to find the urgent reinforcements that its top
>> generals have demanded to strengthen operations against the Taleban in
>> Afghanistan.
>> Despite the recent pressure on Nato governments to reinforce alliance
>> troops
>> fighting in the south of the country, officials admitted that there had
>> been
>> no formal offers in response to an appeal from the alliance's military
>> and
>> political chiefs to produce another 2,500 troops, as well as helicopters
>> and
>> transport aircraft.
>>
>>
>>
>> Chiefs of the 26-member alliance must now wait until a defence ministers'
>> meeting in Slovenia on September 28 to discover whether there has been
>> any
>> change of heart. Nato foreign ministers will also meet in the margins of
>> next Thursday's United Nations General Assembly in New York.
>>
>> British defence sources said that although nothing had materialised so
>> far,
>> there was still "a glimmer of hope" that one or two
nations would step
>> forward with the necessary troops.
>>
>>

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