You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Afghanistan
UK fears Falklands-level casualties in Afghanistan
2006-01-01
BRITISH troops set to deploy to southern Afghanistan this spring could sustain losses on a scale not seen since the Falklands war, military intelligence officers have warned. They say insurgent forces in the south are preparing for a large offensive by Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, backed by sophisticated weapons and training from Iran.

The warnings follow an increase in fighting in southern Afghanistan over the past year. Several thousand people, including about 100 US soldiers, have been killed. The insurgents regard the withdrawal of 2,000 US troops as a key victory and are expected to press home their advantage against the British-led Nato force.

An advance party of British troops from 16 Air Assault Brigade will fly to Afghanistan this week to begin preparing for the deployment.

A new terror group linked to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s Al-Qaeda in Iraq has emerged in southern Afghanistan and is imitating his methods. Messages from the group, Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, have appeared on the same jihadist internet sites as those of Zarqawi’s terror group.

The Taliban has regrouped, adapting its tactics to a classic insurgency campaign. There has also been a surge in suicide bombings and in roadside bombs similar to those introduced to Iraq last year.

US intelligence officers in southern Afghanistan and at the Coalition Joint Task Force headquarters in Bagram, north of Kabul, are blaming Iran for the increase in the use of sophisticated technology.
The Iranians sure get around, don't they.
The British troops’ anti-narcotics operations could also provoke attacks from local warlords. The Dutch will decide on February 2 whether to withdraw their contingent because of warnings from military intelligence about the risks. They are expected to do so.

The plan is for just over 3,000 of the 6,000-strong Nato force to come from the UK, with Canada and the Dutch supplying the remaining troops. A British battle group commanded by 16 Air Assault Brigade and led by 3rd Battalion the Parachute Regiment will take over Helmand province from the Americans. Briefings to officers from 3 Para highlighted the possibility of casualties on a par with those during the 1982 Falklands conflict, when 255 British servicemen died.
Posted by:Dan Darling

#9  As soon as their people start dying, these fellas start leaving.

Um, that's not true, asshole. Stop projecting your wishful thinking.
Posted by: Rafael   2006-01-01 23:07  

#8  *cough* Joseph Kennedy *cough*
Posted by: Frank G   2006-01-01 21:54  

#7  Charles Lindburgh? The flying gentleman with the German patronym who thought Hitler was the cat's pyjamas? No, I wouldn't say he was a traitor as such; rather, he was an American patriot who preferred America to join the fight on the side of evil. There is a difference, dontchaknow.
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-01-01 21:52  

#6  true - in the worst case we all die, instantly, from aneurisms.... has about as much chance as their scenario...
Posted by: Frank G   2006-01-01 16:39  

#5  The thing about worst case scenarios is, most of the time they don't happen.
Posted by: HV   2006-01-01 16:01  

#4  Oh, nevermind, first US operations. Got it.
I still miss Charles Lindbergh. He wasn't a traitor either.
Posted by: visiter   2006-01-01 15:36  

#3  Um, the first operations in the European Theatre were the Wehrmach assault on Poland. No Americans lives were lost.
Posted by: visiter   2006-01-01 15:18  

#2  Mutual defense to the Europeans (excluding the UK forces) means "run away, run away. The Tranzi ownership of Europe is complete and total. It will last until islam takes over. The US needs to look west. Europe is morbid. The smart Euros will flee to the western hemisphere.

Iran is indeed busy. It now has US forces on two sides of it's borders. It's actions are now transparent and overt. That the Europeans are afraid to confront Iran or it's proxies shows just how weak they are and how rudderless their foreign polices is.
Posted by: Mahou Sensei Negi-bozu   2006-01-01 14:06  

#1  Seems to me that NATO forces had no problem expressing solidarity with Uncle Sam as long as there were no casualties. As soon as their people start dying, these fellas start leaving. Uncle Sam lost 526 killed during the first operations of the European Theater - the Torch landings. Maybe we should have pulled out there and then. Or maybe we should have pulled out after the debacle at Kasserine Pass, where 1800 GI's were killed. I guess the word "mutual" in mutual defense treaty means something different to Europeans.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2006-01-01 13:32  

00:00