1  2  3  4  Next

I came across this article on another fourm, it made my blood boil.
Of course this article is from England so the usual the "Brits" are the blah blah blah. No mention of Canada in the article, but as our Troops are dying Germany and others party hardy and lounge in the safe zone. Maybe it's time to bring "Them Home" and hand the mission over to Germany, Italy and France choke, cough. I posted an article in Canadian Politics that detailed basically the same story but it had Hillier's response. It's in the cons lounge, I posted it there because Harper decided to extend the mission so I deemed it a Con issue.

It appears the only danger to the French, Germans, Italians, is liver desease from booze.

Article

On the front line: British troops have endured hardships while other Nato troops party

Nato troops in Afghanistan are staging nightly drinking and karaoke sessions as British soldiers are dying on the front line.

Exhausted British Paras returning from four months of battles against the Taliban - while enduring meagre rations and shortages of clean water - have been ed to find other European troops partying at Kabul International Airport, known as KIA.

The Paras have even dubbed the base "KIA Napa" after Cyprus's notorious party resort, Ayia Napa.

Most Nato troops in Kabul are not sent to the front line because their governments have refused to put their lives at risk - unlike the British. They protect the airport and the capital instead.

British soldiers from 3 Para Battle Group, who have seen 41 comrades die in Afghanistan since the spring, say the airport is a 'haven' for parties for Italian, Hungarian, French, German and Belgian troops.

They are held in giant tents designed to cover military aircraft, or in huge containers that are transformed into makeshift nightclubs.
One Para sergeant who stayed at the airport last week after a tour in Helmand Province said Kabul was "like something out of a Vietnam war film where everyone is oblivious to what is going on elsewhere".

He added: "The clowns at the airport had no idea of what was going on in Helmand. An Italian invited us to a party where he said there would be a lot of chicks and plenty of action, then his French mate tried to pick a fight. I told my boys to keep away from them - losers.

"At a bar in the airport, soldiers sat in their pressed uniforms with beer in one hand and women in the other. We stood there with our mouths open. What a waste of rations." Another British officer said: "The situation is causing a major split in the Alliance, as the UK, the US and a handful of other nations are seen to be doing all the work."

And a corporal with 3 Para said: "It is an insult to the rest of us who are mixing it with the enemy at close quarters. These people should just go home. They are on the lash every night and delivering very little to the operation."

But Mark Laity, Nato's spokesman in Kabul, said comments made by British troops were "highly exaggerated", "inaccurate" and "misleading".

He added: "Alcohol is not banned and it is common to find women in Nato forces. It should therefore be no surprise that in off-duty hours, men and women mix together while sharing a drink." British General David Richards, commander of Nato's force in Afghanistan, added: "Away from the front line, living conditions are inevitably better, although still austere.

"The troops are still separated from their families and still work long hours. So when their day's work is done it would be churlish to begrudge them a break from their duties that is as pleasant as possible.

"But bad behaviour and excessive drinking will not be tolerated and are subject to disciplinary action."

Readers of this story were equally ed by the actions of the French, Germans and Italians.

Comments from readers of this article.

Recent formation of an E.U. army is a grave mistake. British soldiers would be at risk from so called comrades unwilling to fight due to individual government policy and an unwillingness to get down to the work in hand which the Afghanistan conflict proves. These so called allies could at least show some bottle!

- Robert Shirt, Brigg, Lincolnshire
---------------------------------------------------------------

Brings to mind the words of General Montgomery when it was proposed to man intercontinental rocket ships with mixed crews from Nato countries - "There'll be more fighting inside the ships than outside them!" Anglo/US forces liberated Europe in 1944/45 - the French, Belgians, Dutch, Danes, did nothing to help themselves! This is just a repeat performance!

- Ralph Smith, Victoria BC, Canada
-----------------------------------------------------------

I would sooner believe the Paras version of this than some spokesman [[Mark Laity]] who probably organises the parties.

- Mick, Aberdeenshire


dailymail.co.uk

   

And here I thought it was only the CBC who had their head up their ass.

   

CBC

I've got to admit when I read articles like this It makes me wonder what we're doing there. I don't think we should leave, but I think other NATO countries need a good bitch slapping. It's not a fuckin holiday over there. Pull your weight or fuck off.

   

NATO should disband.

   

I would take anything posted by greatbriton and most english press with more then a few grains of salt.

Their papers are well known for printing inflamatory half-truths.

I would hate to think that only a few countries are doing the dirty work there but who's in command? Presumably a NATO commander decides what troops go where and do what so it may be a case of them simply not being asked to do certain missions.

   

What I'm actually refering to is comments made by our own defence minister, not GB's article. It's in the CBC link.

   

Sorry, my bad.

It does seem that the adage "too many cooks spil the broth" seems to ring true. There seem to be a whole lot of commanders without a supreme commander.

In WW2 all the allies saw the wisdom in appointing a supreme commander to command allied troops. While the British may have balked at being under a US commander they rightly saw the wisdom behind it and supported the decision fully.

The result was a unified army (as much as it can be) of many countries fighting as one instead of many seperate armies all pursuing their own agenda.

If this is a NATO operation then there should be a supreme NATO commander with the ability to dictate orders to any troops under his command.

   

Very true.

   

There is, but the problem is that a huge part of his force structure are deployed with absolutely insane restrictions imposed by their countries. The Spanish, Germans, Italians and French are basically a waste of rations at the moment wrt operations pointed at stabilization. Estonian can step up to the plate but the big four of Europe can't?

   

Well...Big two actually... Spanish wouldn't be up there...and France...well...They are french.

   

Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of NATO.

Now NATO was formed for the sole purpose of opposing the USSR (the WARSAW pact happened many years later) the idea was to make many smaller armies into a single unified force and avoid all the BS politics that can cripple the war effort.

Either the countries involved in the Stan agree to "tow the line" or else they leave.

I guess we just need someone to actually stand up and say this.

I may oppose the war but I see no reason to have a bunch of countires conducting field exercises (involving loads of drinking) while soldiers from other countries die when they should be contributing.

Perhaps its time that Canada, the US, and the UK simply tell everyone else that unless they agree to follow the orders of a supreme NATO commander then they should go home.

   

I'd like to hear the reasoning behind that one!

   

Ridenrain, I'm not sure that I want to hear it, but some morbid curiosity makes me want to ask.

   

No doubt it will be some lofty headed jibberish that the Russian superman has passed and now all this power is what would really make the UN the effective power in the world... not the fact that it's mired in bullshit and wimpy politics.
But We're reasonable people so let's here what he says.

   

I'll be blunt, NATO is useless. Upon its founding it had a purpose and a good one but now it is a white elephant that only reason for existing is to desperately justify it's own existence. Perhaps if we were at a cold war footing it would have a renewed focus but as it stands now it is nothing more than a cumbersome body of a bureaucratic morass paralyzed by the whims of its myriad of members that are all marching to the beat of their own political drummer. That situation will never resolve and it is futile to even pretend otherwise so the massive expense that NATO is could be put in to our own military. At least then it won't be money pissed away. It makes the UN seem useful by comparison.

   

1  2  3  4  Next