http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html en-gb 30 Tue 29 Dec 2009 05:52:27 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=18#comment12 Mark:On an admin note, I'm sorry to have broken off the blog after embarking on my leave. This one will probably be my solitary entry before my return to Newsnight duties in late August. In the meantime I'll be doing the usual family summer holiday thing, but also continuing with some unpaid leave, which I am devoting to a research project. I hope that the project you will be working on; Will be made available to the public....=Dennis Junior= Sun 23 Aug 2009 02:09:45 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=16#comment11 An interesting and informed analysis as usual - one of the few BBC journalists I trust on Iraq/Afghanistan. ANA will be a slow process. ANP: many experienced people see some of them as being more part of the problem than part of the solution, Afghan trust and acceptance is less than complete.Just one area I think you missed.Historically Afghanistan experiences 'tipping points' by leaders switching sides, suddenly taking large numbers of fighters with them. Either by military means or financial deals there is always the option to both reduce taleban support and increase government support in one go. This can be large scale and rapid.One debate I have heard on this is the issue of 'decapitation strikes' - targetted bombs or special forces hits taking out key taleban leaders. This has apparently been very effective. Good idea? - it does disrupt them. But are we killing the people we need to bring over? In northern irelan it was the old guard of IRA leaders who eventually came to the negotiating table. Are we actually killing the people who might do that in afghanistan? Thu 20 Aug 2009 08:46:51 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=15#comment10 Seems to me that the ANA are another ARVN, totally underpenderable.We must send additional forces, not two thousand , but four thousand, if it means overstretch of the Army, then the government is going to have to " Bite the Bullet" and call up the some of the regular reserves. After all they claim that victory in Afghanistan is so vital to our security! We need to hold postions we clear, otherwise whats the point!Also more Armoured Personnel Carriers, Leased UH-60 BlackHawks and CH-47 Chinooks must be provided, UAV's and Towed 155mm Artillery must be brought!Either we are in this campaign to win or we should withdraw, We don't want to be humiliated, as we where in Iraq! Sun 26 Jul 2009 21:04:53 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=13#comment9 The problem seems to me is that the Afghans are not prepared to help put their country in order. The whole issue of troop numbers and suitable equipment is not about what is needed for military victory by Nato forces. It is about putting the country into some sort of order which the Afghans themselves feel they can maintain with minimal support from outside. If we put too much in they will feel that they don't need to do anything, if we don't put enough in they will feel that a Taliban (or other dubious group)free country is unachievable so why try?It is for this reason that the real battle is for hearts and minds. One awkward question I have though is to ask if Afghanistan is a viable country? Would some form of partition produce a settled county for the majority? Thu 23 Jul 2009 19:57:59 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=12#comment8 I only hope Gordon Brown or the Defence Secretary have not the bad taste to turn up to the funeral of Henry Allingham in a helicopter.hornedrebuttal Wed 22 Jul 2009 00:07:09 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=10#comment7 mark:Soldiers' deaths will not guarantee Helmand success That is very true and accurate...But, I would like to extend my condolences to the families affected....Enjoy your time in the Administration Note~Dennis Junior~ Mon 20 Jul 2009 04:43:02 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=9#comment6 British troops should be brought home immediately. This is not a war, its a UN arrangement to take turns at protecting underground oil and gas piplines. Just like Iraq, our reason for being there is based on a pack of lies. Meanwhile, our brave and trusting troops are the targets of those who believe we are invading their country. Politicians claiming that we are protecting Britain, by being in Afghanistan is a sick joke.Bring them home NOW and let them protect our own borders ! Thu 16 Jul 2009 23:22:30 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=7#comment5 "eight years after 9/11 we are in Afghanistan and losing, if the attackers in New York were Saudi nationals why are we in Helmond?"Because the Taleban allowed the terrorists to operate and gave them shelter. As an important US ally, Saudi Arabia takes a very dim view of terrorism and crack down pretty hard on it. Wed 15 Jul 2009 20:14:33 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=6#comment4 THE 'IF' IS A LOT BIGGER THAN THAT (#3)"if the attackers in New York were Saudi nationals" Will Blogdog allow this link? http://www.ae911truth.org/info/64 Before you dismiss the idea, think Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair . . . Tue 14 Jul 2009 19:30:13 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=4#comment3 Please watch this video: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8149633.stmHere are a few comments I wrote about it:http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldtonight/2009/07/afghanistan_still_asking_quest.html#P82895669 Tue 14 Jul 2009 19:28:01 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=3#comment2 eight years after 9/11 we are in Afghanistan and losing, if the attackers in New York were Saudi nationals why are we in Helmond? Tue 14 Jul 2009 18:38:37 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=1#comment1 #1 Boris Johnson talked about the UK buying their poppy crops or drug stuff they produce for medical purposes. Maybe he could offer up some of his chicken feed and donate the morphine to our hospitals:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/borisjohnson/5814860/Its-poppycock-to-grow-crops-here-but-destroy-them-in-Afghanistan.html"There are about 250 members of the Afghan National Army (ANA)"Crikey what has karzai been doing since 04 and what are the Americans doing about this ? Tue 14 Jul 2009 14:54:47 GMT+1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/markurban/2009/07/clear_and_hold.html?page=0#comment0 A somewhat gloomy prognosis even in the short term - and one which is difficult to ignore. Key concern that I have n't heard anyone allude to is the sustainability of the sort of ANA force levels US strategy appears to call for. It's all very well building up the armed forces to the sort of mass that has been achieved in Iraq, but the Iraqis can almost certainly pay for it out of oil revenues. This is not the case in Afghanistan which suggests that simply fielding a competent ANA will be a huge financial burden, even when (if) they are in a position to assume more responsibility themselves. Tue 14 Jul 2009 14:23:23 GMT+1