Smaller army : fewer vainglorious adventures.

Why should we have the fourth biggest defence budget in the world? That's after today's cuts.

Predictable posturing from all parties in the Commons today created a predictable tedious exchange. What are forces excepted to do? Certainly peace keeping is a noble and important role. We are good at it. Kosova, Sierra Leone and Bosnia were military successes that saved many lives. Iraq and Helmand were catastrophes. !79 UK lives lost in Iraq and 422 in Afghanistan and counting. Tragically little was achieved by Britain's presence in Iraq. A rotten government has been replaced by another rotten government. In 2001 Afghanistan had a civil war and was ruled mainly by the Taliban. In five years time, the country will be run by the Taliban and there will be another civil war.

No party today questioned the vain-glorious but lethal national military ambition. Tragically, punching above our weight mean dying beyond our responsibilities

I raised the subject today at Business Questions.

Paul Flynn (Newport West) (Lab):

After debates in the Dutch and Canadian Parliaments, those countries withdrew their troops from Afghanistan after great sacrifices in blood and treasure. Should not we in this House answer public opinion, which is strongly in favour of bringing our troops home, adopt a policy of independence from the United States and ensure that our troops are no longer at risk in this increasingly dangerous war?

Sir George Young:

As the hon. Gentleman knows, there is a commitment to bring our troops home, and it has been put on the record. We are committed to making regular quarterly statements on Afghanistan, and when the next one is due he will have an opportunity to make his case, but the view of the House, as expressed in earlier debates, is that we should rightly honour our commitment, stay with our fellow countries in Afghanistan and give that country the opportunity to build up its police force and armed services so that it can restore law and order on its own.

 

Comments

[Robert]

All they are doing of course is moving our wars to the part time soldier

[Ad]

NATO has no right to carry on in the belief that they can shed innocent blood and dismiss the victims as refuse. They have no cause in swallowing up these foreign people except for the fact that this war swells the coffers of the Amerian military and those who profit from war and occupation.

Paul, you made an important argument saying that Britain should not just throw in our lot with America. Unfortunately though many see this war as their chance to share in the the profit. I believe this is the scandal that results in the pointless loss of life of British soldiers and Afghan citizens.

Again, I don't accept the public excuses for this war. The stated aims will not be met by 2014 and the American occupation is intended to last indefinately. If you are looking for rational, well thought out and honest leadership from our politicians on the Afghan war you will be unable to find it. Avoiding civilian and military casualties is likely to be the last thing on their minds.