airbridges to everywhere
It looks like the fallout from the most recent military deaths in Afghanistan has lapsed into the usual debate about equipment:
There were also charges that Viking armoured vehicles — the vehicle in which Lieutenant-Colonel Rupert Thorneloe was travelling when he was killed — do not have adequate protection against Taleban roadside bombs and mines.
The emerging argument here seems to be that you should concede the roads to the Taliban/ACM in order to avoid casualties and since they already have the freedom of the countryside surrounding the roads, that means conceding them the entire battlespace under contention. Apart from the air, of course: that’s ours.
Actual equipment shortages aside, we now seem to have reached the stage where debate about them seems to substitute for debate about the war itself, perhaps not surprisingly since it's consistently unpopular. The Defence Secretary sort of puts the case for counterinsurgency, but can’t bring himself to say that this involves exposing your side to casualties in order to secure control of the population. That might demand an explanation of why this is worth doing. For the Tories, Liam Fox seems to think that Brown should have produced an entire air cavalry regiment from his magic arse while he was Chancellor. This constitutes being a loyal opposition.

Recent Comments