UK casualties in Afghanistan

Discussion in 'Postwar' started by dbf, Jun 8, 2008.

  1. dbf

    dbf Moderatrix MOD

    BBC News - 20% of foot soldiers unfit to fight, MoD figures show

    Almost 5,000 soldiers and officers - or 20% of army infantry personnel - are unfit for frontline combat duties, Ministry of Defence figures show.

    Some are not fully deployable because of physical or mental injury or illness, or lack of fitness, others because of non-medical reasons.

    The data from a Parliamentary written answer showed 19 battalions had fewer than 500 fully deployable soldiers.

    The MoD said most classed as medically non-deployable could still contribute.

    A small number include the under-18s and pregnant female soldiers, or those unable to deploy on compassionate grounds.

    'Difficult decisions'
    Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin, who obtained the information, told the BBC: "To have 20% of the infantry unfit for the duties they are primarily employed and trained for is quite a staggering figure.

    "This reflects the long-term effect of sustained operations, and it's worth remembering the government may pay for extra ammunition and other costs of operations, but they don't fund the recruitment and training of personnel to replace those who are left unfit for combat."

    More than 1,000 servicemen and women have suffered combat injuries in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2001.

    Maj Gen Patrick Cordingley, who commanded the Desert Rats in the first Gulf War, says he is deeply concerned by the figures and warns that difficult decisions lie ahead.

    "I think if this goes on much longer in Afghanistan, and the sad figure of soldiers who are wounded in such a way that they can't go back to frontline rises, it will undoubtedly become a problem unless you're allowed to recruit a lot more people, and take the strength of the Army above what it is now," he said.

    The issue of how to deal with seriously injured personnel is a deeply sensitive one.

    'Expensive options'
    The Ministry of Defence has been studying whether some may have to be discharged on medical grounds, to ensure that the Army's fighting strength is kept up.

    But it is well aware that the issue has to be handled with care, with many of the injured keen to remain within the armed forces, if necessary in non-combat roles.

    "Sooner or later, we have to decide what to do, and we have got to either ask those people to leave and recruit more, or make the Army bigger and recruit more," said Maj Gen Cordingley.

    "Both are very expensive options, and there isn't the money to go around."

    The MoD insists it is committed to providing the best care for injured personnel.

    An Army spokesperson said: "The majority of those classed as medically non-deployable are fit enough to work in some capacity and therefore continue to make a contribution to the effectiveness of the Armed Forces."

    Yet with the defence budget already under severe strain, some tough decisions may have to be made to ensure the British army has enough soldiers fit to fight on the frontlines.
     
  2. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    This reminds me of my first and last tours and how many regular soldiers were medically down graded for one reason or another, I was quite shocked on my first tour by how many were unfit (Unable to pass a fitness test) and I recall one chap who was huge and ate crisps and chocolate all day......The later tour I was roped into taking a fair few infantry chaps for remedials every morning for the best part of 6 months.

    Its all a numbers game IMO.....Better to have someone than no one, the worst cases get left in the UK for Rear Ech duties when a unit deploys overseas.

    The TA is another good example of shuffling figures. Many are down graded and unable to pass basic fitness tests and many are kept on strength when they leave to obtain more money for training and rations etc.

    Cheers
     
  3. Smudger Jnr

    Smudger Jnr Our Man in Berlin

    This reminds me of my first and last tours and how many regular soldiers were medically down graded for one reason or another, I was quite shocked on my first tour by how many were unfit (Unable to pass a fitness test) and I recall one chap who was huge and ate crisps and chocolate all day......The later tour I was roped into taking a fair few infantry chaps for remedials every morning for the best part of 6 months.

    Its all a numbers game IMO.....Better to have someone than no one, the worst cases get left in the UK for Rear Ech duties when a unit deploys overseas.

    The TA is another good example of shuffling figures. Many are down graded and unable to pass basic fitness tests and many are kept on strength when they leave to obtain more money for training and rations etc.

    Cheers


    Andy,
    Is that a case of Lies, Damn Lies and statistics:D

    Regards
    Tom
     
  4. Rich Payne

    Rich Payne Rivet Counter Patron 1940 Obsessive

  5. Stormbird

    Stormbird Restless

    I quite liked it. Seems to me quite a nice idea to have one's portrait made.
     
  6. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    I quite liked it. Seems to me quite a nice idea to have one's portrait made.

    Anecdotally, after my last tour over there, my teenage daughter told me she had thought over the consequenses of the possible ultimate outcome.
    "It wouldn't have been very hard to find nice things to say in your funeral", she concluded.
    Quite sobering.

    How many tours have you done in Iraq or are you refering to 'Stan?
     
  7. Stormbird

    Stormbird Restless

    Glancing at thread's title I was indeed thinking of Stan.
     
  8. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    My supervisor at work had to go out to Bassett other night to seal the post-boxes.
    High St was shut from 1400 to 1800.
    Firms moaned at us because we couldn't collect their mail.
    Another mate just posted this on facebook.
    Charles & Camilla's wreaths.

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    I heard on the radio yesterday they were visiting to thank the people of Wooten Bassett for their support.
     
  10. dbf

    dbf Moderatrix MOD

    Spam, Spam, Spam: Army chef's make-do menu for troops in Afghanistan | UK news | guardian.co.uk
    To quote the old Monty Python sketch, it was a matter of "Spam, Spam, Spam" and precious little else for British troops when the Taliban disrupted their food supplies in Afghanistan.

    After a helicopter carrying supplies was shot down, army chef Corporal Liam Francis was faced with six weeks of keeping hungry troops satisfied with tins of the famous, some might say infamous, chopped pork and ham product.

    In the best traditions of the army, Francis managed to provide a wide-ranging menu based just on Spam.

    Francis, a member of the Royal Logistic Corps from Bristol, said: "We were on compo [compound rations] for six weeks and we only had one menu: Spam.

    "I was surprised what we could do – sweet and sour Spam, Spam fritters, Spam carbonara, Spam stroganoff, Spam stir-fry ... "

    The crisis arose after a civilian supply helicopter flying to forward operating bases in the Sangin district was brought down.

    For a month and a half the supply line remained disrupted, during which the ingenuity of the 26-year-old, his co-workers and the patience of the troops was put to the test before fresh supplies finally got through.

    Francis said: "On the first day I prepared battered Spam sausages, chips and curry sauce. The sergeant major said it was the best meal he had ever had – he'd never seen morale so high."

    Francis's mother, Pat, said: "When he was six he said he wanted to be a chef and went to a hotel to visit their kitchens to see what it was like.

    "Then a couple of years later he wrote an article for school in which he described wanting to be a soldier in the army or a chef in a restaurant. It's incredible to think that now he's combined them and is doing the job he loves.

    "I was absolutely amazed when I heard the story about serving the troops in Afghanistan using nothing but Spam – because he hates the stuff. He would never have eaten it if I'd served it to him, that's for sure."

    With helicopter flights now far more regular, fresh food is getting into most of the forward operating bases in Afghanistan.

    Troops in the smaller patrol bases are still on ration packs, although these are now reckoned by some to be "the best army food in the world", according to the Ministry of Defence.

    Francis, attached to 2nd Battalion the Royal Welsh, is now back at the UK's main base in Helmand province, Camp Bastion. Army and civilian chefs turn out 12,000 meals a day for the troops based in and transiting through.

    The kitchens at Camp Bastion get through 7,500 burgers a week, 10 tonnes of chicken breast a month, 20,000 baguettes a week and 4.5 tonnes of potatoes and chips.

    Francis's boss, WO2 Marcus Turner, 38, said he was proud of the work of all his chefs. He said: "To see them working extremely hard has been fantastic. From junior to senior chef they have been a team to be proud of."

    Spam first arrived in the UK from the US following the passing of the lend-lease act by the US government in 1941. The aim of the act was to aid allied forces in Britain and Russia during the second world war.

    Spam was an interesting addition to the diet of a public struggling by on rations, but as lampooned in the Python sketch, Britain has had a love-hate relationship with the product.


    YouTube - MontyPython's Channel
     
  11. Stormbird

    Stormbird Restless

    ....

    Wonder what the statistics are for the wounded. I never seem to see this quoted in any articles, and I am sure it must be high.

    dbf

    According to bbc.co.uk: 552 UK service personnel were seriously wounded on operations in Iraq and Afghanistan Oct 2001 - Oct 2009.
    Couldn't find any breakdown of statistics, though.

    :poppy: S
     
  12. At Home Dad (Returning)

    At Home Dad (Returning) Well-Known Member

  13. beccajade

    beccajade Member

    This is going to sound harsh, but a 100 dead, but where are the numbers of innocent civilians published? It'll be a lot higher then 100.
     
  14. At Home Dad (Returning)

    At Home Dad (Returning) Well-Known Member

    The UN mission recorded 2,412 civilian casualties during 2009, up by 14 per cent from 2008 when the mission recorded 2,118 civilian deaths.

    Of the 2,412 deaths reported last year, 1,630 (67%) were attributed to anti-Government elements while 596 (25%) were attributed to pro-Government forces.

    The remaining 186 deaths (8%) could not be attributed to any of the conflicting parties as they died as a result of cross fire or by unexploded ordinance.



     
  15. beccajade

    beccajade Member

    Cheers, realising the bias the media has on portraying facts in decoming depressing. I have nothing against the soldiers out there but the medias focus on the issue takes away emphasis on other key issues in the world. I do mean to cause any offence.
     
  16. dbf

    dbf Moderatrix MOD

    Interesting comparative article here:
    BBC News - Falklands and Afghanistan - two very different wars


    The death toll for British forces in Afghanistan passing that in the Falklands in 1982 has been marked by much of the media. But while they seem completely dissimilar conflicts, some of the differences can tell us a great deal.
    The Falklands War lasted only 74 days, was fought over British dependent territory, solely by British forces, against another state with well-equipped forces.

    The war in Afghanistan is in its ninth year, involves a coalition of international and local forces and has been predominantly against an irregular and often nebulous enemy.

    The Falklands War had a clear achievable goal which was met with the Argentine surrender. Much of the criticism of the war in Afghanistan focuses on the idea that there is no clear exit strategy, and that total defeat of the Taliban is an impossibility.

    It is perhaps not surprising that when the conflicts are viewed side-by-side only stark differences are visible. But scratch the surface and there are interesting threads about the changing nature of military action and geopolitics.

    CONTROLLING INFORMATION AND DEALING WITH CASUALTIES
    For those old enough to remember the Falklands War, the figure of Ian McDonald looms large.

    Mocked for his steady monotone, he became the face of the war as he announced sunken ships and other losses of life on television.

    But unlike the war in Afghanistan, it was possible to tightly control the flow of information back from the distant Falklands.

    There were plenty of journalists with the task force, but they were often reliant on satellite communications back to the UK, and they were controlled by the military.

    After the sinking of the destroyer HMS Coventry on 25 May 1982 with the loss of 19 lives, it was nearly 12 hours before the details were revealed in the Commons.

    In the era of rolling news it is hard to believe that if a ship was known to have been sunk, fuller details would not have emerged sooner.

    The MoD was often criticised for going too far in controlling the flow of information.

    "It was just awful," says Dr Andrew Dorman, of the defence studies department at King's College London. "The MoD has learned a lot more about how it deals with the media."

    And the Falklands marked the first major conflict where British forces gave every relative the option to bring back their dead, says Dr Dorman.
    "It was a bit of a turning point relative to whether the bodies came back or not.

    "Now they all come back. There is much more personalisation of death - the MoD puts a picture out and so on."


    PUBLIC SUPPORT
    While it must be acknowledged that there were prominent dissenting voices -MP Tam Dalyell for instance - public opinion was perceived to be staunchly behind retaking the islands.

    As for the war in Afghanistan, the position is rather more nuanced. For instance ICM polls showed British support for the joint US/UK mission was at 74% in October 2001, but was at 47% in July 2009. However, that was a significant improvement on a poll conducted in 2006.

    And the support during the Falklands War was not unquestioning, says Dr Dorman, particularly at the end May 1982, when a number of British ships had been destroyed.

    "Lots of ships were being sunk, there was a real public opinion wobble. The push for Goose Green [a settlement] was to get a victory to help cement public opinion."

    Support for the troops themselves was constant.

    "The country was wholly behind what we were doing and behind us," says Simon Weston, the Welsh Guardsmen who survived the attack on the Galahad and later became renowned for his charity work. "There were parades - we came back to fanfares."

    Support for the troops during the war in Afghanistan has come recently to focus on the welcome for bodies arriving back at Wootton Bassett, and the success of the Help for Heroes organisation.


    LOGISTICS AND THE EQUIPMENT ISSUE
    "Both were wars that weren't predicted and the armed forces had to adjust to these," says Dr Dorman.

    In 1982, British defence spending was geared primarily around the Cold War against the Soviet Union and the continuing troubles in Northern Ireland, Dr Dorman notes. After the withering of the British Empire, the idea of forces dedicated to defending UK colonies had waned.

    A similar situation existed in 2001, where defence planning had been looking towards the Middle East and north Africa, not as far afield as Afghanistan.

    In Afghanistan much of the dissent over the war has focused on the issue of equipment and whether British troops have the best available, or enough helicopters.

    Lack of helicopters was a major problem in the Falklands War, but it was caused then by enemy action. On the 25 May 1982, two Argentinean Super Etendard fighters carrying Exocet anti-ship missiles, and looking for either of the British aircraft carriers Hermes or Invincible, sunk the British cargo ship Atlantic Conveyor.

    Three Chinook helicopters, a number of Wessex helicopters, mobile landing strips for Harrier jets and tents were among the equipment lost.

    The loss of the Chinooks - which were to carry 80 men at a time into battle as well as transporting equipment - was particularly important. But luckily for the British, a fourth Chinook was away flying when the missiles struck.

    Unlike in Afghanistan, where unfavourable comparisons are occasionally made between British and US equipment, in the Falklands the same comparisons were sometimes made with the materiel that the Argentineans had.

    "It was terrifying going into Stanley and seeing the piles of brand new equipment, more up to date than anything we had," says Hugh McManners, author of Forgotten Voices of the Falklands War and Falklands Commando, and who fought in the Special Boat Service during the war. "Thank god they were still in piles."

    But the situation in the Falklands was not about long-term supply, it was simply about what could be deployed at such short notice to such a far-away location.

    "They were absolutely at the limit to which the Navy could sustain an operation," says Hugh Bicheno, author of Razor's Edge: The Unofficial History of the Falklands War.

    If there is a point of commonality in the equipment issue it may be about the difficulty of sustaining supply chains over such long distances.
    "Trying to keep that air bridge going supporting a war over long distances is really challenging logistically," says Dr Dorman.


    ELITE FORCES
    The Falklands War communicated the quality of Britain's elite forces, the SAS and SBS, and the Parachute Regiment and the Royal Marines, to a general public that was not completely familiar with their role.

    The 1980 storming of the Iranian Embassy in London had really put the SAS in the spotlight, and both the SAS and SBS had a major role to play in the Falklands War.

    Military theory was challenged as British forces attacked vastly numerically superior Argentinean forces.

    Officers might have learnt that a 3-1 superiority was advisable for attacking forces on ordinary terrain, says Mr McManners. During engagements like Goose Green that ratio was reversed, with about 1,600 Argentinean servicemen surrendering to 450 British.

    But he says the idea that the British were always attacking inept conscripts is a myth.

    "Some of the Argentinean units were extremely good, all very well equipped."


    FURTHER CONTRASTS
    While the two wars now have the same number of fatalities, the rate at which those fatalities occurred could not be more different.

    Those in the Falklands occurred in large bursts over a short period - like the 48 who died on the RFA Sir Galahad, the 20 who died on the HMS Sheffield and the 19 that died after the HMS Coventry was hit.

    In Afghanistan, the largest single loss of British life was the Nimrod crash which killed 14. For the most part casualties have come in small numbers, often ones and twos.

    The Falklands represents a unique conflict in British military history, says Mr McManners.

    "Two technological nations, no-one had air superiority, ground forces being bombed with impunity, heavy use of artillery.

    "You can't say never again but what one can say is the wars of the future are more likely to be high intensity counterinsurgency wars."

    Some of the information in this article is drawn from The Falklands War: The Full Story by the Sunday Times Insight Team.
     
  17. dbf

    dbf Moderatrix MOD

    Beccajade this thread was started in June 2008: the mounting death toll for UK forces has been followed up in this thread ever since. Members of other nationalites have added information about their countries' participation also. Not all of us here might share the opinion that the war in Afghanistan is right, but we do honour those who were killed.

    By all means feel free to continue the topic of Afghan civilian deaths etc, there is no problem at all with having that debate here. I know it can be done in a level-headed manner.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2022
  18. beccajade

    beccajade Member

    Sorry I meant it in comparison to the civilian death toll and how the situation has been abused by the media.
     
  19. dave3164

    dave3164 @davidcarter1978

    What would be interesting is any statistics on the amount of innocent civilians that were killed/totured/raped preinvasion by the Taliban as a comparison


    Beccajade I will be level headed about this, perhaps you would feel different if you, like at least 2 of us on this messageboard had a friend or colleague killed whilst serving in afghanistan.
     
    dbf likes this.
  20. beccajade

    beccajade Member

    That is a fair point. I have nothing against the armed forces at all and their role in the conflict. The media coverage however is my issue and how the death tolls have been presented and how they have been used.
     

Share This Page