You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Afghanistan
Lack of kit blamed for UK soldier's death
2008-02-16
A British soldier died after being sent into combat in Afghanistan with a lack of basic equipment, a coroner said on Friday. Captain James Philippson of 7 Parachute Regiment Royal Horse Artillery was shot in the head in a gunfight with the Taliban in June 2006.

The 29-year-old from Hertfordshire was the first casualty after troops were deployed to the violent southern province of Helmand, where the Taliban remains strong. Assistant coroner for Oxfordshire Andrew Walker said he died after an unforgivable "breach of trust between the soldiers and those who govern them". The inquest at Oxford heard that troops had repeatedly complained about a lack of proper equipment, in particular standard night-vision kits. Four kits had to be shared between as many as 30 men, the inquest heard.

The Taliban were armed with multiple rocket-propelled grenade launchers and other firepower, it heard. "They (the soldiers) were defeated not by the terrorists but by the lack of basic equipment," Walker was quoted by the BBC as saying at the end of the inquest. He said sending troops into a combat zone without basic kit was "unforgivable and inexcusable."
Well, how on earth could the UK be expected to equip their troops where there are 2nd, 3rd, and 4th wives of indolent immigrants to take care of? I mean, let's get real. Who's more important, stupid old Tommy or our upstanding and vehement imams and preachers of hate?
You speak of Tommy:

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.
Posted by:Fred

#8  Aren't there Scots and Welsh regiments, too?
Posted by: trailing wife    2008-02-16 23:46  

#7  Bright Pebbles: Let's see, the "British" army has English in it, and Ghurkas. Well, since Nepal isn't part of the "British Empire", I guess that would leave the English.

Calling it British anymore is just silly. Britain is no more.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2008-02-16 22:57  

#6  The army is British, not English.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2008-02-16 20:19  

#5  Maybe the English Army should unionise. If they haven't already, I mean.
Posted by: SteveS   2008-02-16 11:34  

#4  England has long sabotaged its own efforts on the battlefield, usually by being chintzy.

Its rule of Afghanistan started in the mid-19th Century with an effective and realistic use of gold bribery to warlords to keep the peace. But by the late part of that century, with the empire in decline, the government foolishly began to shortchange the warlords, and soon they were kicked out of the country, brutally.

Even in World War I, Americans were surprised to see the British army "cleaning" the battlefield after a fight, to recover any scrap or useful equipment that could be recycled, to save money. Even though out of tons of waste, only a few pounds could be preserved. Penny wise, pound foolish.

Spies, collaborators, traitors and the like who helped Britain in exchange for money were more often then not "lost at sea" to save the expense of paying them for their services. Unlike America, which has an extraordinarily good reputation of paying its small debts to such people to the penny. If the wanted poster says the US will pay $25M for Osama, whoever rats him out will someday fart through silk. America will actually seek him out to pay him.

Right now, Brussels hopes that England will turn its navy, what's left of it, over to them. So England, true to form, has no reason to have a navy, if it has to pay for it. The same with its army.

Until the English army quits, just refuses to perform at all, it will be cut back. It won't be a mutiny, in the traditional sense, just incapability.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2008-02-16 09:22  

#3  What is it with coroners with political power in England? They seem to use their position as a bully pulpit to criticize whomever they feel like.
Posted by: gromky   2008-02-16 04:43  

#2  I don't care about the details. In the end, they were defeated by the terrorists. This is why Western forces depend on technology. Forget this basic premise and the rest is out the window. Get to work.
Posted by: gorb   2008-02-16 02:17  

#1  Assistant coroner for Oxfordshire Andrew Walker said he died after an unforgivable "breach of trust between the soldiers and those who govern them".

A rather bold and political statement for an assistant coroner to be making. Someone is running for public office.
Posted by: SteveS   2008-02-16 01:04  

00:00