A pleasant reminder that the Guardian is actually quite a good paper at times, and is arguably becoming less objectionable. It is miles better these days than the Independent in its coverage of foreign affairs and the preposterous Robert Fisk.

The Independent was really a tabloid well before it physically changed to the that format. It's a sort of left-wing version of the Daily Mail.

Excellent article. You should also take that in context with the various other Guardian pieces of last week, especially this one from Audrey Gillan. and this one from Max Hastings.

It's still the Grauniad. The reportage of what the troops were saying (if we can trust the G.) was interesting. But what's with the comparing volunteer Brit forces to the drafted army that the US field in Vietnam all those many decades ago? Apart from the obligatory left-wing extremist swipe at the US, why even bring that up?

If the Grauniad wanted a comparison, surely the relevant one would have been to the drafted British army that fought communist "insurgents" in Malaysia, or even the drafted British army that helped the US "liberate" the French from their cosy WWII relationship with the Nazis.

I have a lot of friends, mostly Royal Marines, who are due to be going out to Afghanistan shortly. I worry about them a lot, far more so than when they went to Iraq. I have read the history of Afghanistan, and I normally dismiss the lazy editorials equating current conflicts with those of years gone by, but in the case of Afghanistan the similarities between Britain's last ventures there are many, although more to do with the nature of the enemy than the mission itself.

If we're going to quote Kipling's Barrack Room Ballads, a practice I approve of wholeheartedly, allow me to cite a couple of lines from The Young British Soldier:

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.

As I said, I'm worried.

The risks to Britain, apart from a continuing trickle of coffins and injured soldiers, are that the civilians of Helmand side with British forces only because they're the strongest warlords in town;

And this is bad because? Sounds perfectly normal for a tribal society that respects fighters and tough guys. Best to simply acknowledge it and make sure we remain the strongest.

From the article Perry linked -

Loden is unusual: an intellectual with an automatic rifle. Two years ago he wrote a 25,000-word master's thesis on The Need For An Ideological Response To Islamic Extremism

I'm trying to find this or any reference to it on the net. No luck so far. Any suggestions, anyone?

Alice above stole my thunder.

"Unlike the US military in Vietnam, these men are volunteers."

I would add to Alice's comment above that US paratroopers are also volunteers, as well as US Marines.

Overall an interesting article. (Thanks for the link, Perry.)

Like Alice, I'm a little puzzled as to the draft comparison.
(What *was* that supposed to mean?)

Also, I don't find the intellectual with an automatic rifle to be odd, at all. I was in ROTC two years and have been around the military in other ways throughout much of my life. I can't vouch for the UK, but here, at least, I find officers and senior NCOs to be far brighter and better read than many others often believe.

Nate, I consider him a credible source who appears to have reached a different conclusion than I have. He could certainly change my mind and I would definately like to read his thesis.

If any one knows how to find it, I would like to read it. Thanks.