Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2009
| Subscribe to Newser's RSS feeds RSS | Follow Newser on Twitter Twitter


15

Afghan War Could Last 40 Years: UK General

Share

(Newser) – The Afghan war could last three to four decades, the new head of the British Army predicted today. “It will take time. This is nation building,” Sir David Richards said, “not the starry-eyed type, but nation-building nonetheless.” He allowed, however, that “the Army’s role might evolve” over the 30-40 years he expects the West's mission to last. "There is no absolutely no chance of NATO pulling out."

British troops go on patrol while clearing compounds during Operation Panther's Claw in Afghanistan's Helmand province, Monday July 13, 2009.
British troops go on patrol while clearing compounds during Operation Panther's Claw in Afghanistan's Helmand province, Monday July 13, 2009.   (AP Photo/Sergeant Dan Harmer, Royal Logistic Corps, MOD, ho)
Asoldier stands watch during Operation Panther's Claw in Afghanistan's Helmand province, Monday July 13, 2009.
Asoldier stands watch during Operation Panther's Claw in Afghanistan's Helmand province, Monday July 13, 2009.   (AP Photo/Sergeant Dan Harmer, Royal Logistic Corps, MOD, ho)
A soldier provides top cover from a Viking Armoured Vehicle during a Combat Logistic Patrol to resupply ground troops, during Operation Panther's Claw in Afghanistan's Helmand province, July 13, 2009.
A soldier provides top cover from a Viking Armoured Vehicle during a Combat Logistic Patrol to resupply ground troops, during Operation Panther's Claw in Afghanistan's Helmand province, July 13, 2009.   (AP Photo/Sergeant Dan Harmer, Royal Logistic Corps, MOD, ho)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
15 comments
VIEWING:
 
Reader64481089
Aug 8, 09 3:17 PM CDT
Or even longer.....the war of attrition is one oft won by the patient and the American people want instant gratification from anything we touch, including war. The odds are on the "terrorists" due to this fact I fear, much like Vietnam. Reply
Vote up! Vote down!
+3
mickey61988
Aug 8, 09 3:22 PM CDT
We dump tons and tons of money into war but we can't spend a mere trillion to insure our own citizens. There's just something fundamentally wrong with that. Reply
Vote up! Vote down!
+7
IN RESPONSE:
Fondue
Aug 8, 09 4:08 PM CDT
As stated by the ever wise Bill Kristol (paraphrasing) "the soldier is more important than regular citizens". He said this on the Daily Show after Jon got him to admit the government provides the best healthcare in the world. -- A nation is only as strong as its weakest citizen.
Vote up! Vote down!
+4
Rocket448
Aug 8, 09 3:25 PM CDT
Here's the difference between money for war and money to reform healthcare: money for war goes into the pockets of the rich. Money to reform healthcare is used to help the poor. Let's face it, this is now a country for the rich, by the rich and of the rich. Reply
Vote up! Vote down!
+4
IN RESPONSE:
mickey61988
Aug 8, 09 3:33 PM CDT
Good point rocket, I agree.
Vote up! Vote down!
+3
LEAVE A
COMMENT
Comment Policy
Facebook ConnectPost this comment to Facebook?

After connecting you will have the option to post your comment on your Facebook profile.