Sir, William Rees-Mogg (“Our men can’t fight a war on Treasury rules — it’s time to pay up or pull out”, Sept 4) says that our Armed Forces, who were apparently sent to Afghanistan not to wage war or seek out and destroy terrorists but to provide the security conditions in which reconstruction could take place, are now fighting in hellish conditions and even the most skilful units are liable to suffer physical breakdown as well as the breakdown of equipment and machinery.

Given that there are frequent complaints about the quality, and sometimes the shortage, of equipment, how on earth does the Government expect men to operate with equipment and machinery that is not only not fit for purpose but which was never designed for warfare under those conditions?

Field Marshal Montgomery may have suggested that there are two fundamental principles of strategy but the Chinese warlord Sun Tzu suggested that “he who wishes to fight must first count the cost”. You cannot keep cutting the defence budget and expect men and machinery to function without sufficient replacements to prosecute the task.

KENNETH ARMITAGE
Kesgrave, Suffolk

Sir, What would constitute victory in Afghanistan? Even if the Taleban are driven out, they would return the very day that Nato forces leave. Surely the time is coming when we have to accept that Afghanistan and most of the Middle East is Islamic. We need to find common ground with Muslims in the fight against terrorism, the heroin trade and poverty.

I can’t see that pouring more money, men and equipment into Afghanistan is going to help matters long-term. We should get out now and redeploy our army on our own borders. We have enough illegal immigration and drug trafficking of our own to contend with without fighting other people’s wars thousands of miles from home.

ADRIAN GILBERT
Tonbridge, Kent

Sir, William Rees-Mogg seems to repeat the myth that all British military incursions into Afghanistan during the Victorian era ended in failure.

In fact the last major British incursion in 1879-80 ended with a force under Lord Roberts completely routing the Afghan Army at the Battle of Kandahar, enabling him to finish a successful campaign by leaving a pro-British government and returning to India.

STEPHEN KENNEDY
Mitcham, Surrey

Sir, I disagree with the assertion that Britain has been in Afghanistan for five years, which suggests that what we are now doing out there is a natural extension to our previous activities.

Afghanistan 2006 is a new conflict that has recently been provoked by the UK and some of its allies, and the decision to undertake this war has not been properly underwritten by full parliamentary approval.

A. JOHNSON
Totton, Hants

Explore Letters

• Feedback