Sir, Having worked in the Ministry of Defence, I know it is seeded with civil servants who, in many cases, owe more allegiance to the Treasury than the Armed Forces. Thus the MoD fights with one hand behind its back and when General Sir Richard Dannatt speaks out courageously (Times Online, July 12) and tells the British public that we need more helicopters and enough troops to hold the line, this Government immediately pooh-poohs his words. A minister states that the general is “playing a high risk game” (as high as losing your life, Minister?) and an MP claims Sir Richard should “get on with the job” and then, in the face of all reason, suggests that “after the conflict, if there are lessons to be learnt, we should do so in a considered manner”. What ignorance, what crass stupidity, what temerity to play with the lives of brave servicemen who serve where they are ordered and fight with the equipment they are given.

Colonel Terry Knott

Chichester

Sir, If our military operations in Afghanistan constitute a war, how will we know when we have won? Suppose that the gallantry of our soldiers bears fruit and the Taleban are subdued sufficiently for an election to take place, after which a government attempts to impose law and order over a nation completely unused to such discipline. If that is victory, it will surely be only a temporary one. When the Taleban regroup, do we return and start again? Are we there forever? I do not believe the nation will accept that commitment. This need not be a counsel of despair. If a fraction of the cost of this operation, in terms of courage, initiative and money, were channeled first into intelligence-gathering and second into our own border security, I believe that most Britons would be content to let the Afghans sort out their own problems.

Ben Stroude

West Kirby, Wirral

Sir, Your leading article (“Were we wrong?”, July 11) gave reasons for our involvement in the war in Afghanistan but left out the most important cause of our position there, namely the relationship between George W. Bush and Tony Blair. History has shown us, not once but twice, that you cannot win a conventional war in that territory and it is not a question of hearts and minds because we are dealing with a civilisation that is, in the main, stuck in the Dark Ages and a religion that has not undergone the changes of centuries that has taken place in Europe. We cannot hope to bring these people into a modern Western democracy quickly. In any case, who are we to say that that would be the best form of government for them? If there is a battle to protect ourselves it should be fought here, at home, concentrating on the proper integration and education of our immigrant community. I write as an immigrant to these shores.

Michael Nathan

Blandford, Dorset

Sir, There are certain principles of planning a campaign of warfare today that have differed little from those set out by Sun Tzu in The Art of War. One of these principles was “Selection and Maintenance of the Aim”. In Afghanistan I see little of either from our politicians and can only sympathise with those currently in the Armed Forces who have to plan a military campaign based on the whim of political and public opinion.

Eric Hughes

Hitchin, Herts

Explore Letters

• Feedback