this is sad we brits are over their with you americans, were underfunded, humiliated and embarassed but our boys and girls are still out their slugging it out with the rest of you. The main reason i feel so many people are having a problem with our forces is because of how they are managed(poorly)

mark, london,

The " surge" in Iraq consisted of temporarily buying off the former Sunni resistance. Has the US got enough cash for Afghanistan as well & how long will it last? I for one think that the British have a longer & more experienced history than the Cowboys & their "spray & pray Friendly Fire".

Atul, Mumbai, India

Carlton,
The US Marines are nothing like the Cossacks. As noted before me, some nations are there to wave the flag and sit out their tours - the US is there to win. Which one are you Britain?

Brian, Syracuse, US

US Marines: Very much like the Russian Cossacks of old.

Carlton West, Athens, GA, USA

Its probably worth noting a 3,500 man expeditionary force is approx half the total size of 3 Commmando brigade! From which just some of the British troops are sourced. Not to mention the funding that the US is able to allocate. Its a complex situation, hats off to those doing a difficult job.

Dave, London, UK

The British forces in Helmand Province have been invalable in both the planning and execution of this operation. We rely on their experience in this part of Afghanistan. Thank you all for your attention to the mission in Afghanistan. Semper Fi.

Capt Kelly Frushour, Kandahar, Afghanistan

Let's not get above our station, we have been the 51st state of the US for a number of decades now (especially since T Blair and his Ziocon buddies like Levy), take the flak that a more superior force throws at our lads. Just salute them & hope they don't kill anymore of our lads in 'friendly' fire!

Peter, Solihull, UK

The appeasement we see in Helmond is symptomatic of the appeasement we see at home towards those who are clearly against Britain. It is not the Services fault; it is the current governments policy that is influencing our approach in the Middle East and elsewhere (eg appeasing pirates in Somalia)

David Cartright, Birmingham,

If you want things stirred up and the local population 'aggressed' into the stone age, then the US marines are the ones to do it.

The problem in Afghanistan is largely socio-economic. Bootnecks don't do socio-economic. They just stomp all over the flower beds.

Mike Poulsen, Reading, Berkshire

James, get over yourself. The Americans' initial approach in Iraq was catastrophic, but they have learnt quickly and easily surpassed us. I am committed to two tours of Helmand, and welcome US involvement. They have the money and most importantly the WILL to make it work.

Christopher, London,

British forces have been asking for additional troop deployments from their useless Nato allies for months. Now US troops are doing just that.

Why does The Times paint this as a failure? There is a nasty anti-British (Army) streak in this newspaper (cf reporting on Basra). Why?

Are you the BBC?

Steve Roberts, Doncaster, UK

Whether the Brits know what they're doing or not, it is patently obvious that they don't please their US masters. Furthermore, the US practice of troop deployment is causing severe mental problems amongst their troops.
British troops are running risks for no purpose. Get them home.

Eddie Reader, birmingham, england

This article was doomed to have armchair military historians battle it out with their comments. "USA number 1" "NO Rule Brittainia". Just read the articles and stop arguing with each other.

michael, London, UK

The Americans may have a point. Lets get off our high horses, forget national pride for a minute and seriously look at what we are doing there. The big difference seems to be attitude. The US is determined to win - everyone else seems to be just flag waving and aimlessly holding the fort - for what?

M Graham, Auckland, New Zealand

Lets just pull out. If the yanks are not grateful and we keep getting humiliated lets go. All those wasted lives for nothing, so the Yanks can strut about blaming us for their own screw ups. The French and others had the right idea all along. They were the smart ones. Its an unwinable mess anyway.

Jim, Tokyo, japan

Thank heavens; the Americans are finally coming to rescue the British. Afghanistan is saved.

martyn, calvia, spain

James: British ability to win hearts and minds didn't do much in Basra, which ended in a humiliating retreat.

nigel roberts, Manchester, UK

I feel safe assuming you already know why the US invaded Iraq, and I'll be the first to admit that it was a colossal mistake. That has nothing to do with tactics in Afghanistan,however, nor does the Vietnam War, except in a very broad sense. The US military aren't mindless killers as James implied.

Matt, Chicago, Illinois

A flawed perception, Matt? Have you forgotten Vietnam? And what are you doing in Iraq anyway?

Tony Price, Toulouse, France

A completely flawed perception, James. The USMC has a long institutional history in this type of operation. They published their first counterinsurgency doctrine in 1940, and they've arguably been better at quelling the various insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan than any other force-look at Anbar.

Matt, Chicago, Illinois

Is there a difference in UK and US strategy in Afghanistan? General McNeil's comments also seem to diverge slightly from the anti insurgency tactics belatedly adopted by General Petraeus in Iraq. If we're in these wars, can't we at least have joined up policy?

Steve Evans, Argyll,

American's don't know how to do hearts&minds like the British Army. 'Counter-insurgency' for the Marines is simple - point and shoot, which more likely than not won't get the results they want. If the British adopt American tactics, then I for one will no longer pursue a military career with the UK

James Williams, Lancaster,