Air Chief Marshal Mike Wigston has indicated that the Royal Air Force could strike Islamic State targets in Afghanistan.

The head of the Royal Air Force told The Telegraph that the UK could be involved in strikes against Islamic State.

“Ultimately what this boils down to is that we’ve got to be able to play a global role in the global coalition to defeat Daesh, whether it’s strike, or whether it’s moving troops or equipment into a particular country, at scale and at speed,” he told the Daily Telegraph.

“If there’s an opportunity for us to contribute I am in no doubt that we will be ready to – that will be anywhere where violent extremism raises its head, and is a direct or indirect threat to the UK and our allies. Afghanistan is probably one of the most inaccessible parts of the world, and we’re able to operate there.”

Asked about Sir Mike’s comments, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab told Sky News here that he would “not comment any more on operational details”.

But added: “Of course, in extremis, the UK retains the right to exercise self-defence and that must include in relation to terrorist groups operating from abroad.”

Mr Raab also reportedly said there was a “need to see the Taliban live up to the explicit commitment that they’ve given not to allow Afghanistan to be used as a safe haven, let alone a base for terrorist attacks”.

The UK, US and other allies have now withdrawn from Afghanistan.

Operation Pitting was the British military operation to evacuate British nationals and eligible Afghans from Afghanistan following the Taliban takeover of the country.

In the end, 13,708 eligible Afghans and British nationals were successfully evacuated in 100 flights but 800–1,100 eligible Afghans and 100–150 British nationals were left behind.

With 100 flights, the effort was the largest British evacuation since the Second World War and largest airlift since the Berlin Blockade of 1948-9.

Timeline of the largest British airlift since the Berlin blockade

Who are ISIS-K?

The Islamic State Khorasan Province, which is also known by the acronyms ISIS-K, ISKP and ISK, is the official affiliate of the Islamic State movement operating in Afghanistan, as recognised by Islamic State core leadership in Iraq and Syria.

An attack on a crowd gathered outside Kabul’s airport on August the 26th, 2021, has left at least 100 people dead, including at least 13 U.S. troops. ISIS-K claimed responsibility for the coordinated suicide bomb and gun assault.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
94 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago

The distance from the UAE to Kabul overflying Pakistan via Karachi is about 1500 miles. So for a Typhoon a round trip of 3000 miles. Just saying.

maurice10
maurice10
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

We are on the verge of a period of desperate military action against a full-scale influx of dangerous groups as the Taliban concentrate on establishing effective governance of their country. That in its self may be an impossible task, and all the time the West will be making airstrikes against terrorists from outside its borders. With the total US withdrawal, Pakistan could now be exposed to a myriad of threats, and their nuclear weapons being the glittering prize. America has the equivalent of Prime minister Chamberlin as president, at what could be a pivotal point of danger for the whole… Read more »

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  maurice10

Pakistan played with the devil and they will get burnt. Their nuclear weapons are no serious threat to us. The hubris of Pakistan supporting all these terrorists groups and it will very likely lead to a hard muslim caliphate in Pakistan but that’s not our problem. Let them kill one another with impunity it’s not our problem now.

maurice10
maurice10
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

What happens in Pakistan is very important for the rest of the World as any nuclear state needs to be stable. The concept of people dying with impunity, no matter where, is not an acceptable state of affairs either. Such turmoil can spill out beyond borders and quickly infiltrate surrounding nations. To suggest their nuclear weapons are not a threat is to seriously underestimate the international threat they could pose in the wrong hands?

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 month ago
Reply to  maurice10

I think if Pakistan does go to hell in a handcart ther are enough sane people in the Pak military who’ll help others China ? US ? to get their nukes out or destroy them.

George Parker
George Parker
1 month ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Get their nukes out begs the question, where to?
It’s a very poorly guarded secret that Pakistan is storing warheads ordered and constructed for their sunni brothers in Saudi Arabia. Destroying them in situ would be far more effective and send the right message. It may even deny large areas of contaminated territory to the fundamentalists.

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 month ago
Reply to  George Parker

Well I think that would be the alternative choice put to the Pak military ! I think they would choose the alternative at that point !   :wpds_wink: 

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 month ago
Reply to  George Parker

Well now I know put an emoji in your comment and it goes to adjudication.
I think that would be the alternative to put to the Pak military. I think that’s the one they’d go with. LOL

Last edited 1 month ago by David Steeper
Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  maurice10

They always played that card so they can double deal. It doesn’t cut mustard with me and your scenario is incredibly unlikely. Let’s call their bluff this time and see the emperor has no clothes.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

👍
Partition was a mistake

Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 month ago
Reply to  maurice10

India will be a lot more concerned than anybody else, they are most likely to be targeted first by a Pakistan-based caliphate.

George Parker
George Parker
1 month ago

Which is why Pakistan should be dealt with at the same time as ISIS and the Taliban. It is second only to Iran when it comes to supporting “J” terrorist groups.

George Parker
George Parker
1 month ago
Reply to  maurice10

Their nuclear capability is weak at best. Easily neutralised in a multiple cruise missile strike by a modern military such as ours. The problem with Pakistan is the very nature of the country and it’s demographics. There are more fundamentalist ISIS/Taliban sympathisers in that country than in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria combined. Despite the flowery rhetoric, they are not our allies. Only appearing so following George Bush juniors threats and bribes. Which actually radicalised the irate population even more. The tribes in northern Pakistan do not recognise national borders. Any action to eliminate the fundamentalists must adopt the same borderless… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  maurice10

Both China and India are already nuclear powers. China does not tolerate dissent of any kind. India has already suffered attacks by Islamic terrorists and has good anti terrorist forces I suspect. The partition of India was a mistake. The Muslim people were happy with the inclusive holistic India proposed by Ghandi. It was the smart talking suit wearing British educated, ‘one of us’ barrister Jennah who persuaded the British establishment to create Pakistan – a clone of the British establishment. Pakistan now has a chance to reverse that decision to the extent it can be reconciled with India and… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Paul.P
Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

There was a political group called the ‘Pakistan movement’ which brought together many Indian Muslim groups in order to pressure the government of the day into creating a new state specifically for Muslims. Saying the creation of Pakistan was the decision of one British guy is simply not accurate or true.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago

There was a group, the Muslim league. Jennah lead this group. He wanted reserved seats for Muslim MPs and separate electoral roles based on religion in the future independent India; institutionalised segregation. He rejected the non violence strategy of Ghandi and Nehru.
One has to ask whether had we not partitioned India would Islamic terrorism found sanctuary in a unified India?

Last edited 1 month ago by Paul.P
Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Read up on this guy: Muhammad Ali Jinnah

Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Had Pakistan not existed then Yemen would have probably been the next choice then maybe Somalia or Sudan?

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago

Indeed. That said I do think that a united India would have been better for the Muslims who would have been healthier and happier in a more diverse country and also for India which under Modi is being led into being an intolerant Hindu monoculture.

Douglas Newell
Douglas Newell
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

A “unified India” would have been torn apart with sectarian tensions. Its already wobbly enough without another 200million Muslims in the mix (nearly 400million if you include East Pakistan).

British did the right thing creating the two states.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  Douglas Newell

Well, we are where we are. We will never know. It will be interesting to see how things go now.

George Parker
George Parker
1 month ago

Well said. The primary force behind partition was spawned in Mecca 1500 years ago and since, has been responsible for well over 270,000,000 deaths. Many in the Indian subcontinent. That does not include slaves taken from said sub continent. Are people aware of what Hindu Kush means.
Nothing to do with high cold mountains and everything to do with swords, scimitars and severed infidel heads. “Piled so high that a man on a horse could not see over them.”

George Parker
George Parker
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

That is why bases in northern India are essential to a successful air campaign. Together with the Indian air force.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  George Parker

Indeed.

farouk
farouk
1 month ago

Why, I’d rather the time and effort was spent patrolling the channel

geoff
geoff
1 month ago
Reply to  farouk

Exactly. It is quite bizarre that many suitable immigrants have to jump through hoops to get into the UK yet on the beaches of Kent people are just pitching up!! Outrageous

Meirion x
Meirion x
1 month ago
Reply to  geoff

Yes I agree, they are cheating!

Andy reeves
Andy reeves
1 month ago
Reply to  geoff

agreed

OldSchool
OldSchool
1 month ago
Reply to  geoff

We pay France to stop this – which is why it is still happening. Pskistan isn’t the only country double dealing.

James
James
1 month ago
Reply to  farouk

Thats politically unacceptable and would also infuriate the French.

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  farouk

Farouk good luck with convincing the powers that be. The political elite are disconnected from your average person in the street. I would fully concur with you but there seems zero political interest in doing what you suggest.

Meirion x
Meirion x
1 month ago
Reply to  farouk

Could we not build a floating sea barrier?

Andy P
Andy P
1 month ago

Sounds a bit of an empty threat to do it unilaterally and based on us getting handed our arses and wanting to sound tough. The UK might be slightly more palatable than the US if they were dishing out invites to do some internal bombing but you would think they’d ask some of their other neighbours for a hand.

geoff
geoff
1 month ago
Reply to  Andy P

Howsit Andy. Agree. Things need to settle before such action is taken and there must be meaningful consultation.

Stephen Salt
Stephen Salt
1 month ago

Seems a pointless and empty threat to me. What will it achieve ?

James
James
1 month ago
Reply to  Stephen Salt

Other than giving pilots real life exercises nothing, its just a complete waste of money.

Stephen Salt
Stephen Salt
1 month ago
Reply to  James

Real life exercise with enhanced opportunity for ejection training ( not advisable ) and enhanced escape and evasion techniques.

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  Stephen Salt

Maybe it might train pilots in evasion tactics and also resisting interrogation after their aircraft have been shot down and they have been hunted down. It may even lead to one of the senior RAF officers getting a further promotion but other than that it will do diddly squat all!

Steve
Steve
1 month ago

Reaper can’t fly (& Loiter) that far and it has been shown numerous times that you can’t be certain a ‘car’ does contain the target? Now there no ground forces how would we (they) be able to, let alone accurately track enough to ever launch? Not that i can see Pakistan authorising armed over flights now forces have been withdrawn. Of course US could do some B2 strikes as i don’t think they could be detected but again the issue is confirming what is legit target from 40000 feet?

Last edited 1 month ago by Steve
John Clark
John Clark
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

Sounds like total posturing to me. Pakistan certainly won’t allow armed overflights, on route to bomb a key allied nation…. Nope, no chance whatsoever.

We don’t have a suitable asset for the job.

Any airstrikes will be US, humint led and via a B2.

Deniable….. Nothing to do with us chief, must have been an IED….

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

Unless we are willing to accept massive collateral damage then manned aircraft and drone strikes are hard to sell unless it is intelligence led on the ground. ISIS-K know this is the case which is why they will surround vehicles by women and children or drive through major population centres. The west can be totally hamstrung by wars that are now fought in the domain of public opinion and in the court room. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t take a moral high ground but it is probably incompatible with winning modern offensives, battles or wars. In this case our… Read more »

JohninMK
JohninMK
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

Exactly that. How would Boris or another PM handle the, very likely, situation where a civilian target is hit accidentally or intentionally due to malicious false co-ordinates? We are not flavour of the month out there and the latter must be a high probability. This is nor another Syria or even Iraq. On the other hand what else is Wigston to say? Yup the last 20 years were a waste? Instead he has to continue the line that we were there for a valid reason and that reason still exists so we should be ready to do something about it,… Read more »

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  JohninMK

I think modern warfare is almost impossible in the west now because of lawfare and public opinion. I think even the Falklands might be touch and go now in terms of our politicians determination to see it through. I think the general public don’t get how dirty war is and they think it is like a movie which can be directed from afar by lawyers litigating the morally correct way. I don’t think even Maggie Thatcher or Reagan could win against these odds. It’s very sad but true which is the reason why a lot of the general public were… Read more »

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago

It’s much better to co-ordinate drone strikes with the US – assuming that we can repair the relationship between the US and UK (takes two to tango and the democrats seem hostile at present to the UK). We don’t want to be using very expensive manned aircraft for such missions. Only do these drone strikes if ISIS-K actually threaten western interests though and don’t try and exacerbate the coming civil war in Afghanistan. Personally I think we should wait to see how things pan out with the Taliban and see if we can work with them on ISIS-K – some… Read more »

John Clark
John Clark
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

Don’t think we don’t still excel at low intensity, intel led operations Andrew, such things are quite rightly classified and not for public disclosure..

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  John Clark

I really don’t know John. If we did have good intelligence wouldn’t we have prepared better for the sudden surrender of the ANA? Surely the powers would be knew that the ANA were not up to the job? It doesn’t fill me with much confidence that we can still perform intelligence driven low intensity warfare.

John Clark
John Clark
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

It caught out everyone Andrew, including the Taliban itself.

The Taliban leadership were completely unprepared to actually take charge, they are scrambling around trying to form a government as we speak…

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  John Clark

I’m of the opinion it didn’t catch them out. Many of the ANA were ambiguous in their alliances as long as they got paid. When the pay ticket was leaving they opted for the other side. My guess is that no more than 2000 troops were committed and the rest were plastic bobbies like we have in the UK. It’s a harsh judgement but likely very true.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

Over 69 thousand Afghan soldiers died fighting the Taliban. I wouldn’t be so flippant criticising them without the true facts.

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

Are we actually sure of those figures? I mean we thought there were 320,000 ANA troops left and then there were none within a week. I mean there was widespread fraud and some troops were reported to not even exist. Pardon me for being cynical but maybe that 69K casualty figure might be an embelishment….

Paul T
Paul T
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

My Internet is playing up currently so i can’t post links but look for ‘Afghanistan Index – Brookings Institution’ it brings up some interesting figures regarding Casualties etc.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

From someone who served in Afghan, I can assure you the ANA casualty figures were high. Very high. Some fantastic characters in that country. Some very brave men & women. The complexity of Afghanistan and it’s people is hard to understand from the safety of the UK.

Barry Larking
Barry Larking
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

We were not even a junior partner to the Americans in Afghanistan nor Iraq. What you suggest is similar to my own analysis, but to become a reality would require a freedom of action we do not possess out side Commonwealth countries (Sierra Leone, or assisting the French in their colonies). We are completely invested politically in N.A.T.O. and that means accepting American leadership and direction. Currently, America’s only proven reliable ally, Great Britain is disparaged in Washington; the doddery butler who spilt the cocktails.

Last edited 1 month ago by Barry Larking
Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  Barry Larking

I see your point that we can’t do anything unilaterally even low intensity warfare without the US authorisation. Makes you wonder about the full ramifications of the Suez crisis and its impact upon the UK pysche. Saying that though we did stick two fingers up at the US over the Falklands when it was political expendient to do it. They were politically opposed and wanted us to capitulate but Thatcher said get stuffed. Alternatively, maybe we can convince Biden he isn’t the president and Trump won….wouldn’t be hard given that he followed Trump’s policies (tongue firmly in cheek). Personally, I’m… Read more »

Steve
Steve
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

Biden will only be there 4 (an a bit years) it will take our bunch of clowns at least 2 presidential terms to make a decision!
Also Maggie had way bigger ones than any Prime Minister since

John Clark
John Clark
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

Absolutely Steve, she has brass balls, trouble is these days, all PM’s of any political flavour, are absolutely terrified of public option and litigation. Mrs Thatcher (like her or not) took a decision and stood by it, right or wrong… She was from a different generation, using the strength of their convictions as their guiding hand, not a room full of bloody lawyers … I would agree, I would be astonished if Biden stood again, hes looking massively strained already. What the US needs, is a new generation of Presidential candidates, someone bright, preferably with military service behind them, in… Read more »

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
1 month ago
Reply to  John Clark

Ex military doesn’t mean they will make a great presidential candidate. Look at George Bush Jr.

Peter S
Peter S
1 month ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

His military service was in the Texas Air National Guard, a neat way of avoiding Vietnam.( Trump had heel spurs!)
There have been some pretty poor US presidents with real military backgrounds.
It’s hard to look at recent incumbents without thinking ‘ is this the best a nation of >300 m can produce’.
And the there’s the UK.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

Could make sense, this endless ass licking achieves nothing you just get taken for granted and disparaged knowing we just take it with a fixed smile. There are already rumblings in some US outlets criticising the way we their most reliable ally has been effectively shafted so I think a little coldness from our end might get Biden some further internal and external negative press that he can ill afford. Never has the US needed it’s friends more and it’s disturbing that Bidens own ignorance, prejudice and stupidity is repeating those of Trump.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

Are you all confusing authorisation with consultation? We certainly consulted with the US over deploying our CSG to the South China Sea, but did we seek authorisation?

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
1 month ago
Reply to  Barry Larking

Barry, why do you say we weren’t even a junior partner to the US in Afghamistan or Iraq? By any definition or observation, we were.

Steve
Steve
1 month ago
Reply to  John Clark

Interestingly seeing as LAST US aircraft left yesterday HC-130 suddenly popped up on ADS-B half way across Pakistan today!!!

James
James
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Thorne

What on earth are we doing there on a foreign land known as the graveyard of empires ? Let Afghans sort out their domestics. Foreign intervention has driven the west into bankruptcy and made China rich . The era of military action and occupation is over! Already the vaccum is being filled by Turkey China Russia there who won’t use military action to get what they want

Phil
Phil
1 month ago

Oh Dear…..

Melchett1.png
Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  Phil

LOL made me laugh that one…Oh so true though….

Grant
Grant
1 month ago

Our politicians love using these Typhoons despite cutting our Combat Air numbers to less than a 100….

Barry Larking
Barry Larking
1 month ago

Afghanistan was defined as a country with borders by the British. It isn’t a unified entity in any sense Europeans (or North Americans) can understand. Today ‘the Taliban’ parade and mock. Tomorrow the factions will be back bickering and falling out. In this part of the world there isn’t a chance in Hell of producing settled political outcomes; anyone in the British Indian Army knew this more than a century ago. Bombing military assets left by the Coalition makes sense; longer term there are some old tried and tested British underhand methods. See: The Great Game. Ultimately however, this part… Read more »

JohninMK
JohninMK
1 month ago
Reply to  Barry Larking

Our forbears put those borders in the position they are intentionally, wherever possible through the middle of tribal lands. Around the world we were past masters at divide and rule. Both north and south borders of Afghanistan are classic examples. We, several generations later, are the ones that have to live with the results.

Meirion x
Meirion x
1 month ago
Reply to  JohninMK

Yes, certainly our forbears got the borders wrong.
The inhabitants of the tribal lands of NorthWest Pakistan are Pashtun too, so should be part of Pashtun-land or Pashtunistan.
It would be better if Afghanistan broke up!

Last edited 1 month ago by Meirion x
JohninMK
JohninMK
1 month ago
Reply to  Meirion x

They are definitely wrong now but they got the borders spot on for their needs, exercise control with minimum resources.

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 month ago

So the debate about whether the Taliban can operate the aircraft they captured from the Govt is now moot. We are offering to provide it free of charge. We’re also going to provide £100’s of millions p/a in economic aid. It seems we think the Taliban are our best buds. Wonder how the Taliban see it ? It gets worse. While we’re attacking ISIS what will the Taliban be doing with all the troops we will have freed up ? Panjshir anyone ? Ok smart guy what’s the alternative ? The Taliban are Pakistans little helpers let them clear up… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by David Steeper
John Clark
John Clark
1 month ago
Reply to  David Steeper

What happens in Panjshir is the really big question David and it will inform us how the west intends to proceed. We will either tacitly support them, as the Mujaheddin were in the 1980’s, we once supported them to play proxy wars against the Soviet Union, if we support them again, it will be to play a new proxy war against Pakistan and Iran and possibly more importantly, to interfere with China’s ambitions in the country. If Afghanistan drops back into civil war, Chinese hopes of mining rights and influence go up in smoke. On the other hand, the West… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by John Clark
David Steeper
David Steeper
1 month ago
Reply to  John Clark

The Taliban have 2 enemies now. What’s left of the northern alliance in the Panjshir and ISIS. Since we’ve offered to do most of the heavy lifting against ISIS the implications for the N.Alliance are clear.

Meirion x
Meirion x
1 month ago
Reply to  David Steeper

The Talibs could have a third enemy before long, most likely Pakistan. The tribal Pashtuns of the border region of P. will want to be part of the new Islamic state, so start an insurgency along the border, and now use Afghan territory as safe haven.

A sort of pay back time for Pakistan!

Last edited 1 month ago by Meirion x
David Steeper
David Steeper
1 month ago
Reply to  Meirion x

The Taliban are a wholly owned subsidiary of the Pak army intel service the ISI. They already run Pakistan go on most news sites and you’ll find out about the number of journos and even politicians who get in their way they’re having killed. Now they run Afghanistan too, You don’t defecate where you eat. Personally I’m pinning my hopes on either Daesh or Iran giving them what they well and truly deserve.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 month ago
Reply to  David Steeper

What a lovely future in store what with Pakistan in serious threat of degeneration now that the Afghan distraction will become less focused on any aspect of actual borders and it’s intelligence services needs a new script. The potential of that Regional degeneration in a generation rumbling up to India’s bidders doesn’t bare thinking about. Equally Russian and even China must be ( indeed reported to be) exceptionally nervous about how this might spread over their or their satellites nebulous borders.

David Steeper
David Steeper
1 month ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

It is beyond rational thought why we fund to the tune of £100’s of millions a country like Pakistan that we know 100% funds the most evil faction of the Taliban. The Haqqani network and arms, trains and supplies the rest. The icing on the cake is that the Pres of that country Imran Khan has publicly called Osama Bin Laden a martyr. What the f… would Pakistan have to do before someone in Govt or Parliament would say ‘enough’

Andrew Thorne
Andrew Thorne
1 month ago
Reply to  David Steeper

I think someone in our government is getting back handers from Saudia Arabia and Qatar to support Pakistan. It’s the only thing that makes sense. Look at how many mosques are built in expensive areas in London….you think the Muslim council of Britain funds this mosque expansion…follow the money to Saudia Arabia and Qatar and also look in detail at our own MPs bank and expense accounts…

John Clark
John Clark
1 month ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

If things go seriously south in Afghanistan, I can see China eventually occupying the narrow funnel of land leading to their border and perhaps a tad further, to create a Chinese administrative buffer zone. If it becomes a failed state, China will likely take direct action to secure their territory against the possibility of Islamic terrorism. They are the next Super power to get sucked into the maddness, are they sharp enough to keep away I wonder? The Taliban have said they want friendly relationships the everyone, including the US. They do need the frozen assets unlocked and vitality, foreign… Read more »

Simon
Simon
1 month ago

Afghanistan surrounded by anti west neighbors, how would we strike and even if we could, should the air force be talking about it.

Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 month ago

Let’s not put any more of the lives of our forces at risk in this part of the world, the Taliban does not want us there, let them deal with Isis-K.

Meirion x
Meirion x
1 month ago

The Fact is, interventions are necessary, occasionally now and then. And the need to fight terrorism as far away as possible from our shores. To deny this fact, you might as well burry your head in the sand.

Last edited 1 month ago by Meirion x
Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 month ago
Reply to  Meirion x

Relations between Pakistan and the west are getting worse, Pakistan is now cosying up to China. If the y close the air corridor to Afghanistan, how then do we intervene?

Meirion x
Meirion x
1 month ago

Pakistan receives 100s of millions of $s in aid from the US, and the Ps are reliant on this, so they won’t refuse anything the US asks. All the F-16s they have got require US assistance.

Also, don’t forget is that Pakistan is made up of different ethnic groups, Punjabi’s and Sind’s etc, so they would not want anyone to encourage separatism and breakup of the country. Access to Afghanistan can be achieved by overflying Balochistan which is sparsely pop.

Last edited 1 month ago by Meirion x
John Hartley
John Hartley
1 month ago

I suppose Britain could use a few of its small stock of SSN launched Tomahawk. I see the US has experimented with launching JASSM-ER out the back of a C-17. RAF C-17s could also gain that capability, if there was the political will.
What has been ignored with the loss of Afghanistan, is that Iran has just joined the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation. Gives China a land route ,that America cannot blockade, through to the Gulf & its oil & ports. Gives Iran access to the latest Chinese weapons in return for oil.

Steve
Steve
1 month ago
Reply to  John Hartley

Have you read ‘Dragons Fury’ by Jeff Head! 😱 

Will Dutton
Will Dutton
1 month ago

Utter madness, have we learnt nothing from the latest debacle? Hard to believe as it is, working with the Taliban to mitigate this threat is the best way to reduce yet another hot bed of terrorism. It’s not ideal, but neither was the empty posturing getting us into this mess.

We are very happy to get into these situations without really thinking how we will ever exit them.

Meirion x
Meirion x
1 month ago
Reply to  Will Dutton

We invaded Iraq in 2003, without finishing the Job in Afghanistan, which started in 2001!

Rob
Rob
1 month ago

Blowing up a few terrorists in Afghanistan isn’t going to stop global militant I Islamic terrorism. The West, and for that matter Russia & China, need to look at the bigger picture. Without an Israeli / Palestinian, an India / Pakistan settlement and a Sunny / Shia (which means Iran & Saudi Arabia) there will be no peace. Unfortunately the UN is disfunctional so until we reach another crisis point this will continue for the foreseeable future.

Ulya
Ulya
1 month ago
Reply to  Rob

Rob, this is a topic I can talk for hours about but I will try to keep short, the countries you mention, you take out the religious element and they would still dislike each other as their core issues is land and regional dominance, religion is just and extra layer to make it interesting. Governments can only do so much to control militant Islam, the most important front line must be at tribal and community level with people standing up and saying don’t use my religion as a excuse for being a dick and this is where Islam fails. Almost… Read more »

James
James
1 month ago

Nobody knows this evacuated people include double agents of IS. With the Taliban celebration of US and NATO defeat ( which it is obviously ) Another major player is entering Kabul namely Turkey and backed by Qatar which struck a deal with the Taliban to operate Kabul airport and get a large size of the lithium reserves pie of Afghanistan before the Chinese and Russians jump in . The way the vaccum is filled fast wherever the US and NATO leave is extraordinary and marks the decline of the entire west global power they once deployed at will . Interesting… Read more »

johnf
johnf
1 month ago

We cannot effectively control our own borders, or manage people flying in to our major airports, but the RAF says they can accurately, with a relatively short range single seat aircraft, bomb folk in Afghanistan? WHich land of the deluded do these people live in. Politicians and service chiefs seem on a different planet. Can we have some common sense and concentration to our own country and its immediate neighbours before we go killing foreigners in their own country. EVEN BIDEN has said no more foreign adventures but our deluded leaders think they know better? Any more money for a… Read more »

Andy P
Andy P
1 month ago

Is it just me ???? I’m sorta feeling sorry for the Taliban at the moment, the UK news are in shock that the (new improved, I can’t believe its the..) Taliban aren’t letting women into ‘High Office’ in their regime. Totally unlike a number of other countries in the region that we’re backing a 100%. They’re saying (yeah I know) that lassies can go to school and be involved in government, just not at the top. We’ll need to wait and see I guess but it seems a tad unrealistic to expect the Taliban to take the lead on women’s… Read more »

George Parker
George Parker
1 month ago

Have they learned nothing. Even if HM Gov. was willing to correctly name the real enemy, which they are not! The British Armed Forces alone are incapable of delivering the necessary death and destruction to defeat ISIS; Daesh; fundamental islamists; islamic terrorist; axis of evil groups or whatever term they use to deflect from the blatantly obvious. Dropping the occasional precision weapon on targets will achieve very little. We could join with our allies such as India, to obliterate a common enemy and send a message. Strengthen relations, practice interoperability and cement a formal alliance. India is the worlds largest… Read more »