Tuesday, April 28, 2009

British SAS to be expanded for Afstan/Plans to increase army size

SAS to reach out and touch people, as well as conducting intelligence-driven kinetic operations of a certain sort:
SAS to increase in size to counter Taliban in Afghanistan

Special forces are to be increased in order to meet the growing demands of the conflict in Afghanistan, John Hutton, the Defence Secretary, has said.

But Mr Hutton told the defence select committee that they would not compromise with "quantity over quality" in getting more recruits into the SAS and other elite regiments.

Mr Hutton also did not rule out an increase in the size of the Army in order to create a bigger pool of recruits for special forces.

With the Taliban insurgency increasing in Helmand, defence planners have opted to spread the roles of specialist troops operating covertly on the ground.

In addition to targeting Taliban leaders they will use "soft power" in expanded roles in which they will address medical and other needs of the population in remote locations.

Asked about an increase in the size of special forces Mr Hutton said: "I don't think we should compromise on quality as we look to do this. These are the sort of issues that we have to make decisions on in the future."

Answering a question by the committee chairman James Arbuthnot, MP, on whether it would mean expanding the Army he said: "We are trying to recruit the size of the Armed Forces. We are looking at the details of this."

But special forces had to "avoid the elephant trap in that we increase quantity over quality".

With the SAS now withdrawing from Iraq, where up to two squadrons have operated successfully in Baghdad since 2003, the regiment is expected to rapidly redeploy to Afghanistan to assist the Special Boat Service...

The Army has to meet its current manning shortfall of 4,500 troops before it could consider expanding special forces, defence sources said. Plans are currently being drawn up to increase the size of the Army by 5,000 troops to 106,000. It is hoped that the recession and withdrawal from Iraq will attract extra recruits.

The defence committee also heard that the Armed Forces had not been able to train for all contingencies because "a lot of our people" had been committed to Iraq and Afghanistan [emphasis added].

Mr Hutton said the impending draw down of operations in Iraq would "significantly help things" but admitted that with almost 9,000 troops in Afghanistan the MoD would still be operating above its planning levels.

He added that the military needed a "period of grace" to "replenish our people [emphasis added]"...
Sound familiar?

2 Comments:

Blogger Dave in Pa. said...

A "period of grace", an "operational pause" ... whatever phraseology, I don't buy it.

It's been almost eight years (!) since 9/11, when Western Civilization was forcefully reminded that we are -and have been since the 1970's- effectively at war with Global Islamism, a war not of our choosing.

Our enemies today are nowhere remotely on the scale of the Wehrmacht, the Luftwaffe or the Imperial Japanese Navy. Nor do we need to mobilize our entire respective national industries or manpower. Our enemies are manifested in Al Qaeda, the Taliban, the Saddam Baathist Regime, the strong-but-brittle Iranian Mullahocracy, Somali pirates, Afghan Narco-Gangs, et. al.

That the major Western Democracies cannot sustain such low numbers and levels of combat formations in on-going combat reflects on the flaccid political and social will of our respective nations, not our capabilities. That certain major Western Democracies refuse to carry their share is simply inexcusible. That even the euphemistic name "Global War on Terror" is now un-PC, is reflective of this lack of will. That the Western Democracies won't even seriously use their truly formidable diplomatic and economic power in a co-ordinated manner is pathetic.

Wars are won or lost firstly in the will of the combatants. Our enemies cannot defeat the West, if we decide to take this threat seriously. The question really is, are we choosing to win or to lose?

8:55 p.m., April 28, 2009  
Blogger Mark, Ottawa said...

Quite.

Mark
Ottawa

9:49 p.m., April 28, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home