You have commented 375 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Afghanistan
British general to command American troops -- first time since 1944
2006-05-02
Break-down of number of troops by country at site
A THREE-STAR British general who takes control of Nato operations in Afghanistan this week will have thousands of American combat troops under his command — the first time this has happened since General Bernard Montgomery took charge of the US 9th Army in late 1944.

Lieutenant-General David Richards’s command will cover every region of the country by September and include about 8,000 US combat troops, who are engaged in counterinsurgency and reconstruction programmes in eastern Afghanistan. They currently come under US Central Command.

Under the leadership of General Richards, who heads Nato’s Allied Rapid Reaction Corps, the International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) in Afghanistan is spreading its wings to encompass the southern and eastern provinces with a total of 15,000 troops.

In the south, in Helmand province, 3,300 British troops with full combat potential will be operational by the end of July. The only soldiers who will remain strictly under the control of US Central Command will be American special forces and covert operators engaged against al-Qaeda in Operation Enduring Freedom.

General Richards, 54, a keen student of military history, will not need to be reminded of what happened to Monty when he was handed overall command of the US 9th Army during the Battle of the Bulge in the Ardennes — the largest land battle of the Second World War.

The Americans had already suffered huge losses and did not take kindly to remarks from Monty at a press conference when he boasted that he had defeated the Germans. His command of the American troops was swiftly withdrawn.

General Richards will also be wary of any comparisons with Britain’s 19th-century role in Afghanistan during the “Great Game” against the Tsarist Russian Empire, immortalised by Rudyard Kipling in his novel Kim.

Britain, this time in its Nato role, is involved in a wholly different endeavour, seeking to spread the authority of the Afghan Government across the country by a mixture of hearts-and-minds diplomacy and robust defence against hostile opponents, and by extending troop presence to areas where drug barons and warlords have traditionally dominated. Yesterday a suicide bomber struck against US forces just outside Kandahar on the road to Helmand. One soldier was left with nails embedded in his head, but was stable. Over the weekend Canadian troops clashed with Taleban rebels in Helmand province. No Canadians were injured but up to 20 rebels were killed. On Sunday the body of an Indian telecommunications engineer was discovered beheaded after he was abducted on Friday in the southern province of Zabul.

The British mission to reconstruct southern Afghanistan will be set right in the middle of the increasing violence.
Posted by:Sherry

#18  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-05-02 21:48  

#17  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Lancasters Over Dresden   2006-05-02 21:45  

#16  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Besoeker   2006-05-02 19:39  

#15  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Deacon Blues   2006-05-02 19:37  

#14  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Whamp Pholuth6661   2006-05-02 18:59  

#13  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: 6   2006-05-02 18:55  

#12  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Angath Huperens3717   2006-05-02 18:26  

#11  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Clomoque Chaique8020   2006-05-02 17:35  

#10  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: JFM   2006-05-02 17:07  

#9  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: mojo   2006-05-02 16:01  

#8  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: OldSpook   2006-05-02 15:58  

#7  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Seafarious   2006-05-02 14:46  

#6  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: AlanC   2006-05-02 14:44  

#5  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: lotp   2006-05-02 14:42  

#4  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Armylife   2006-05-02 14:37  

#3  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Fred   2006-05-02 14:31  

#2  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Ptah   2006-05-02 14:26  

#1  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Matt   2006-05-02 13:51  

00:00