Tonight:
4°c
Army chief: I have to borrow a helicopter from Americans
Joe Murphy and Nicholas Cecil15 Jul 2009
Britain's most senior general went public today with a plea for more troops, equipment and helicopters to fight the war in Afghanistan.
In a revelation that will deeply embarrass Treasury ministers, General Sir Richard Dannatt said he was having to borrow a Black Hawk helicopter from US forces because there were not enough British machines.
Making his final tour of the battlefields before standing down as Chief of the General Staff, he said: “Self evidently, if I move in an American helicopter it is because I have not got a British helicopter.”
He said that the Army needed more “boots on the ground” to secure areas and win the confidence of the Afghan population.
“I don't mind whether those feet in those boots are British, American or Afghan,” he said. “But we need more to have the persistent effect to give the people confidence in us. That's the top line and bottom line.”
Sir Richard also criticised the slow pace of bringing in new equipment. “We are building our resources up in terms of equipment,” he said. “It's probably not moved as fast as I would have liked it to have moved. But we are increasing the numbers.
“I would like to get more energy behind it if we possibly can.”
Sir Richard, who is meeting troops on the frontline in Afghanistan, told BBC radio that British and American forces shared a pool of helicopters but he made clear that Britain was not putting enough in to meet its needs.
“There's a pool and we share the assets. But we have got to put as much into the pool as we need to take out of it,” he said.
The general said that travelling in an American helicopter was “part of the wider issue”, adding: “We are trying to broaden and widen our effect here, which is about people, it is about equipment and yes, of course, it's about helicopters as well.”
Asked if David Cameron was correct to call the lack of helicopters “scandalous”, he said: “I don't want to get into whether the Conservatives are right or not... but air mobility is a key enabler and I know the commanders need a lot of that.”
General Dannatt said the “mark of success” was allowing Afghans to return to a normal life by providing security. But British deaths and injuries could not be avoided.
“It is a sad fact and part of the reality of this campaign that over the years every successive brigade that deployed has taken casualties,” he said. “When you push, inevitably there is a prospect of taking casualties.”
Ministers were furious at reports that Sir Richard met Tory MPs last week and briefed them privately that 2,000 more troops were needed.
It was claimed that Gordon Brown rejected a request made in March for the extra soldiers. No 10 denied, however, that any troops were refused on cost grounds and the head of the Armed Forces, Sir Jock Stirrup, has insisted that the current Afghanistan operation has all the troops and equipment needed.
Reader views (24)
I like a General how speaks his mind.
- Stan White, leeds, 16/07/2009 07:19
Report abuse
You can sing for your shiny new comfy multi-million dollar helicopters, mate! We're supposedly in the middle of one of the World's worst recessions, the governments talking about cutting health care and pensions for the elderly, people are losing their jobs left right and centre. And these clowns want shiny new weapons, so that they can unjustly invade yet more middle-eastern countries to secure oil for rich corporations at the TAX payers expense? For get it!
- Pete, London, 16/07/2009 01:36
Report abuse
I worked with some Brits (military) in Bosnia and they were some good guys. The brits that spewed such vitriolic garbage to us were the hipster dufus' that were stuck in the 60's trying to be flower children. One day western europe will need america's military for support and we will be there without question. either grow up, sack up, or shut up...western europe and canada dont need militaries b/c they know the U.S. will take care of them when we are called. People in western europe are just so much smarter than anyone in the U.S. and have all the answers. I know not all brits are like that but there seem to be quite a few.... I saw them and heard them talking trash under there beer stinkin breath constantly. Take some notes from Eastern Europe...Western Europe is a snobby semi socialist country anyway..not too far behind france...thanks for all your support
- Jay, South Carolina, 15/07/2009 22:15
Report abuse
This government is doing its utmost to give our troops the worst equipment and chance of survival.
Why?
- Dave Davies, Basingstoke, Hants, 15/07/2009 22:13
Report abuse
I used to be stationed in England in the mid 90's so I like to read the London news sometimes. For those of you saying "what are we doing over there anyway"...and the "taliban didnt attack us." Oh and another classic well informed comment like "they (Americans) started this mess." In case your memories are that short let me remind you Brits...Al Quaeda started this mess and the TALIBAN was actively and knowingly protecting bin laden and providing safe haven from which they planned attacking the west. They started this mess on 9/11 and there were some Brits in the 2 World Trade Centers...I believe around 300 or so were killed. Also, didnt they have a hand in the 7/7 attacks? How about in Spain. Whether you Brits like it or not an attack on the U.S. is an attack on the west and our way of lives. I am so sick of hearing all the negative american sentiment...and for the one who said you all shouldnt be helping out over there...consider it payback for all the americans killed in Europe..a small price to pay...When I was over there we were called vietnam baby killers in cambridge, about ran over with a car in new market and i could go on...Most americans are very pro-Brit and have your backs if needed...why cant you guys do the same...at least your military is helping out..Also "brits do better winning hearts and minds of the locals than americans." How do you know? Did you take a poll? that is a stupid comment.
- Jay, South Carolina, 15/07/2009 22:08
Report abuse
If our useless MPs were considerably less greedy, the funds necessary for the protection of our forces would be available, and the lives of the murderers in Parliament would be rather more equal to the rest of the public. They should, each and every one of them, be charged with dereliction of duty, likely to cause death or injury to the brave people who are fighting for this country.
- L.Taubler, London / ENGLAND, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
No votes for Talabour in the British Army, but lots in Education, NHS, the extra 800,000 civil servants since 1997, and the Quangos.
- Jamal Akhbar, Edinburgh, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
The government's attitude towards troops is that they are expendible idiots fit only to be killed in the pursuit of power, wealth and oil.
- Neil, London, London UK, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
no senior office will say they have adequate equipment
no senior doctor will say the NHS has enough equipment
no head master will say they have enough resources
the list goes on........it is their duty to lobby for more resources - but let's be clear, the best equipped and funded army in the world (the US) is not immune to casualties -
- Martin_Clerkenwell, london, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
Well done General Sir Richard Dannatt it must have been hard to say it as it is.
How can we justify a war in Afghanistan when most of Africa is about to explode, ignore the usual spin we are only in Afghanistan to save the US face, we just get planes of body bags in return
- Gerry, Essex, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
Send the bill to G Brown c/o 10 Downing Street. He will probably claim it on his expenses.
- Albert Hall, hove england, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
Sorry,
Please can someone tell me, why are we in this war in the first place?
- Terry Groves, Horley Surrey, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
Two points. First I cannot see how the Head of our Armed Forces can be described as "sauntering about" - he has a duty to visit the front line and see our troops who no doubt welcome top brass getting out into the field. That he has to borrow a helicopter from another army leaves us looking cheese-paring both to our own toops and to the US army. Pooling resources amongst allies makes sense, but let's be clear: in dire emergency our troops will be left to sweat things out if the only helicopters available belong to the US and are needed for American troops. We need to contribute our fair share or we are not equipping our troops properly.
- James Elliott, Eastbourne UK, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
What are we doing there anyway. Since when did the Taliban set off bombs in the U.K.Pull out now.
- C.D.C., Shrewsbury, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
We have spent millions on chinook helicopters that have been parked in a shed for some years because of a computer software problem caused by our MOD. These purchases were from the United States so could they please as an act of mercy take them back, put them in airworthy condition and return them.
- Jack Spratt, Richmond, Surrey, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
The blame lies with the political correct Labour government and their trendy left wing agenda's.
- Joe, Swanley Kent, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
Boo hoo brass complaining that they have to borrow a chopper to saunter about in. Frankly I'm delighted to see that all resources avaailable are being tasked to front line troops not rear echelon officers.
I wonder though did he start complaining about a lack of equipment before or after they took away his private toy and gave it to the squaddies?
- Danny, London, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
For me, the real scandal is that Government Ministers are driven around in bullet and bomb-proof cars, yet soldiers who know they are going to run the gauntlet of shootings and road-side devices are expected to do so in canvas-backed Landrovers.
Given the British make a better job of 'hearts-and-minds' exercises with locals than the Americans, it may well prove important to be in a British helicopter, not an American one. As Britain backed the US to the hilt more than any other nation in Iraq and Afghanistan and against Al Qaeda, perhaps the US would like to cough up some cash? After all, the Americans do meet the cost of the Polish Army's pay-roll, but the British - who are doing something a lot more dangerous - foot their bill themselves . . .
As for Dave Cameron: he would do well to remember that it was John Major who cut the Army back to dangerous levels against the dire warnings of a cross-party committee set up to examine the issue. Clearly Labour could and should have done something about it - especially given how often the Army has bailed them out (from burning carcasses to stand-by fire brigade!) but the sad fact is that no politician gives a Tinker's until the press starts publishing pictures of soldiers bodies returning home - it's same with every war.
- Roz, France, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
"..allowing Afghans to return to a normal life.." may include their centuries-old male national sport of fighting (once the harvests are in). When all the various foreigners have gone, they will want to fight each other.
- Steve, London, England, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
I really wish we could get to the bottom of this,yesterday a Senior Army Officer spoke on a radio station and said that he had just returned from Afgahanistan, and that there was no shortage of troops,or equipment,and when pressed by the presenter about the shortage of Helicoptors he replied that Helicopters were no use in fighting this type of conflict,today we have another Senior Officer saying the exact opposite.
- Colin, BristolI, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
This Nu Labour government has blood on it's hands. All those thousands of people at Wootton Bassett witnessing the repatriation of the fallen soldiers know those soldiers deaths are directly linked by either not enough or the wrong equipment in Afghanistan. It's time to stop the spinning and its time to stop the lies. If we are going to send troops into a war zone the least Gordon Brown can do is to equip them properly.
- Ron, Chislehurst, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
The answer to the shortage of 'boots on the ground; is very simple. Take those parasites that you have in westminster who have been thieving, which of course would mean them all, and allow them 6 weeks basic training in soldiering. Then send the bastards to Agfhanstan. That should give you one regiment. take the bankers and their rent boy mates, do with them as you did with the first lot of wasters, and you have a second regiment. Now then, there is a very good chance that before you can conscript the civil servants that assisted the mp's and bankers in their thievery. They will have de-'camped' However, you can quite easily use the rules they formulated, to have them returned. Result. Another two Regiments of T'ali meat!
Regards,
Bill Dolan, nelson Creek, New Zealand.
- Bill Dolan, Ngahere, West Coast, New Zealand, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
The answer to the shortage of 'boots on the ground; is very simple. Take those parasites that you have in westminster who have been thieving, which of course would mean them all, and allow them 6 weeks basic training in soldiering. Then send the bastards to Agfhanstan. That should give you one regiment. take the bankers and their rent boy mates, do with them as you did with the first lot of wasters, and you have a second regiment. Now then, there is a very good chance that before you can conscript the civil servants that assisted the mp's and bankers in their thievery. They will have de-'camped' However, you can quite easily use the rules they formulated, to have them returned. Result. Another two Regiments of T'ali meat!
Regards,
Bill Dolan, nelson Creek, New Zealand.
- Bill Dolan, Ngahere, West Coast, New Zealand, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
If it IS true that our troops are woefully under equiped then this is a scandal that violates the human rights of the ground troops.
they should all be provided with the best equipment possible. We dont want them there but we are in too deep to get them out now and it would be a waste of the brave who have lost their lives for this fight.
HOWEVER. I dont see the harm in having to borrow Helicopters from the Americans? Their budget, (by sheer size) its much more than ours, they started this mess and so have more resourced comitted to it than we do, if they have X amount of Black Hawks and can only use a certain amount of them wheres the harm in letting British forces borrow it? if it cuts down costs for everyone and ensures equipment is kept up to date and in order I fail to see the problem?
- David M, London, 15/07/2009 21:08
Report abuse
