British soldiers death causes “lack of personnel” debate

A British soldier has been killed in Afghanistan after being struck by an explosion during his foot patrol, the Guardian has learnt.

The Ministry of Defence (MOD) spokesman said the soldier was the 16th British serviceman to die as under the escalated fight with Taliban.

According to the Guardian, the soldier became the 185th member of the British military to die in Afghanistan to date - compared to the Iraq war, more people have been killed.

The soldier was reportedly from the 2nd Battalion The Rifles and attacked by an explosion while on his foot patrol near Gereshk in central Helmand, the BBC reports.

Lieutenant Colonel Nick Richardson, a spokesman for Task Force Helman told the Guardian: “It is with extreme sadness that I must report the death of a brave soldier.

“He laid down his life for his country and for the good people of Afghanistan. We grieve for his loss and join with his family and friends to mourn his passing. He will always be remembered.”

The continuous death of the British soldiers in Afghanistan raised a new debate about whether British troops are adequately equipped.

General Sir Richard Dannatt, the Head of the British Army told the BBC troops “needed more” and said he would be compiling a “shopping list” of what was required.

Other publications like the Timesonline reports Sir Richard Dannatt flew around Afghanistan in an American helicopter.

The General made it clear he would have flown in a British helicopter if there had been one available and called for greater urgency over the supply of new equipment, though some people accused him of playing politics.

However, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has repeatedly insisted the Army has enough equipment and denied claims of a helicopter shortage, the BBC said.

Shadow Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox told the BBC the Conservatives would be “extremely likely” to agree with bringing more troops to Afghanistan, if there were more in office.

Sir Gen Dannatt told the BBC it was “critical” to tackle the problem of improvised bombs in Afghanistan.

He said if we want to ensure the safety of Army forces, we need to receive more coalition troops or Afghan personnel to build better intelligence and better “overhead surveillance” of Taliban activity, and require more technical ability to see where they were planting explosives.

He has also previously called for more “boots on the ground”, pointing out the Ministry of Defence needs to focus its priorities towards the “land environment”, and shift away from navy and air force needs.

However, he added the military chiefs had never made a direct request for 2,000 extra personnel.

Should bring troops home from Afganistan?

After British troops being involved in Afganistan for several years, many people were arguing should the government bring troops home or order more troops to Afganistan?

What were people think?

During the debate on Radio 4, one of the Afgan said that at the beginning, when UK troops removing the Taliban goverment.

The locals were very positive, they were even over-expecting that Kabual would change in 24 hours, and Kabual would be quickly become London, Paris, and New York.

However, the west lost their chance during the first two years, and till now many issues were still remain unresolved, such as nation-building, education, heathcare.

A Afgan lady, who were used to be trained as a journalist, told BBC journalist that after the Taiban government were removed, she heard the music on the street, and it was banned for nearly 6 years after Taliban came to power.

More people thought Afganistan definitely need British troops to stablise the country, to assist nation-building, to train the locals fight with the Taliban power.