Kharian_Beast
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,645
- Reaction score
- 0
hounrable,Kharian_Beast; sir
i guss, no !
sir, USA having best of its army units & best of equipments with best of their capabilities in afghanistan, still boosting its troops, numbers why?
yes , i surly support the idea to expand the capabilities IFV's, better small arms and a level of training of FC, but its not enough because the location of the area of FATA & AFGHANISTAN are not just a simple battle field, so therefore after a lot of consideration , US is putting more troops.
i guss , its about time that we, should follow the same but with a permnent force under the command of PAKARMY, & for ever!
Thanks batmannow for the insight as I appreciate hearing your views. I would support more troops but at the same time the US is fighting a totally different kind of war where they would need a lot more boots on the ground. The US has less than 50,000 troops deployed there to hold an entire country, and the recent talks of reinforcements is around 12,000 - 17,000 at maximum so nothing huge. In my books, better trained and better equipped troops means a lot more then sheer numbers. Yes they are being backed by around 50,000 NA and a further 50,000 NATO and ISAF but FC can be backed by PAF and PA at any given time.