Can Britain succeed in Afghanistan?

Gordon Brown has defended the government's Afghanistan strategy, saying it is the right one despite a "dangerous battle" ahead. Do you agree?

YOUR COMMENTS

It beggars belief that the prime minister believes that supporting the ISAF in Afghanistan could prevent terrorism coming to the UK.

Military operations in Afghanistan will breed Terrorists and as long as UK troops are involved in the USA led invasion of that country we in the UK are at risk of becoming the target of Terrorism.
Pamela Read, London

My grandson has wanted to join the army since he was seven. In August this year he will be joining their college. Nothing can dissuade him from joining the army, The REMI, is his chosen outfit. Needless to say I am dreading his first deployment in two years time when he is 18. I wish this bloody war would end. I do not believe anything the politicians say. Because in the end it is all about power and money. They are not spending enough on our troops. Hence all the recent deaths in my opinion.
Maureen Harris, Leicester

I am not against the UK's military involvement in Afghanistan, if it is genuinely serving some real purpose. The original action against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda was legitimate, and assisting the elected government is, too, but if it's to succeed it has to be done with sufficient numbers and resources to be effective. That could mean occupying the whole country, as in Iraq, which could only be done with massive American involvement. At the moment young lives are being thrown away aimlessly.
JustAnotherEUSerf, Shrewsbury, UK

Short answer is no. Skill, bravery and determination unfortunately is not enough or it would be over by now. Defeat of the Taliban will require a lot more troops than we have in our sorely depleted army at present and a huge investment in equipment that the government will not fund. However when it comes to paying out for Fred the shreds pension?
Campbell, Inverness

Whether we should be there is for debate. As we are there, then put the resources (more troops, helicopters and properly armoured vehicles) into theatre and let the military do their job.
DW, Melrose

I am fed up hearing people saying we ought to pull out of Afghanistan, because it's 'nothing to do with us'. I wonder if they forget those slain on 7/7 and the thousands of innocent people slaughtered on 9/11. This was all from Islamist extremism, which is what our boys are fighting right now. That aside, should we really leave these countries to fend for themselves when they are being bullied and threatened by extremist regimes? What would the world be like if we had had that selfish attitude toward Europe in 1939 when Hitler's extremists terrorized his own and neighbouring countries? God bless our wonderful, brave troops fighting a noble and honourable war against evil, and protecting those who can't protect themselves.
Mark Cunningham, Lincolnshire, England

No army will ever win a war in Afghanistan - a few battles perhaps, but no more. We're just there building sandcastles that will disappear in a tide of tribal resurgence and fundamentalist strength the moment we leave. Worst of all, we're using naive, gullible 18 year-olds to build them. Why do we never learn?
Peter, London, UK

Yes we have made a difference just look at the number of children that are now being educated, they are the future. I support ISAF but we must get more technical support to the troops on ground. A defence review before an election makes more sense than one after as we all know it will mean cuts or should that be prioritising?

Conflict resolution means understanding the enemy and stopping him from gaining the political high-ground either at home or in Helmand. The nut will crack but when it does we must ensure that the future generation of Afghans will not want the Taliban back.
Peter Robinson, Northwood, Middlesex, UK

My father was in the India Army and his regiment was made up of mainly Indian Officers, many from Afghanistan. He was told by those knowledgeable and wise men that no one from outside that country could ever win a war in against those fiercely proud fighting men in that impossibly difficult terrain. Times and weapons change but many things remain the same and I believe those old soldiers are still right. I sense great sadness and loss and waste at each British and Allied death.
Margaret Laughton, London, UK

I do not understand why Britain is the only European Union nation providing troops in Helmand province. We are not big enough to be as effective as we would like. Why aren't our European partners also providing troops to fight in Helmand? German peacekeepers in Kabul do not count!
Sally Copperwaite, Brentwood, Essex, UK

If the Russian military might could not do it, with the advantage of living next door, I do not think we a have any chance of succeeding.
Harry Rowley, Poole, UK

Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan were no threat to the UK until Bush and Blair's illegal invasions filled those people's hearts with hate and revenge. And every day that passes with foreign troops there increases that hate and revenge. They should get out now.
Pete Humphries, Mansfield, UK

I think it is wrong to even be questioning it. As soon as our troops landed they were committed and will now be involved for as long as needed, it would make the sacrifices that have already been made pointless if we leave before the end, all those service men and women would have died or been injured for nothing. We should be supporting them, not battling against them.
Llse King, Norwich, UK

What is clear is that the rest of NATO need to get there thumb out of there collective backsides and start contributing real combat troops to this conflict. The USA and the UK are the only ones actually fighting, the rest offer support roles and soft assignments. The Media including the BBC needs to back out troops, and stop whining at every turn of events. Far too much is given to the liberal point of views and not enough to support our Men and Women up the sharp end. We have the best trained Military in the western world and it is being let down by lack of support from the home front.
Stewart Dunbar, Keighley Yorkshire, UK

How is it possible for British troops to perform to the high standards they are trained to if they have ineffective equipment? The government has failed on 2 separate occasions to provide suitable armoured vehicles by cancelling the Boxer programme and the FRES programme. Instead they have had to make do with modified mastiff vehicles which were not designed for the tasks they are currently being used for. Standard metal detectors to find IED's is totally unacceptable while the Americans have jamming equipment. Defence ministers and MOD heads are simply lying about stating that troops have sufficient equipment.
Dave, Birmingham, UK

I find Gordon Brown's comment that we are there to prevent terrorism slightly disconcerting as in 2001 there had not been an attack against the UK, only USA and USA interests elsewhere. In fact the UK attacks came after the UK Govt's blind obedience to George Bush's war on terror, once we had invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact we had some early successes in Afghanistan which were put back by not reinforcing the troops so that they then lost the ground they had spilt blood gaining.
Allan Jones, Newbridge, Wales