Online chatter - UK's Afghanistan role

The availability of helicopters for British forces is among the issues to have ignited debate on the internet

Is the British Army under-resourced? Or would no amount of extra helicopters cut the death rate in Afghanistan? What is the UK doing about the country's opium production?

These questions and others about the conflict in Afghanistan are being discussed across the internet. The BBC is not responsible for external sites.

ON HELICOPTERS

Much of the debate centres around a reported lack of helicopters, as described by former Chief of the Defence Staff Lord Guthrie in the Daily Mail.

Soldiers commenting on the ARmy Rumour SErvice website seem to agree that while helicopters may not be the answer, they will go "a long way" to helping the mission's success.

Soldiers are debating equipment needs on the ARmy Rumour SErvice Website

One echoes what Lord King, former Tory defence secretary, told the BBC at the weekend - that they proved invaluable in Northern Ireland for helping soldiers avoid such roadside bombs.

Another says helicopters would help prevent the "please deploy your [Improvised Explosive Devices] dust clouds" that giveaway troop convoy movements.

Bruce Anderson, in the Independent, says that if the politicians who sanction the conflict "will the end, they must will the means".

The helicopter, he says, is vital as a "force multiplier", adding: "While it cannot literally enable troops to be in two places at once, it could often feel like that to an enemy under the cosh."

Meanwhile, the Times' defence editor Michael Evans, reports that eight Chinook Mark 3 helicopters which have been grounded for eight years because of software problems may soon provide some back-up.

TROOP NUMBERS

Reports at the weekend gave conflicting accounts of the government's plans on troop levels, with suggestions ranging from cuts of up to 1,500 personnel to the provision of an additional 2,000.

Ministers will say only that the issue is "under review".

Patrick Mercer MP, chairman of the Commons counter-terrorism sub-committee, says the government denied commanders an extra 2,000 personnel for the current operations - and was wrong to do so.

"Every commander I have spoken to bemoans the fact that when ground is captured from the enemy, they haven't the strength to hold it," he says in the Daily Mail.

Peter Hoskin, in the Spectator, takes offence at accusations attributed to Labour ministers that General Sir Richard Dannatt, the chief of the general staff, is "playing politics" by asking for more troops.

THE UK'S ROLE IN AFGHANISTAN

Prime Minister Gordon Brown says providing security for the future of Afghanistan is crucial to preventing terrorist attacks at home.

But for blogger Andrew Field, on business social network Ecademy, this "stale justification... is wearing thin".

The Guardian's Peter Preston dismisses the government's justification as a "grisly mistake".

Afghanistan is not the only place from which Al Qaeda can operate, say some

"The world is full of places where Al Qaeda can hide and operate. Somalia, Sudan, twisting back streets from Jakarta to Casablanca," he says.

The recent deaths prompt the Daily Mirror to ask: "Is it still worth it?", with armed forces minister Bill Rammell and Lindsey German, from the Stop the War coalition, offering conflicting views.

One blogger from the region, Pakistani Housewife, delivers a damning verdict on Britain's mission in Afghanistan, saying it has achieved only three of nine key goals.

Meanwhile, London Mayor Boris Johnson - writing in the Telegraph - offers a different take on Nato's approach to Afghanistan.

Rather than destroying the poppy fields that provide the drugs money the Taliban use to fund their operations, he says the coalition should create a legitimate market for medical opium - helping address rural poverty in the process.

The idea gains some support from those posting on the ARmy Rumour SErvice site.

ON EQUIPMENT

Max Hastings, in the Daily Mail, says: "I have been writing about defence and Whitehall spending wrangles for 40 years, but I have never known such bitterness as exists today."

Michael Evans, defence editor of the Times, says heavy-duty armoured vehicles are on their way but fears the Taliban will adapt to tackle them.

That view is shared by Thomas Harding, writing in the Telegraph, who says the Taliban are making "enormous" technological strides in bomb building.