Donated by ex-Soviet bloc, eastern european nations or bought and paid for by U.S., really not sure of the numbers yet, but lets face it no amount of helo’s is ‘strategically’ going to fix 300 years of inter-tribal warfare ! But tactically they would help the boys on the ground right now (and we could have hired civvy contracted Mi 17′s years ago, like the Canadian’s do now …..)

Our aim, today, is to advance the Afghan forces enough for them to beat the Taliban.
The Afghans have road bound trucks, without a secure road network, they’re completely ineffective.

Being able to drop large numbers of troops anywhere at short notice is useful for killing Taliban, but to “win” the war we need the ANA and they need the roads.

The U.S. has always had the helo ambulance role well funded since Korea (think M.A.S.H.) and consider their Vietnam experience. Plus U.S.A.F. has had well funded Combat Search and Rescue capabilities. Google for Micheal Yon and look for his article on the “Pedro’s” – the Para-Rescue Jumpers who man the HH60′s. It’s all about the “golden hour” !

Is it all Gordon’s fault ? Not entirely. The Generals seem to have been at least a little complicit in the “we have enough helo’s” debate, and uninformed and generally crass mass media coverage does not help anyone.

In a wider sense more helicopters would save many more lives, the large combat logistics patrols would be less frequent and less urgent if supplies could be moved by air. Furthermore more helicopter assaults could take place arriving in large numbers anywhere allied forces please rather than giving notice and time to organise to fight the allied forces.

I personally would much rather we set a time table to withdraw like every other nation has, not doing so is just plain stupid in my mind. Ideally i would like to see us out of Afghanistan as i’ve said in recent posts by the end of 2012, this would mean the end of 11 years of War which i think is enough.