Four soldiers were unlawfully killed after troops were given inadequate training.
So ruled Wiltshire Coroner David Masters who, at the conclusion of a six-day inquest into the soldiers’ deaths, went on to say that he would write to the Ministry of Defence to raise concerns about equipment shortages and gaps in training which led to the deaths.
The four soldiers died when their Snatch Land Rover detonated a roadside bomb at Lashkar Gah, Helmand in June 2008.
The use of the Snatch Land Rover is controversial, given the high number of soldiers that have died in them. The vehicle is unsuitable for the terrain in Afghanistan; it cannot be driven over soft ground and gets stuck in small amounts of water, meaning that troops using it must use roads and tracks where the enemy can anticipate them, and plant roadside bombs. So many deaths have been attributed to the use of this inappropriate and dangerous piece of kit that the lads refer to it as a mobile coffin.
The troops’ commanding officer, a colonel whose name was withheld, told the court that he had raised concerns about the lack of safe vehicles and was told that as no others were available they would simply have to make do.
Mr Masters noted that there was a limited pool of vehicles available and that there was a general shortage of vehicles available.
Major Sebastian Morley, one of the soldiers’ commander in Helmand, has resigned since the deaths accusing the government of being criminal for ill-equipping troops.
The court heard too that there were shortages of metal detectors, essential kit, which meant that soldiers had not been trained in their use before they were sent to Afghanistan. They had been forced to seek guidance once they were already in the theatre of war. One of the witnesses said that they had had to work it out themselves with the use of the manual.
Mr Masters concluded that there was a theatre-wide shortage of that piece of vital equipment. He said that the lack of the metal detectors slowed the convoys thus increasing the risk of attack.
"In my judgment there was an inadequacy in training for this unit and its members," he said.
Well of course I realise that this is (yet) another, different war from the one that the Chilcot inquiry is investigating at the moment, but, if all we hear is true, Iraq was funded properly, everything that the commanders wanted they got, the troops were well fed and well trained and equipment was plentiful.....whereas in Afghanistan the troops are ill-equipped, badly trained and under-funded with sub standard kit and rations.
Right! A word to the wise, Mr Brown....... OUR HEADS DO NOT ZIP UP THE BACK!
So ruled Wiltshire Coroner David Masters who, at the conclusion of a six-day inquest into the soldiers’ deaths, went on to say that he would write to the Ministry of Defence to raise concerns about equipment shortages and gaps in training which led to the deaths.
The four soldiers died when their Snatch Land Rover detonated a roadside bomb at Lashkar Gah, Helmand in June 2008.
The use of the Snatch Land Rover is controversial, given the high number of soldiers that have died in them. The vehicle is unsuitable for the terrain in Afghanistan; it cannot be driven over soft ground and gets stuck in small amounts of water, meaning that troops using it must use roads and tracks where the enemy can anticipate them, and plant roadside bombs. So many deaths have been attributed to the use of this inappropriate and dangerous piece of kit that the lads refer to it as a mobile coffin.
The troops’ commanding officer, a colonel whose name was withheld, told the court that he had raised concerns about the lack of safe vehicles and was told that as no others were available they would simply have to make do.
Mr Masters noted that there was a limited pool of vehicles available and that there was a general shortage of vehicles available.
Major Sebastian Morley, one of the soldiers’ commander in Helmand, has resigned since the deaths accusing the government of being criminal for ill-equipping troops.
The court heard too that there were shortages of metal detectors, essential kit, which meant that soldiers had not been trained in their use before they were sent to Afghanistan. They had been forced to seek guidance once they were already in the theatre of war. One of the witnesses said that they had had to work it out themselves with the use of the manual.
Mr Masters concluded that there was a theatre-wide shortage of that piece of vital equipment. He said that the lack of the metal detectors slowed the convoys thus increasing the risk of attack.
"In my judgment there was an inadequacy in training for this unit and its members," he said.
Well of course I realise that this is (yet) another, different war from the one that the Chilcot inquiry is investigating at the moment, but, if all we hear is true, Iraq was funded properly, everything that the commanders wanted they got, the troops were well fed and well trained and equipment was plentiful.....whereas in Afghanistan the troops are ill-equipped, badly trained and under-funded with sub standard kit and rations.
Right! A word to the wise, Mr Brown....... OUR HEADS DO NOT ZIP UP THE BACK!
Picture: A Snatch Land Rover
