Taskforce sent to Afghanistan to take heroin off the streets of Britain?

[enquirewithin]

The recent London conference on Afghanistan purported to search for a "five-year plan" for the country. Since the US and Britain seized the country in 2001, 87% of world trade in opium is ascribed to Afghanistan, with output breaking all records. This year's crop is expected by the UN to top the 1999 record of 4,500 tonnes. Britain's latest plan is to send a 3,000-plus strong taskforce to the hostile, opium poppy growing region Helmand, in a three-year deployment costing 1bn, to stamp out the opium trade.

Will spending this money reduce the amount of heroin available in the UK, or instead will it just see British troops deployed in a dangerous and impossible task in the name of the 'war on drugs'?

Afghans attacking the retreating British and Indian army � January 1842
Sometimes the past provides good insight:
'Until the First Afghan War the Sirkar (the Indian colloquial name for the East India Company) had an overwhelming reputation for efficiency and good luck. The British were considered to be unconquerable and omnipotent. The Afghan War severely undermined this view. The causes of the disaster are easily stated: the difficulties of campaigning in Afghanistan's inhospitable mountainous terrain with its extremes of weather, the turbulent politics of the country and its armed and refractory population.'


http://www.release.org.uk/newsletter...etter.php?id=4

[enquirewithin]

This is another poor joke in 'the war on drugs'-- President Kazai, the US puppet, has has cabinet filled with drug barons. The US 'war on drugs' is funding not stopping the drug trade!