Here is the letter he has written to Gordon Brown explaining his reasons why;
"Dear Mr. Brown,
I am writing to you as a serving soldier in the British army to express my views and concerns on the current conflict in Afghanistan.
It is my primary concern that the courage and tenacity of my fellow soldiers has become a tool of American foreign policy. I believe this unethical short-changing of such proud men and women has caused immeasurable suffering not only to families of British service personnel who have been killed and injured, but also to the noble people of Afghanistan.
I have seen qualities in the Afghan people which have also been for so long apparent and admired in the British soldier. Qualities of robustness, humour, utter determination and unwillingness to take a step backwards. However it is these qualities, on both sides, which I fear will continue to cause a state of attrition. These will only lead to more heartbreak within both our societies.
I am not a general nor am I a politician and I cannot claim any mastery of strategy. However, I am a soldier who has served in Afghanistan, which has given me some small insight.
I believe that when British military personnel submit themselves to the service of the nation and put their bodies into harm's way, the government that sends them into battle is obliged to ensure that the cause is just and right, i.e. for the protection of life and liberty.
The war in Afghanistan is not reducing the terrorist risk, far from improving Afghan lives it is bringing death and devastation to their country. Britain has no business there.
I do not believe that our cause in Afghanistan is just or right. I implore you, Sir, to bring our soldiers home.
Yours sincerely,
Joe Glenton
Lance/Corporal, Royal Logistics Corps"
www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/aug/03/british-army-alleged-deserter-court
thats one opinion whos to decide whether its the right one or not? maybe allah will decide or a terrorist who cuts an innocent persons head off with a sword will decide. they are there fighting terrorist and yes terrorist are also involved with civilians.[}:)]**** happens?
The action of the Allies in WW2 was probably the best one available, and I would support it not criticise it.
But - the cause of WW2 was a bit more complex than Nazi Germany invading a neighbour and slaughtering Jews.
At the time Britain has been invading countries for 300 hundred years and built up quite a large empire, based in part, on slaughtering and supressing the natives. They had done so relatively unopposed for reasons that are quite interesting, but not for here.
I am sure some would have argued that German expansionism was to free those enslaved by British Empirialism, thus the right and just was with one and not the other.
My opinion is that British Empirialism was better than German (and particularly Nazi) expansionism, and in general did more good than bad, but that doesn't make any war conducted in its name right or just.
Many historians would suggest WW2 could have been avoided with a different British foreign policy in the period 1919 to 1939 (and particularly immediately after WW1). Thus a differnet political solution would have averted a world war, and so the war could be seen as an unjust result of failed politics.
Whether that is right or wrong I don't know, but I am sure the argument of failed political systems is one petermac33 is suggesting also applies to Afganistan, and again whether I agree or not it is not without foundation.
^^ Well yes, I see your point but many also argue that Britain fought to protect its empire knowing full well that win or loose the war it would loose the empire.
I think Churchill understood that better than anyone.
I think one of his famous quotes is something like
'Britain lost her empire so Germany couldn't gain one'
It is alledged that well into the war Hitler was still trying to negotiated with Britain (unbeknown to the other allies) to divide the world between Britain and Germany, both with an empire and both with a truce between them.
Britain is said to have refused, although it knew to do so would result in loss of its empire.
But I totally agree with your last paragraph.
Where is osama bin laden?
We went there to fight alqeda (don't know the spellin) and international terrorism but now find ourselves fighting the taliban in a civil war.
Best keep the war going so the current govt doesn't have to loose the war and it can be the next government's problem. Or at least create a big marketing campaign to convince us we have won so we can walk out with our heads held high.
Aside from the link in the original post being one from 2009, the topics raised are just as relevant today as they were then.
Some interesting from other members, but seeing you started this topic what's your view on the matter Petermac33?
Are you trying to get a discussion going about the rights / wrongs of the war?
Are you trying to get a discussion going about the moral stand of the soldier?
Are you trying to get a discussion going about the soldier being a "coward"?
Are you trying to get a discussion going about the bravery of the troops?
Are you trying to get a discussion going about the military culture?
Joe Glenton is saying that the war in Afghanistan has become a tool of American foreign policy.
greed is one of [many] factors motivating American Foreign Policy.
a transference of wealth, measured in trillions [over many years] from the US/other taxpayers to military contractors.
how many have died in Afghanistan/Iraq since this war started?
many have estimated over 3 million,injured aside.
not to mention destroying the infrastrucure of the country,as was the case with Iraq.
when a British PM or US President state the the reason for war is 'just' it is accepted.
when a British soldier who has served in Aghanistan states the war is not 'just', it is considered a conspiracy theory.
Guess who coined the term conspiracy theory?
go figure.
I don't mind the wars so much but i'd prefer my intelligence wasn't insulted along the way.
I kind of enjoy the conspiracy theories on 9/11 and the engineering of the whole thing (Loose Change) by the powers that be to invade countries to control the Heroin, Cocaine and most importantly Oil reserves with a blank cheque from the voting public. I'd prefer them to say 'you know what, we're kind of running out of oil here and if we don't do something about it we're all screwed' and if that was the case it would be a better reason for war to me than pretending you were looking for terrorists or chemical weapons.
On the other hand I am happy to live in a society where people can make doco's like Loose Change and I can even write about it here. Things are good here and even if I believe we are taught to believe what we are told and be happy consumers for the good of the country sometimes it feels nice to believe for a minute that we are free and extremely lucky.
Good and good people exist.
Evil and evil people exist.
Good people who try to warn other good people about evil are quite often branded as crackpots or conspiracy theoricists.
Noah is a good example. I just can't understand why he put a pair of ostriches on the Ark.
When the flood ended and the ostrihces stepped off, they certainly entered into a prolific breeding program. 
The Yanks never invaded europe. They did nothing officially 'till the Japs bombed their Pacific fleet, then they declared war on Japan, and by defualt also Germany.
Britain never 'invaded' Europe either. They fought to free France from German occupation, at the request of France. Probablyb the first time in 2,000 years Britian fought for french territory but did not 'invade'.
Well - they didn't 'invade' in the same sense of the 'coalition' invasion of Afganistan or Iraq.
One view maybe that Britain declared war because of treaties it held with Poland and when Germany invaded Poland, Britain had to act to uphold its treaties.
One view maybe that if it didn't act it would loose its spot of being the supreme world power. Although it could also be argued the Britain knew it would loose that position even if it won. Thus the motivation for war maybe more benevolent than the self interest that that argument portrays.
And, despite what my earlier comments may imply I would agree that, for the average solider fighting on the ground, it is easier to see 'righteousness' in fighting WWII than fighting during the current Iraq or Afganistan conflicts. - And in general all the soliders fighting overseas are braver than me, hiding in my back room.
. D-Day
People are so opinionated about war and their arguments cloud the issue.
War is out of your and my control.
It is controlled, but not by us.
Think about it. Every time we do something as one of the members of the Coalition of the Willing we end up clobbering people.
Now I am sure there are people on this forum who have used violence at one stage or another, but it is not in our nature to kill to resolve an issue.
This execration that happens on a daily basis is not in our interests. It is in the interests of the people who control the money that they invest in war.
They created a bad guy all over the world, and all over the world we are rubbing them out, and rubbing them up the wrong way, but then that is part of the plan.
visited my parents on Monday night, mum was sitting on edge of chair watching
730 report or Four Corners taking it all in.
the brainwashing that is.
a panel of five 'experts', not including the grey haired ABC presenter, debating the war in libya.
could not help notice all five were pro-war!
how can you have a debate with no opposing views ffs!
when i mentioned to my mother the horrific/disgusting consequences of firing a 1350 kilogram missile at 550mph, with a sophisticated explosive attached, the reply went something like this.
he's a b--tard! they are trying to save the people!
the depth of brainwashing is breathtaking! congrats on doing a fab job!
the both of them sit there everynight on the edge of their chairs, watching
the 'news',taking it all in, pretty much as gospel.
so very, very sad.
thankfully, ignorance on occasions can be bliss.
tried to mention Haarp to my dad the other day,the smirk on his face told me don't even bother.
