today

The BMJ study results indicate that adherence to a clear and explicit policy on duration of each deployment may have beneficial effects on mental health. Overstretch in the UK armed forces may have consequences on problems at home, and deterioration of psychological health may be more apparent in those directly exposed to combat.

Such a policy may conflict with strategy requirements. But any war is a pity and a badly conceived and inappropriately and dishonestly planned war may be far harder to rectify. There is no denying that Saddam Hussein, who seems to have had US approval much of the time, could be glibly said to be America's answer to the UK's Idi Amin.

IMO: Maybe the ol' "cut and run" policy may again be the answer eventually chosen, like it was in Vietnam. I could doubtless think of half a dozen better answers, but would any of them be satisfactory to the self-serving military supremos or to the politicians ? That is the really difficult problem, and often a reason why a change of administration helps.