THE ONLY reason for the claim of some 3,000 plus casualties among the "innocent civilians" of Afghanistan was, and continues to be, an attempt to make the bombing by both us and the USA appear as horrific and destructive as the devastation inflicted on the Twin Towers in New York on September 11.

There is one massive difference that no massaging of figures can hide, that is the one that should be obvious to all but the most prejudiced, namely that the destruction of the Towers was an evil act with the sole intention of killing as many innocent people as possible.

Our and America's bombing and rocket firing, plus now action on the ground, was and will always be, conducted with the avoidance of loss of innocent lives uppermost in mind.

That some innocent lives were lost is beyond dispute. However, I will await the official assessment as and when presented by the appropriate authorities.

One of the captives who was taken and handed to the US forces turned out to be a US citizen. So citizenship is no guarantee of loyalty is it? How would you deal with this man, Mr Pittock?

The "barrack-room lawyers" among us will no doubt tell us that, as there is no declaration of war in existence, he cannot be tried for treason. What do you think, Mr Pittock? If and when the "British" subjects under US custody, a minimum of five I believe, are returned to the UK courts, what will be the international law that they will be in contravention of? As I have said before, the United Nations has no laws to deal with terrorists of the Osama bin Laden type, so we must deal with them as and when they commit their acts of terror.

F Isherwood

Latham Road, Blackpool