British troops claim to have wiped out up to 100 Taleban fighters and destroyed an enemy”regional headquarters” in Afghanistan in the Army’s biggest single raid since it started policing the volatile Helmand province.

The Taleban compound, in the area of Kostay south of the town of Garmsir, was attacked during an operation lasting nearly four hours by around 100 British troops backed up by air support, the Army said in a statement today.

In what could bea significant advance for the Helmand operation, UK commanders said both buildings in the compound, which intelligence said housed between 60 and 100 Taleban fighters, were completely destroyed while no British casualties were reported.

NATO also claimed to have killed 150 Taleban fighters in a seperate battle in eastern Afghanistan, after they were spotted crossing from Pakistan.

In the British raid, which began at 3.30am today local time, troops from the Brigade Reconnaissance Force (BRF), part of 3 Commando Brigade, supported by the Light Dragoons, crossed the Helmand river and took up positions around the Taleban compound.

Men on the ground were supported by jets and Apache attack helicopters with twin airstikes launched against the buildings.

Both attacks were direct hits, the UK forces said, with first reports suggesting there was no collateral damage to other buildings or civilians. The troops left the scene at around 7am.

Major Mike Geldard, who co-ordinated the operation from UK Task Force headquarters in Lashkar Gah, said it was not possible to say how many Taleban may have been killed but he said it was believed to be a significant number.

He said: “It was a very successful operation. This was probably the biggest action in Helmand we have conducted to date in terms of a pre-planned operation.

“We have been building up information about this target up for about two weeks. Through intelligence we were able to pinpoint these two locations that we considered to be a Taleban regional headquarters for the south of the province.”

Meanwhile, in a seperate operation, a NATO statement claimed as many as 150 Taleban militants had been killed in a battle in eastern Afghanistan.

The statement said that two groups of Taleban were monitored and tracked as they crossed the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, and then attacked.

The Afghan defence ministry earlier estimated 80 fatalities, while Dr Muhammad Hanif, a Taleban spokesman, was quoted by agencies as saying that the figure of 150 Taleban fighters killed was “a complete lie”. There was no independent confirmation of numbers.

THE fierce pre-election fight between Labour and the SNP descended into personal abuse yesterday after Jack McConnell accused Alex Salmond of being “snide”, “sarcastic”, and indulging in “playground mockery”.

In what amounted to a full-frontal assault on the SNP leader’s character, McConnell claimed Salmond was somebody of no experience in governing, who preferred to score cheap political points rather than get results .

Salmond, he added, was “out of touch” with modern Scotland, still engaged in fighting the battles of 30 years ago.

The bitter attack was met with derision by the SNP leader last night, who said that if McConnell wanted to challenge him, he should agree to a head-to-head debate to let the public make up their own minds.

McConnell’s aides meanwhile said that Salmond would now be increasingly targeted in the run-up to the campaign as they seek to capitalise on what they see as his weakness as a statesman.

“We were half-expecting Salmond to appear on Celebrity Big Brother,” said one Labour aide yesterday.

The assault will be led over coming weeks by Labour MPs who will be told at a meeting this week to put renewed pressure on Salmond.

Labour hope to use the Scottish Question Time slot at the House of Commons to put him under the microscope.

Labour campaign chiefs also say they plan to highlight what they see as the contrast between McConnell’s experience in government, and Salmond’s career in opposition.

McConnell made his comments in a speech to Labour candidates in Edinburgh yesterday. He said: “I am in politics to change things. To create positive change rather than simply attack other politicians. If you want snide comments, sarcastic laughter and playground mockery you know which leader to go to.” The SNP, he added, had “no experience - none of hard decisions, tough choices, getting things done, from their leader on down”.

The public wanted a First Minister “able to take tough decisions”, such as implementing the smoking ban, and someone able to “get things done”, such as reducing hospital waiting times and increasing jobs.

He concluded: “Compare this with the prospect of an SNP leader living in the past. Still fighting the tired battles of the 1970s such as oil.

“He is out of touch, with no experience of the hard decisions of government, far less modern Scotland, who will say anything to get elected.”

Salmond rounded on McConnell last night. “Labour’s campaign started as one of a series of panic attacks, unmitigatedly negative about Scotland’s prospects, and has now descended into personal abuse,” he said.

“The First Minister has ducked every opportunity for a head to head debate on the future of Scotland preferring to rely on assaults on the SNP from London heavies. Now he is launching assaults from the safety of his own candidates’ meeting.

“Once the election campaign gets under way there will be no place to hide and the contrast will become clear between the SNP’s positive vision for Scotland and the unremitting negativity of Labour’s campaign.”

McConnell’s attack on Salmond’s character comes after independent polls have suggested that Salmond is marginally preferred as First Minister.

Now, Labour aims to hit back by stepping up the attack both on Salmond’s record and the SNP’s spending pledges, which it claims are uncosted and will leave a 5bn black hole in Scotland’s finances.

The Nationalists are proposing to scrap student debt, reintroduce student grants, and bring in a local income tax.

Labour aims to drive home the message of reliability in coming weeks when a series of UK Labour ministers come to Scotland. Prime Minister Tony Blair is also expected to make regular visits north.

Related topics

- http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=324
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=324
- http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=478
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=478

Having enjoyed the fruits of a year that was better than average in the stock market and a much weaker one in housing, home owners and investors appear neither exuberant nor glum about 2007.

In fact, they are decidedly ambivalent, according to recent New York Times/CBS News poll. They are split, for instance, almost evenly on whether it is a good time to buy a new home or better to wait, even though a sizable majority expects home prices to stay steady or rise, especially in their neighborhoods.

The poll also showed that Americans had regained some faith in stocks as a safe investment since the market’s crash in 2000, but they were less confident that stocks would rise next year than they were during the depths of the last bear market, in 2002.

The telephone survey was conducted from Dec. 8 to 10 and included 922 adults nationwide and has a sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

The seeming confusion and anxiety is not entirely new or limited to average Americans. Similar worries abounded in late 2005, when some economists and market experts predicted the nation’s long housing boom would come to a screeching halt and inflict damage on the economy and the stock market.

While home sales did plummet from records levels, the stock market rebounded to new heights after a brief stumble last summer. The Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index posted a 14 percent gain last year, its best showing since 2003. The American economy also put up stronger-than-expected performance as job growth and business investment made up for the faltering real estate market.

Still, in follow-up interviews, several of those polled last month said that while they were confident about their personal financial positions, they were preparing themselves for tougher times by either changing their spending and investment patterns or by not taking as many risks.

Christopher Pujol, an account manager at pharmacy benefits company in Texas, said he planned to shift some of the assets in his 401(k) account to cash from stock-based mutual funds because he does not think the market will match its 2006 performance. “The good times can’t go on forever,” he said. “I take a conservative approach and take money off the table.”

Pujol is not alone. Skeptical market experts have raised concerns about the durability of the recent rally. More broadly, economists are significantly divided about the outlook for the year, from the most pessimistic among them predicting a recession and the most optimistic saying economic growth could be so strong that it may force policy makers to resume raising interest rates to fight inflation.

“People seem to have a fairly balanced view about things,” said Robert McGee, chief economist at U.S. Trust, who reviewed results of the Times’ poll. “We have had a relatively strong housing boom and people recognize that is over, but at the same time the disappointment in stocks that occurred after 2000 and 2001 is dissipating some.”

The poll is in line with other recent surveys that show Americans are slightly more cautious, even though most of them have stable employment and are seeing their paychecks increase, said Lynn Franco, director of the consumer research center at the Conference Board, which produces a widely followed consumer confidence index. “Over all, it’s this glass half-full/half- empty scenario,” she said.

Pujol, who lives in Keller, Texas, near Fort Worth with his wife and their two young sons, thinks that economy will “moderate” in 2007. The family bought a new home four years ago and is not planning to move but Pujol and his wife have other real estate investments in Texas that he believes will fare better than property on the coasts.

Pujol reflected the view of most Southerners, 57 percent of whom said local housing prices would increase in the coming year and the same number said it was a good time to buy a house. Only 47 percent of people surveyed nationally said it was a good time to buy a house and 45 percent said local prices would increase. The difference may reflect the relative strength of housing in Texas, on the Gulf Coast and in the Carolinas.

Not surprisingly, home owners were also more upbeat on housing 52 percent said it was a good time to buy a home than renters, 60 percent of whom felt it would be better to wait. (Similarly, 65 percent of people who owned stocks or mutual funds said the stock market would go up next year compared with 39 percent of people who did not have investments.)