Afghanistan Fighting

[Johno please?]

You've still got to wonder where mr Taliban is getting his gear from, hmmm.

And where the actual men are coming from, we must have killed thousands by now.

 

[SilverTongue]

gun smuggling and civilians that they recruit

 

[Nix]

You've still got to wonder where mr Taliban is getting his gear from, hmmm.

And where the actual men are coming from, we must have killed thousands by now.

Supplied by Iran (no secret) and the men tend to come across the border from Pakistan as the Pashtun valley and rural north tend to be a Taliban stronghold.

People seem to forget that the Afghanistan people are incredibly pragmatic and will support whoever they deem to be winning - or even happens to be walking through with a gun at that particular time. The tribal divide also complicates things as you have youngsters running off to the ANP/ANA or Taliban dependant on whatever grievance they have with someone else.

The Russians failed to take Afghanistan and we also failed about 200 years ago (both during the heights of colonial and post-war super-power). If you think this should be easy, you're mistaken. If you think we should come home - you are naive. The worst possible thing we could do now would be up sticks and run with our tail between our legs - it will only cause a massive power vacuum resulting in an opposite and worse situation then we had to begin with.

This is a war - it is a forgotton war - deaths unfortunately are part and parcel. 250 years ago we could easily have lost 3,000 men in a day simply through a little gun-boat diplomacy. We've lost 10 men since this push began - yes it's tragic - but it's far from unrealistic. The only difference today is that society has moved on a little, and our world has shrunk so we hear about these events as they happen.

 

[Anim]

Looks like Zip has wrapped this arguement up, and rypt has proven why he'll never .... EVER be in charge of a military unit.

 

[TJM]

As for peacekeeping, the only hotspots are Kandahar, Helmand and the Pakistan border - everything else can does not have major fighting and can be patrolled by the Afghan army or local militia working with Afghan army.

Try to understand that the Taliban will move into the areas vacated by the NATO peacekeepers. Good insurgents (and Afghans certainly qualify) do not just sit still while the area is flooded with enemy reinforcements. If NATO moves, the Taliban moves. It's as simple as that. You seem to be under the impression that the Taliban will not react to aggressive NATO movements, even though remaining mobile is the key to any insurgency.

When our troops die due to IEDs rather than from "normal" fighting it does bring into question certain things.

IEDs are bombs. What exactly is unusual about troops being killed by bombs?

As far as I'm concerned the majority of NATO troops should be being used to fight the Taliban and not to keep the peace.

Keeping the peace is fighting the Taliban. Holding ground is as important as clearing it when fighting an 'invisible army' because you can never be sure you actually have cleared it.

So give our boys the right to shoot anyone who is armed and is non NATO soldier or Afghan army (or militia working for us) and looks even slightly suspicious. Have them confiscate weapons as they pass though villages.

Great idea. Reduce civilian cooperation to zero and leave them completely defenceless against the Taliban.

No, it's about minimising the casualties that our troops can potentially suffer due to the fact that they are fighting an irregular army in a place where everyone is armed.

This would have the opposite effect. After the Afghans are forcibly disarmed (with many doubtlessly killed in the process), do you think they will help NATO forces? They will say nothing when they see the Taliban and might even supply them with intelligence on the movements of the foreign oppressor that has stripped them of their arms. Creating massive resentment does not help to reduce casualties.

 

[The Funktopus]

i dont see your argument, because the french and germans arent dying they arent doing their fair share?

I can see your point, but there have been some actions on the German's part that makes you question their commitment, and gives them that perception that they're not pulling their weight. For instance, the Luftwaffe deployed a Squadron of Tornado IDS fighter-bombers to Manas in Kyrgyzstan, however, the Bundestag ruled that they were not to take part in combat missions and perform unarmed reconnaissance only. Furthermore, the KSK, Germany's special forces and direct equivalent of the SAS spent two years in Afghanistan without ever going out on one combat mission. They were eventually withdrawn. And for a time (although this may not necessarily be true now) German forces were banned from leaving their bases at night for fear of them coming into contact with the enemy (God forbid!), and in one embarrassing incident, a high profile Taliban commander was able to escape German forces by simply running away. Laden with weapons and bodyarmour, and constrained by government imposed rules of engagement that dictated that they couldn't fire unless fired upon no matter what the circumstances, the German troops couldn't keep up, and couldn't shoot him to prevent his escape.

 

[The Mad Rapper]

The Danish were fighting around Helmand Province. You Tube has some good videos.

 

[^^Gord^^]

I can see your point, but there have been some actions on the German's part that makes you question their commitment, and gives them that perception that they're not pulling their weight. For instance, the Luftwaffe deployed a Squadron of Tornado IDS fighter-bombers to Manas in Kyrgyzstan, however, the Bundestag ruled that they were not to take part in combat missions and perform unarmed reconnaissance only. Furthermore, the KSK, Germany's special forces and direct equivalent of the SAS spent two years in Afghanistan without ever going out on one combat mission. They were eventually withdrawn. And for a time (although this may not necessarily be true now) German forces were banned from leaving their bases at night for fear of them coming into contact with the enemy (God forbid!), and in one embarrassing incident, a high profile Taliban commander was able to escape German forces by simply running away. Laden with weapons and bodyarmour, and constrained by government imposed rules of engagement that dictated that they couldn't fire unless fired upon no matter what the circumstances, the German troops couldn't keep up, and couldn't shoot him to prevent his escape.

Well put! Saved me some typing.

The Danish were fighting around Helmand Province. You Tube has some good videos.

The Danish have been involved a fair bit, their armour and fire support groups have especially been well received.

 

[Eddie182]

My question is why are they not investing in radio jammers, as far as i can see most of the IED are radio controlled or controlled my mobile phone for which a signal jammer can prevent???

We do have ECM kit and it is used. The problem is ECM only works for radio command detonated IEDs, most IEDs being encountered are pressure pad, PIR or command wire detonated.

 

[benneh]

I was just reading about this in a newspaper, and I didn't feel anything.
I just can't feel sympathy for someone whos job it is to kill other people, regardless of politics, reasoning and so on. I support our returning troops, in the sense that I would imagine that some of them have a very hard time dealing with that they have seen, and in the sense that their families at home should be given financial security and some kind of mental support network, but I can't get past the fact that if you're paid to kill then you're a bad human being. That goes for the 'enemy' also.

 

[slambo69]

These men are killing to save lives, they way you say it makes it sound like murder. Someone has to have the balls and step up to fight evil and in my opinion, the taliban are the bad guys here, to put it simply.

They're not paid to kill, their paid to soldier and protect.

 

[ianh]

We work with the Danes (even got some here in the UK for training) and they're great troops (their 1st aid wagons make ours look like a bloke with a cart shouting "bring out your dead!" - cracking bits of kit).

I've been in and around afghanistan/iraq lots and I'm amazed we haven't lost lots more troops TBH. Wars kill people so I'm not shocked by suddenly losing 8 in a day, hell when the herc and nimrod crashed we lost more guys in one go than on friday.

Also, helicopters aren't the full answer, a good post from someone else said it all - you still need vehicles to patrol. Choppers are really only useful for the roles they're already carrying out, but it'd be nice for some more to be out there to avoid none essencial road moves.

 

[drunkenmaster]

I still have no idea why we're over there, killing talaban, we aren't killing their leaders or cutting their numbers.

For half the talaban you kill, their upset brother, and their 6 sons join the talaban to get revenge on the western scum that came and murdered their brother. You can NEVER win this kind of conflict, its quite literally impossible, its Vietnam all over again. Laughably ridiculous as most of the world laughed at the USA for its ridiculous attempt to crush communism in Vietnam and losing a ridiculously long expensive and bloody war after losing, we've gone to commit to an identical mistake here. Iraq is fairly easy as far as war terraine goes, yes sand can screw up engines, armour, jeeps, but the problems are known, enemy is easy to find and we went their with a goal, remove Sadam, which we did, remove his government and remove his generals from power, dismantle his army and never let anyone in the regime back in.

We completed those goals, but the important thing was we had goals we went in with, and accomplished them. Vietnam, the goal, crush communism, ridiculous, unachievable, there was no way to win, they lost and ran away. Afghanistan, remove the talaban, who don't solely operate in Afghanistan, who have no headquarters, no known specific locations for targets, no real structure to remove, no known command structure to locate and remove, simply put no real goals that can be achieved. Hence we're still there years later doing smeg all but chasing our own tails.

Every day we're their, we increase the deep seated hate that drives the talaban forwards. As can be seen, no matter how many we kill, they keep coming back, more and more of them.

The whole things a joke and makes the lives lost a complete and shameful waste. Sadam, his army, his family and his evil dictatorship was removed, there was a result and while loss of life is a shame, at least there was a reason and we achieved what we wanted.

 

[Johno please?]

Supplied by Iran (no secret) and the men tend to come across the border from Pakistan as the Pashtun valley and rural north tend to be a Taliban stronghold.

People seem to forget that the Afghanistan people are incredibly pragmatic and will support whoever they deem to be winning - or even happens to be walking through with a gun at that particular time. The tribal divide also complicates things as you have youngsters running off to the ANP/ANA or Taliban dependant on whatever grievance they have with someone else.

I dunno why I asked actually. I kinda knew (due to reading books AND THAT) but didn't want to be jumped on by people going..... "SOURCE? SOURCE?"

 

[Von Smallhausen]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8145603.stm
8 killed in 24 hours ....

WHY are the Brits the only ones doing any fighting in Afghanistan? Where are the Yanks, the Canadians, the Germans, the Italians, the Spanish, etc?
It is a NATO war afterall.

And why do we still not have enough helicopters for your troops to use - can we not borrow some helicopters and pilots from some of the other NATO countries? Or the Aussies?

You really need to do some research.

 

[fadetoblack]

I was just reading about this in a newspaper, and I didn't feel anything.
I just can't feel sympathy for someone whos job it is to kill other people, regardless of politics, reasoning and so on. I support our returning troops, in the sense that I would imagine that some of them have a very hard time dealing with that they have seen, and in the sense that their families at home should be given financial security and some kind of mental support network, but I can't get past the fact that if you're paid to kill then you're a bad human being. That goes for the 'enemy' also.

If was not for people trained to kill years ago (WW1,ww2) you would be speaking German right now. people like you make me sick. Show some respect to the familys of the dead troops and also the mates on patrol with them. It's because we have an armed forces defending your rights that your able to post pap like that.

 

[Farore]

It's shocking though how we've gone from the best man for man army during the Falklands to struggling to kill some Arab ragheads :/

Afghans are not 'Arab ragheads'. Let alone Arabs.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

It's shocking though how we've gone from the best man for man army during the Falklands to struggling to kill some Arab ragheads :/

Try reading some history rypt.

Specifically, go back to the Boer War of 1899-1901 when the biggest and best man for man army in the world, namely the British, numbered 500,000 in South Africa and couldn't subdue a Boer guerilla force of no more than 25,000 until in desperation, block houses and concentration camps were built along with a scorched earth policy.

That brought the war to a close.

Since the dawn of warfare, a regular army has always found it very difficult to subdue an irregular enemy.

Vietnam ring any bells ?

 

[Missing.String]

If was not for people trained to kill years ago (WW1,ww2) you would be speaking German right now.

And what's wrong with german exactly?

Imo Benneh makes a very valid point; everyone out there is killing people, there's no moral high ground for anyone to take. We like to dress it up with politics and by branding them as "terrorists" and "insurgents" but at the end of the day you're still aiming and shooting, just like the other guys.

 

[XPE]

The yank's are now starting to pull their weight in Afghanistan since obama took office he has sent over 10,000 extra troops to Afghanistan.

This is why we are seeing a spike in deaths from UK's forces, we are now able to take and hold area's, we no longer go into an area fight the Taliban out go back to our base and let the taliban come back. the taliban no longer have the option of falling back, so they not fight it out.

As for countries not pulling their weight i do agree some of the bigger nato countries are staying in the safer parts there are countries who are fighting in the south like us, for one the Canadians are fighting taliban in Kandahar and Denmark, Estonia and the yanks are fighting in helmond.

Tho a lot of the blame to be pointed at our own government we know that the yank's were sending a lot more troop to the area and we could have guessed that the taliban were not going to leave with out a fight we done nothing to increase our own numbers so when the time came we could steam roller the tallban, what we did in fact do was keep our troops at he number we had to just milling along in Afghanistan instead of increasing for offencive action.