12 to 1

Yeah, I'm not very educated in topics such as these (aside from watching the history / military channel religously (and I must say, the Military channel is somewhat of a joke)) but there seems to be far too much control by people who aren't even there.

The intent of the comparison is the limitation and outright non-use of a offensive tactical element that is totally part of a combined arms operation. Along with the interference in the theatre command structure by individuals oand organizations totally outside of the tactical operation itself. Once a weakness is identified, relayed back to DC, hemmed and hawed upon for political consequence, and a decesion returned to the command, the tactical situation has changed and the decesion is no longer relevant to the new situation that developed in the mean time.

Even a 2hour lag in the command sequence, the tactical situation can and always does radically change in a guerilla styled limited war.
The bad guys do not stay in place waiting for an operation against them, they strike, they vanish, we search, they strike elsewhere and the sequence repeats.

US Forces alone if given a green light can end this without NATO or Afghan National Army Assistance, it is having the "will" to do so that is the challenge.

Example is this idiocy: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091028/wl_afp/unpakistanafghanistanusmissilerights

Our use of "drones" may be against international law, according to the UN, but strapping a bomb on a suicide bomber and targeting political infastructure with that form of guided weapon is OK with the current UN.

This "Nintendo War" mentality, 70 strikes 600 civilian casualities, WW2 one strategic bombing raid on Tokyo kills 50,000 civilians, or one RAF Fire Raid on Hamburg kills 50,000 civilians not a peep from the "international community", is crazy. Did the UN make these calims against the violations of International Law during Iraqs Chemical Attacks on the Kurd, The Soviet bombings in Afghanistan destroying entire villiages. NO...the UN and the despots therein only Target the US and GB in their attrocity monitoring, blind eye towards their own sponsored warlords, genocide and revolutions in Africa.

So now another effective weapon against the "heads" of the beast will be eliminated in the current administrations attempt tp ease political tension abroad and domestically with another "feel good" decesion to abide with the UN findings on our "drones".

Edited by oldsoldier - 28 October 2009 at 1:54pm

Or we could put a gun to the head of a civilian who might know where the taliban is. Use counter-terror tactics the same way the taliban is using on them? Would they be more afraid of us or them?

I'm not saying kill them.

Originally posted by Rofl_Mao I'm not saying kill them.

Originally posted by agentwhale007 Originally posted by oldsoldier Get the media out of there Why is this a crucial step in winning?

Originally posted by agentwhale007 Originally posted by brihard Originally posted by agentwhale007 Originally posted by oldsoldier Get the media out of there Why is this a crucial step in winning? It's actually a terrible idea. Transparency to some degree is critical- if it can be seen that we're doing a good job, and doing it according to our society's values, we'll receive the support we need. If, conversely, it's shown that we've acted improperly, media attention will galvanize military leadership to make necessary changes. This has happened several times. The government is far more receptive to the opinions of voters than the opinions of local Afghans. Generally I take "Kick the media out!" as disguised language meaning "Let the military run rampant!"

Particular care will be made with making sure we pave over the entire country, once everyone is dead.

Don't want to waste asphalt.

Bri hate to burst the bubble: Vietnam- Fought against Viet Cong (Communist South Vietnamese, who also blended quite well into the population, after a firefight outside so no name ville in the highlands by the time we got to the ville no-one knew of any VC, and the same individual taht was shooting at you an hour ago was smiling under his doa as he led his water buffalo along the paddy dikes further camoflaging the just a few minute ago buried weapons cache, BTDT). We controled the urban areas, Strategic Firebases, Logistic Bases, and major Support Bases along the major arterials (highways) Uncle Charlie owned the rest, along with his North Vietnamese Allies. Afghanistan is simular in operational planning, now the tactical operations have changed based on technology available, but the problem I expierienced in 1970, and the troops today expierience on the "who is who" game, and "who controls what" has not changed.

Whale: The correspondant is no longer Ernie Pyle, more than not he sits safely in a "security zone" and then gets his reports and photos by locally hired individuals with dubious credentials, and writes them up as they are presented to him. Like the news reporter that filmed the marinne shooting the "g" with his hands still underhim, and refusing to pull them out, the reporter called it an unjust shooting, OK, next time let him show us how to make it safe for the squad to secure the situation. "Tried by 6, or carried by 6" is a poor choice.
These experts usually with no formal training in operational or tactical situations telling the group he is in how to fight to "G" is lunacy. Why do you think the majority of the news types hide in the "green zone".

Originally posted by oldsoldier Bri hate to burst the bubble: Vietnam- Fought against Viet Cong (Communist South Vietnamese, who also blended quite well into the population, after a firefight outside so no name ville in the highlands by the time we got to the ville no-one knew of any VC, and the same individual taht was shooting at you an hour ago was smiling under his doa as he led his water buffalo along the paddy dikes further camoflaging the just a few minute ago buried weapons cache, BTDT). We controled the urban areas, Strategic Firebases, Logistic Bases, and major Support Bases along the major arterials (highways) Uncle Charlie owned the rest, along with his North Vietnamese Allies. Afghanistan is simular in operational planning, now the tactical operations have changed based on technology available, but the problem I expierienced in 1970, and the troops today expierience on the "who is who" game, and "who controls what" has not changed. Whale: The correspondant is no longer Ernie Pyle, more than not he sits safely in a "security zone" and then gets his reports and photos by locally hired individuals with dubious credentials, and writes them up as they are presented to him. Like the news reporter that filmed the marinne shooting the "g" with his hands still underhim, and refusing to pull them out, the reporter called it an unjust shooting, OK, next time let him show us how to make it safe for the squad to secure the situation. "Tried by 6, or carried by 6" is a poor choice. These experts usually with no formal training in operational or tactical situations telling the group he is in how to fight to "G" is lunacy. Why do you think the majority of the news types hide in the "green zone".