Afganistan - future strategy
Select messages from
 # through # Forum FAQ
[/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> The Mess
#1: Afganistan - future strategy Author: dj,  PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:21 am
    —
There is a lot of debate right now in the Obama White House about setting a new strategy in Afganistan.  Who is right, who is wrong?  What is the solution?

Personally I think Joe Biden has the best plan (see below).  America needs to do a better job at recruitment of more troops from our NATO allies.  Obama just met with the new NATO commander a few days ago...looks like he has that in mind.

Good article from today:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091001/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_us_afghanistan
#2: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: MörserCarl, Location: Tokyo PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 11:44 am
    —
The United States of America was attacked on September 11th, 2001. Shocked and in disbelief I watched on TV when the second plane hit the tower. An attack on the US is an attack on the entire NATO alliance. Many nationalities were among the dead. The attack on the World Trade Center was an attack on the free world and not only the USA. I am not American. I am Danish. The NATO alliance emerged from the ashes of WWII. Denmark as many other European nations have a lot to be grateful to the US for. OK, WWII happened many years ago but the principle of solidarity among free nations prevails.

Unfortunately, it saddens me that British/American news media paint a very biased picture of what is actually happening on the ground in Afghanistan in terms of who is in the war an who isn't. I watch TV channels like BBC, CNN, FOX, CNBC etc. and it really is unfortunate that these channels give the impression that it is an American/British war on Taleban. There are many nations participating in the fight against the Taleban. Some are not actively engaged in combat but ensures stability in more quiet areas of Afghanistan. Had their presence not been felt in those areas the Taleban would surely have exploited any weaknesses.

Canadian and Dutch troops are involved in combat actions as are Danish troops. Recently, a book was published in Denmark by a soldier from an elite unit call the Jager Corps. The book caused a lot of controversy as it tells about the secret, but still not so secret, story of elite unit tactics of fighting the Taleban. Furthermore, as one of few countries, Denmark has even main battle tanks stationed in Afghanistan (search Danish Leopard tanks in Afghanistan on UTube). Danish combat troops are operating side by side with British troops in the Helman province. This is how NATO was organised in Northern Europe, i.e. had it come to a European war, Danish divisions would have worked in tandem with our British friends. Sadly, so far at least 22 Danish soldiers have died in combat or fallen victim to IED's. What's occuring in Afghanistan is more complex than what the news media is showing the British and American viewers.

Combat troops don't do the job alone but they certainly make a big difference. To really improve the situation in Afghanistan, Pakistan must play an even more active role than what we have seen in recent months. But much, much more needs to be done. On the civilian side of things better infrastructure and opportunity to run businesses must be improved. This would also require a crack down on corruption. A crack down on corruption is, however, highly unlikely. In that part of the world, corruption is as natural as drinking water.

The task ahead is immense.
#3: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: CSO_Talorgan,  PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:34 pm
    —
Why not just nuke it to a car park and start again?

;]
#4: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: Tippi-Simo, Location: Helsinki PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:04 pm
    —
Americans attacked to Afghanistan to prevent talebans stopping poppy cultivation.
War against drugs is very lucrative thing to different government agencies around the world.
#5: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: dj,  PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 3:18 am
    —
The media coverage I agree has been awful.  Instead of doing research and proper journalism, the major media outlets just dumb-down the news.  

Let's not forget when the mighty USSR had 150,000 of their best troops there and lessons need to be learned.  In fact many of the enemy forces are veterans from fighting the Soviet Union.

Just the mere fact that President Obama wants to sit down with all of his advisors and make a major policy assessment in encouraging IMO.  Otherwise it seems the past 8 years have not brought about very good results except for the initial success of taking out the Taliban government.

I hope NATO does not get tired of this war and leave the USA by itself.  This is why setting a new strategy is so important.  Otherwise Germany has already talked about leaving by next year.

capt-1.341581778ed149bfb1e7e3766363fffa.obama_us_afghanistan_wx105.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  22.91 KB
 Viewed:  8820 Time(s)

capt-1.341581778ed149bfb1e7e3766363fffa.obama_us_afghanistan_wx105.jpg
#6: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: CSO_Talorgan,  PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 9:18 am
    —
Out of interest, are any of the European troops in Afghanistan conscripts?
#7: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: sample,  PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 9:50 am
    —
CSO_Talorgan wrote (View Post):
Out of interest, are any of the European troops in Afghanistan conscripts?


some 1045 romanian troops are deployed there; so far 11 soldiers lost their lives and many others wounded

regards
#8: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: MörserCarl, Location: Tokyo PostPosted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 4:47 pm
    —
From today's news, 3rd October (reported in US/Britain?)

Four Finnish soldiers wounded in Afghanistan in an explosion, one critically wounded.

The four souldiers have been evacuated by helicopter to a German field hospital.

The soldiers were on a patrol west of the town Mazar-i-Sharif in northern Afghanistan when they were hit by an IED.

Finland has about 200 soldiers in Afghanistan.
_________
Edited:

And today, 4th October, another sad development.

Eight American soldiers lose their lives in fighting in eastern Afghanistan. It was the worst loss for NATO in more than one year according to the alliance. It was a tribal militants that Saturday began the attack from a mosque in the province Nuristan close to the boarder of Pakistan. According to NATO, two Afghan government troops were also killed in the fighting.
#9: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: dj,  PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:16 pm
    —
Presently...the biggest challenge to the primary mission of stabilization of the Afgan population centers and the government is the controversy over the election results.

American UN sr. official Peter Galbraith went on CNN recently and outright called the election a fraud.  He said not even 1 vote was tallied for the opposition candidate in large counts - seemingly impossible.  

This reminds me of similar political instability in South Vietnam.  Apparently under the circumstances - there is really no other alternative given the risk of total collapse of the Afgan government.

From the Guardian:

"...Peter Galbraith, the deputy UN special envoy responsible for electoral matters, was removed after a dispute with his Norwegian boss, Kai Eide, after Galbraith had taken an outspoken line over alleged vote-rigging in the 20 August election, a position that reportedly angered Karzai.

...UN sources said Ban was persuaded to end Galbraith's mission after ministers in Karzai's government said they could no longer work with him.

...Sources say Galbraith was furious that the IEC first voted to apply a set of standards to its count that would have excluded tens of thousands of fraudulent votes, only to reverse the decision the next day, apparently following political pressure.

...a surprise following the earlier demand by Obama's own envoy to Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke, that Karzai respect the proper election process."
#10: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: Tippi-Simo, Location: Helsinki PostPosted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 7:38 pm
    —
MörserCarl wrote (View Post):
From today's news, 3rd October (reported in US/Britain?)

Four Finnish soldiers wounded in Afghanistan in an explosion, one critically wounded.

The four souldiers have been evacuated by helicopter to a German field hospital.

The soldiers were on a patrol west of the town Mazar-i-Sharif in northern Afghanistan when they were hit by an IED.

Finland has about 200 soldiers in Afghanistan.

I don´t understand why our country wastes money for peacekeeping.

Finland considers the most dangerous peackeeping countries (where we have troops atm) Tshad (EUFOR TSHAD/RCA, MINURCAT II) and Afghanistan (ISAF). Daily tax free allowence is 76,95€ in both countries plus monthly wage depending your rank and what you do there.
#11: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: dj,  PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2009 6:14 pm
    —
Here is an excellent article today regarding lessons learned by the USSR and the transition to the Taliban government:

The Soviets also relied heavily on special forces...

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/stevecoll/2009/09/gorbachev-was-right.html
#12: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: Therion,  PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:53 am
    —
So, basically, the American government from 90-91 was responsible for that mess?
#13: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: Tippi-Simo, Location: Helsinki PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 1:28 pm
    —
Therion wrote (View Post):
So, basically, the American government from 90-91 was responsible for that mess?

No.
#14: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: dj,  PostPosted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:13 am
    —
From the New Yorker article:

"..the United States, until the end of 1991, continued to fund and support a “military solution” for the mujaheddin favored by Pakistan’s army and intelligence service. The C.I.A. argued in favor of the military solution. It then concluded, as one assault after another on Najibullah-defended cities failed, that the U.S. had no further interests in the country and should pack up its financing and diplomacy and go home. A few years later, the Taliban took Kabul."

Basically the Cold War was over, the Soviet Union was kaput...Afganistan was left alone to fight its own civil war .  So Gorbachav was right...the fundamentalists were a greater risk than the old Cold War allegiances.
#15: Re: Afganistan - future strategy Author: dj,  PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 6:08 pm
    —
The new NATO commander just stated he expects a strong commitment to sending additional troops.  However Germany is under political pressure to not send additional forces and Canada is set to completely withdraw in 18 months.  The U.S. will probably start to rely on Afgan army units to back-fill departing NATO forces.  NATO forces are said to be mostly in the north where there is very light combat.  Allegedly NATO is under strict engagement orders and are not allowed to leave vehicles when on patrol missions.  

American and notably U.K. forces are seeing the heaviest fighting in the south and east.  The recent story about Karzai's brother being implicated in Opium drug trafficking in the southern Helmand provinceis an interesting twist.  They said the Afgan government is "corrupt" ?
Close Combat Series -> The Mess


output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1