U.S. Troop Killed By Gunmen In Afghan Uniform

Discussion in 'Afghanistan' started by High_Gravity, Aug 7, 2012.

  1. High_Gravity
    Offline

    High_Gravity Belligerent Drunk Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2010
    Messages:
    40,159
    Thanks Received:
    6,894
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Richmond VA
    Ratings:
    +7,726
    This keeps happening more and more.:mad:

    U.S. Troop Killed By Gunmen In Afghan Uniform

    [​IMG]

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/07/afghanistan-us-troop-killed_n_1752010.htm
     
  2. SayMyName
    Offline

    SayMyName Live, Love, Laugh.

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,055
    Thanks Received:
    153
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Shanghai, China
    Ratings:
    +158
    Well, we did our best, and for the most part, did what we went there for...kill Osama bin Laden and topple a regime that gave refuge to terrorists.
     
  3. High_Gravity
    Offline

    High_Gravity Belligerent Drunk Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2010
    Messages:
    40,159
    Thanks Received:
    6,894
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Richmond VA
    Ratings:
    +7,726
    Our Troops seem to be getting shot at by their Afghan counter parts every damn day now, and the media are burying these stories.
     
  4. RoccoR
    Offline

    RoccoR Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Messages:
    6,263
    Thanks Received:
    1,696
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Reynoldsburg, OH
    Ratings:
    +3,670
    High_Gravity, et al,

    I think this was the point of the earlier thread.


    (COMMENT)

    The Afghani must want an alternative to the Taliban Regime. Remember, the Taliban is the weaker force. It has no combat air support, no massive overhead intelligence platform, no surveillance drones, no helicopter, armor, or larger combat vehicles. It is an inferior force all the way around by any measure you choose to make; yet, after a decade of facing off with the US/NATO (ISAF), it is still around. And it is strong and dangerous enough to be considered a major threat to the security.

    WHY? Do they know something we don't? Do they have a secret weapon? Do they have a superior anything? No! But they have a "resolve." They want to defeat ISAF and the Afghan Security Forces. And that is the difference. If the people of Afghanistan really wanted an alternative to the Taliban, and they really were the majority, they could defeat the Taliban with only the same weapons that the Taliban has to use. But the people of Afghanistan don't have that resolve to become a democracy or an autonomous nation. So we (US/NATO) try to offset the lack of initiative on the part of the people by trying to equip them the same way we are equipped, and teach them our tactics, and provide them our intelligence, so that they can overcome the Taliban. We are trying to get them to do the same things, with the same stuff, with the same concepts, that have been so unsuccessful in eradicating the Taliban for a decade.


    If overwhelming force with superior weapons and knowledge have failed the US/NATO for a decade, why would we think it would work for the Afghani? And there in is the problem.

    Our goal is confounded because we believe we can give the Afghani something the Taliban already has - which has made them so resilient over the last decade: "resolve to win." And if the Afghani does not have the resolve to win, no matter how much superior firepower we give them, their nemesis (the Taliban) will never truly be defeated and will ultimately take Afghanistan.

    We think we can overcome this lack of resolve by making them mimic US/NATO. It simply will not work! The Afghani must want to defeat the Taliban, they must want to cut the support the Taliban receives from the every source, and strangle the movement --- cutting them off from all aid and assistance --- so that they wither and die. But the people of Afghanistan do not have that resolve, and therefore cannot win politically or militarily.

    The Taliban of Afghanistan [(Taliban AF)most ultra right Pashtun tribesmen and militants under Mullah Mohammed Omar)] is not exactly the same as the Taliban of Pakistan [Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (the TTP) under Hakimullah Mehsud/Maulana Toofan]; they are not directly related. The Taliban AF is the Government in Exile of Afghanistan, while the TTP is more of a coalition of various anti-Government (PAK) subversives.

    • The Taliban AF has the goal of ousting the US/NATO Occupation to re-establish its leadership and re-institute the extremist practice of the Deobandi model of Islam. It is a struggle for (from their view) liberation from Western Empires, saving the virtue of the people, and the accumulation of power and influence.

    • The TTP is a coalition or umbrella alliance of a number of subversive elements with the goal of establishing governance under Shari Law, to openly oppose US/NATO forces operating in Pakistan, and to establish a resistance movement against PAK military forces. The TTP believes that the citizenry is being victimized by the state via the imposition of military force.

    The US has had an extensive amount of experience in combating 4th Generation Warfare (4GW - insurgency) opponents. And it has recently gained an extensive amount of experience in the evolving 4th GW (organized non-state supported actors) opponents; or quasi-evolving 4GW.

    Some might agree that the US has limited experience fighting in a guerrilla environment. But that is a misunderstanding on two counts.

    • The US has extensive experience fighting in a guerrilla environment. It just believes that the overwhelming application of conventional forces is the better strategy than the use of counter-guerrilla operations that engage in unconventional fashion.

    • It pre-supposes that what they experience in terms of engagements by the Taliban, is a type of guerrilla operation; as oppose to more stealthy conventional small unit tactics. While there are some special insurgent tactics applied in the inner-city, typical to insurgent operations, the US leadership believes the correct application of static defenses and roving security is a better use of resources.

    The real problem facing US Forces is a leadership that it is principally composed of leaders heavily influenced by 20th Century thinkers, and very slow to evolve with the change in challenges. The military leadership certainly did not know how to tactfully express shortcomings to the civilian leadership expectations; especially when it came to questions of outcomes on decisions of occupation and counterinsurgency development and containment.

    Most Respectfully,
    R
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2012
  5. High_Gravity
    Offline

    High_Gravity Belligerent Drunk Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2010
    Messages:
    40,159
    Thanks Received:
    6,894
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Richmond VA
    Ratings:
    +7,726
    Well you are right, I have a feeling the majority of Afghans would have no problem living under Taliban rule as long as it stopped the fighting, although I am sure the people in the north of the country would feel different. We have been in that country for almost 11 years now and the war was under funded, under manned and just plaine neglected for far too long. I truly believe if we didn't go into Iraq and had stayed the course things in Afghanistan would be different but now its too late, the Taliban are rejuvenated, more confident and have all the manpower, weapons and funding they can ask for, plus they have Pakistan to use for shelter when things get too hot and they definently take advantage of that. Its time to leave this place, I don't know anymore that we can accomplish by being there, Al Qaeda is busy setting up areas of operation in Yemen, Syria, and Mali as we speak.
     
  6. ima
    Offline

    ima BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2012
    Messages:
    4,650
    Thanks Received:
    209
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +209
    Nobody in history has been able to take that area by force. Thinking that WE can is typical American arrogance. Like when we went into Iraq, or Columbia, or Nam, or Korea, or Lebanon, or Somalia, or...
     
  7. mudwhistle
    Offline

    mudwhistle Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Messages:
    65,185
    Thanks Received:
    11,915
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Wetwang With Fimber, Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +26,139
    If the media would cover the war the way they did during the Bush years Obama would be history.
     
  8. High_Gravity
    Offline

    High_Gravity Belligerent Drunk Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2010
    Messages:
    40,159
    Thanks Received:
    6,894
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Richmond VA
    Ratings:
    +7,726
    Afghanistan is different than all those other places you named.:eusa_hand: We barely stayed around in Lebanon or Somalia, South Korea is a stable democracy thanks to our troops, I don't know why people look at that as a failure. As far as Colombia I don't remember us ever invading it.:eusa_hand:
     
  9. High_Gravity
    Offline

    High_Gravity Belligerent Drunk Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2010
    Messages:
    40,159
    Thanks Received:
    6,894
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Richmond VA
    Ratings:
    +7,726
    I have to admit its really not being covered, the other week some Talibans breeched the wall of one of our bases on the Pakistan border and killed 4 troops, the bastards almost got into the fucking dining hall on post. Nobody said a word about this.
     
  10. ima
    Offline

    ima BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2012
    Messages:
    4,650
    Thanks Received:
    209
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +209
    We barely stayed around in Lebanon and Somalia because WE GOT OUR BUTTS KICKED AND WE RAN!!!!!!

    North korea is a nice stable democracy! :D

    Columbia is part of our failed war on drugs, just ask Nancy.
     

Share This Page