RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Kedicat -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 1:27:35 AM)

Some US military personnel are complaining in general about the poor command quality. Not only in firefights but every aspect of the US military. Civilian casualties are much higher than they need be. Coordination and even basic organization seem to be shakey. It could stem from the military operations being more political than militarily tactical. Confusion of the reasons leading to confusion of the actions.

Why are we here, and what the hell are we doing? Leads to sloppy work. Leads to useless death.



KenDckey -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 4:42:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedicat

Some US military personnel are complaining in general about the poor command quality. Not only in firefights but every aspect of the US military. Civilian casualties are much higher than they need be. Coordination and even basic organization seem to be shakey. It could stem from the military operations being more political than militarily tactical. Confusion of the reasons leading to confusion of the actions.

Why are we here, and what the hell are we doing? Leads to sloppy work. Leads to useless death.



This is quite true.   there will always be SOME regardless of whose army.



CrappyDom -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 6:50:53 AM)

Kedicat,

The problems we are facing in Iraq are almost all due to incompetence at the top and the lack of understanding of guerilla warfare at a rather surprising level in some of the high ranking officers. 



MistressWolfen -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 7:05:11 AM)

Yes, what you have pointed out appears to be the sad truth.



KenDckey -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 7:24:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

Kedicat,

The problems we are facing in Iraq are almost all due to incompetence at the top and the lack of understanding of guerilla warfare at a rather surprising level in some of the high ranking officers. 



Yeah   that is probably true to some extent.

Another issue is how do you combat a thousand or ten thousand independently run (although they have some central contact) groups.  The violence today is happening heather and yon.  they all have short  term aims and goals - mostly to spread fear for some purpose.

Take for example the Germans following WWII.   They continued to fight as gurellas or patriots or whatever you want to call them.  Most of the fighting was directed against their own citizens.   It stopped when the citizens themselves put a stop to it.   Unfortunately, the same may have to happen in Iraq.  I hope not.



philosophy -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 7:28:39 AM)

"It stopped when the citizens themselves put a stop to it.   Unfortunately, the same may have to happen in Iraq.  I hope not."

......has there ever been a case where it wasn't ultimately the locals that stopped a guerilla war? Has anyone ever beaten a guerilla army? If so, how did they do it?

(i'm not a military historian, these are not rhetorical questions)



KenDckey -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 10:05:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

"It stopped when the citizens themselves put a stop to it.   Unfortunately, the same may have to happen in Iraq.  I hope not."

......has there ever been a case where it wasn't ultimately the locals that stopped a guerilla war? Has anyone ever beaten a guerilla army? If so, how did they do it?

(i'm not a military historian, these are not rhetorical questions)


I am not a military historian either, just like military history.   The only case that I can think of was where the Roman Legions defeated the Jews at Masada.  But that is still controversial.

The US also defeated the American Indians which were basicly non-traditionally armies but it too how long?   From 1492 until the early 1900's and I am not so sure that they were really defeated.  There is even one tribe that has a diplomatic mission to the holy see.



meatcleaver -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 10:10:30 AM)

I guess the British in Malaya won guerillas with a mixture of seek out and kill and winning the hearts and minds of the population.



KenDckey -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 10:13:44 AM)

I don't know.  Like I said   I am not a military Historian   just like military history



meatcleaver -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 10:21:26 AM)

The Mayalan emergency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malayan_Emergency

Hmm The British try not to call wars wars for some reason.



TheTopHat -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 10:35:18 AM)

If anyone here is actually interested in the aspects of guerilla warfare and how it has evolved and its effect today may I suggest picking up "War in the Shadows: A brief history of Guerilla Warfare" (I think it is by Robert Asprey).  If there were just a single work I had to read to get properly acquainted  with  the topic this would be it.

Also someone made reference to Germany during the occupation post world war 2.  There is one crucial, huge difference between the occupation of Germany (and Japan)as opposed to that of Iraq.  Ironically  though much more damage and destruction were done during war time, at the end of hostilities the allies had the good sense, in WW 2, to try and maintain order and rebuild.  Yes there were Nazi's in the police force, civil service and everywhere else but nobody was dumb enough to disband entire services until they were ready to replace them.  In Iraq post invasion the first thing that was done is everyone was sent home, and then occupation forces were suprised that having disbanded everything that there was chaos and looting, riots, power failures etc. and nobody available to help them.



KenDckey -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 10:46:51 AM)

rofl  yeah   people that dont learn from history are doomed to repeat it



CrappyDom -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 10:57:24 AM)

dammit, I couldn't get the docs to download and now everyone beat me...here is the post I was trying to put together

Guerilla wars have been put down and the tactics are not obscure but they require that people put aside ideological blinders, something this administration finds impossible.  Not to be flippant but take almost everything we have done, do the opposite and you would be doing the accepted counterinsurgency tactic.
 
First off, guerillas rarely "win" by defeating a sitting government or even an occupyer, it is the government/occupyer that loses them.
 
Guerilla wars have three basic phases

small group forms with the intent of overthrowing government
group does small hit and run attacks with the intention of getting the government to overreact and piss of the population
insurgents operate in the open and engage the military of the government in ground combat.

Greece
Malaysia
Iraq - under the Brits


The Brits put down an insurgency in Malaysia in the 1950s.  They did it by having small teams in the field shoot anyone with a gun.  They left the body and the gun where it fell and after there was a small pile of bodies the bad guys stopped picking up the guns.  This tactic also prevents the killing of civilians, something the guerillas beg for the governement to do.  Which is why as a guerilla you would put a single sniper at the top af a hospital and HOPE that the government blows up the hospital to kill the sniper, instantly everyone in the hospital is on your side.
 
Not to be flippant but take almost everything we have done, do the opposite and you would be doing the accepted counterinsurgency tactic.
 
http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/biblio/CAC_counterinsurgency.asp
 




KenDckey -> RE: Friendly fire in Afghanistan kills 1 Canadian, wounds more than 30 (9/7/2006 11:19:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

dammit, I couldn't get the docs to download and now everyone beat me...here is the post I was trying to put together

Guerilla wars have been put down and the tactics are not obscure but they require that people put aside ideological blinders, something this administration finds impossible.  Not to be flippant but take almost everything we have done, do the opposite and you would be doing the accepted counterinsurgency tactic.
 
First off, guerillas rarely "win" by defeating a sitting government or even an occupyer, it is the government/occupyer that loses them.
 
Guerilla wars have three basic phases

small group forms with the intent of overthrowing government
group does small hit and run attacks with the intention of getting the government to overreact and piss of the population
insurgents operate in the open and engage the military of the government in ground combat.


    Greece
    Malaysia
    Iraq - under the Brits



      The Brits put down an insurgency in Malaysia in the 1950s.  They did it by having small teams in the field shoot anyone with a gun.  They left the body and the gun where it fell and after there was a small pile of bodies the bad guys stopped picking up the guns.  This tactic also prevents the killing of civilians, something the guerillas beg for the governement to do.  Which is why as a guerilla you would put a single sniper at the top af a hospital and HOPE that the government blows up the hospital to kill the sniper, instantly everyone in the hospital is on your side.
       
      Not to be flippant but take almost everything we have done, do the opposite and you would be doing the accepted counterinsurgency tactic.
       
      http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/biblio/CAC_counterinsurgency.asp
       




      Yeah that works.   Actually I think that we should send over all the cops.  They are more effective than a military force.   Military is like trained to search and destroy (usually on a grand scale).  Cops go in and figure things out then go after the one or two or ten and get them.   Each has their place.  Soldiers from any country don't make good occupiers.  they don't have the training and resources to do the job right. 



      Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]

      Valid CSS!




      Collarchat.com © 2025
      Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
      0.03125