Post by Frenchie on Jul 12, 2009 11:34:54 GMT 1
This Article Submitted by Member: Big Stevie
Copyright (c) BigStevie
This is my personal perspective on the situation in this area, based on recent events and reading through press from the last few weeks/months.
After the tragic events of the last week, especially of the last 24 hours, I wanted to get some sort of handle on the 'tactics' being employed in the area.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8129789.stm
Operations are now being conducted by both US and UK forces, who are now jointly under control (along with the rest of the 'coalition forces') of a US commander, who has a Special Forces background. It is significant also that the US Ambassador to Afghanistan is a former US Army general, with a civvy deputy as a concession to the State Department.
The US Marines brigade are operating (Op 'Strike of the Sword') in the northern Helmand River valley area, with approximately 4000 troops and supported by Afghan troops. Their plan is to take and hold areas to implement a re-building policy, leading eventually to democratic self-government free from Taliban involvement.
Further south the UK forces are involved in Op Panther's Claw to remove the Taliban stronghold on Garmshir and Lashkar Gar, both regional centres vital to local taliban operations, and equally vital to allowing the elections at the end of August to go ahead. This has proved to be a head-down, bloody grind for the British troops, whereas the US forces have faced no concerted opposition.
To my eye there are clear parallels to tactics used in Vietnam, such as the 'block and sweep' (a.k.a. 'search and destroy') and the use of local forces. In this instance the US have moved into an area that has previously been a virtual taliban community with courts and law enforcement in line with their doctrine.
It is likely that this is the home area of the Taliban fighting the British further south - they would not fight as hard in the areas where their own families live.
The British on the other hand are bearing the brunt of the Taliban response, equally calculated by the Afghans to drive a wedge in the Coalition countries' public opinions - 'why are our lads taking a hammering and the Yanks are getting it easy?'
Consequently the Americans gain an easy 'victory' both for their 'military prowess' and their foreign policy, at the expense of British soldiers being killed in the south. It can only be assumed that the UK government has got some sort of pay-back arranged for this sacrifice; doubtless the US is paying to keep British forces in theatre.
The quicker the US can stabilise the region by actual re-building work, or more likely by paying off the local warlords to keep them on-side, the quicker the up-coming UK defence review can reward the heroes of Helmand with a place in the dole queue.
So what will the next few weeks bring? Sadly, more British casualties; it will force a knee-jerk reaction from HMG to try to prop up their flagging popularity by spending money they don't have on vehicles the Army will never see; the US will appear to have solved the 'Afghan problem' by building a MacDonalds in the Helmand Valley.
In other words, it will drag on much as it has done.
For a real look at the US plans for Afghanistan and their barely-concealed contempt for Europe, see this:
www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/04/nato_afghanistan_map.html
(c) bigstevie2009
Copyright (c) BigStevie
This is my personal perspective on the situation in this area, based on recent events and reading through press from the last few weeks/months.
After the tragic events of the last week, especially of the last 24 hours, I wanted to get some sort of handle on the 'tactics' being employed in the area.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8129789.stm
Operations are now being conducted by both US and UK forces, who are now jointly under control (along with the rest of the 'coalition forces') of a US commander, who has a Special Forces background. It is significant also that the US Ambassador to Afghanistan is a former US Army general, with a civvy deputy as a concession to the State Department.
The US Marines brigade are operating (Op 'Strike of the Sword') in the northern Helmand River valley area, with approximately 4000 troops and supported by Afghan troops. Their plan is to take and hold areas to implement a re-building policy, leading eventually to democratic self-government free from Taliban involvement.
Further south the UK forces are involved in Op Panther's Claw to remove the Taliban stronghold on Garmshir and Lashkar Gar, both regional centres vital to local taliban operations, and equally vital to allowing the elections at the end of August to go ahead. This has proved to be a head-down, bloody grind for the British troops, whereas the US forces have faced no concerted opposition.
To my eye there are clear parallels to tactics used in Vietnam, such as the 'block and sweep' (a.k.a. 'search and destroy') and the use of local forces. In this instance the US have moved into an area that has previously been a virtual taliban community with courts and law enforcement in line with their doctrine.
It is likely that this is the home area of the Taliban fighting the British further south - they would not fight as hard in the areas where their own families live.
The British on the other hand are bearing the brunt of the Taliban response, equally calculated by the Afghans to drive a wedge in the Coalition countries' public opinions - 'why are our lads taking a hammering and the Yanks are getting it easy?'
Consequently the Americans gain an easy 'victory' both for their 'military prowess' and their foreign policy, at the expense of British soldiers being killed in the south. It can only be assumed that the UK government has got some sort of pay-back arranged for this sacrifice; doubtless the US is paying to keep British forces in theatre.
The quicker the US can stabilise the region by actual re-building work, or more likely by paying off the local warlords to keep them on-side, the quicker the up-coming UK defence review can reward the heroes of Helmand with a place in the dole queue.
So what will the next few weeks bring? Sadly, more British casualties; it will force a knee-jerk reaction from HMG to try to prop up their flagging popularity by spending money they don't have on vehicles the Army will never see; the US will appear to have solved the 'Afghan problem' by building a MacDonalds in the Helmand Valley.
In other words, it will drag on much as it has done.
For a real look at the US plans for Afghanistan and their barely-concealed contempt for Europe, see this:
www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/04/nato_afghanistan_map.html
(c) bigstevie2009