This is what our troops have to deal with [Archive]

View Full Version : This is what our troops have to deal with

parishioner

10-03-09, 21:33

http://news.aol.com/article/afghan-police-officer-opens-fire-on-us/687584

KABUL (Oct. 3) - An Afghan policeman on patrol with U.S. soldiers opened fire on the Americans, killing two of them before fleeing, officials said Saturday, raising questions about discipline in the ranks of the Afghan forces and possible infiltration by insurgents.
Training and operating jointly with Afghan police and soldiers is key to the U.S. strategy of dealing with the spreading Taliban-led insurgency and, ultimately, allowing international forces to leave Afghanistan. But Afghan forces have periodically turned their guns on international soldiers.
The U.S. military said two American troops were killed by "an individual wearing an ANP (Afghan National Police) uniform" in Wardak province on Friday. Shahidullah Shahid, a spokesman for the Wardak provincial governor, said the policeman fired on the Americans while they were patrolling together Friday night, killing two and injuring two.
Halim Fidai, governor of Wardak, said two people who recommended the alleged assailant for his job were in custody for questioning. Fidai also said a joint team of American and Afghan officials was investigating the attack, interviewing both the American soldiers and the Afghans who had been on the patrol to learn what happened and how the gunman escaped.
"However tragic, this event will not hamper the close partnership and combined security efforts" of Afghan police and international forces, said Zemarai Bashary, spokesman for the Afghan Interior Ministry, said as part of the U.S. statement on the deaths.

A third U.S. service member died Friday of wounds from a bomb attack in Wardak, the province neighboring Kabul, the day before.
Over a period of less than a month last year, Afghan policemen twice attacked American soldiers in the east. In October 2008, a policeman hurled a grenade and opened fire on a U.S. foot patrol, killing one soldier. In September 2008, an officer opened fire at a Paktia police station, killing a soldier and wounding three before he was fatally shot.
Most recently, in Kabul, an American service member and an Afghan police officer argued because the American was drinking water in front of police during the Ramadan fast, prompting the police officer to shoot the American. Other American troops responded and seriously wounded the Afghan.
In violence Saturday, a remote-controlled bomb on a motorbike exploded in a busy market in northern Kunduz province, killing three Afghans in a region that has recently seen a spike in attacks. Elsewhere in the north, a Finnish convoy hit a roadside bomb in Balkh province, destroying one of the vehicles and injuring four soldiers, Afghan and Finnish officials said.
In western Afghanistan, a Taliban attack on a NATO supply convoy killed a civilian contractor escorting the trucks, said Raouf Ahmadi, a regional police spokesman.
U.S. and NATO deaths dropped in September over the previous two months — possibly due to the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan or because no major offensives were launched. But since President Barack Obama's decision to send 21,000 more troops to curb the growing Taliban-led insurgency, international and civilian tolls have risen steadily.
U.S. forces mounted major operations in July and August in southern Afghanistan to try to dislodge the Taliban from longtime strongholds and improve security ahead of the Aug. 20 presidential election, the outcome of which remains in doubt because of allegations of massive fraud by supporters of President Hamid Karzai.
One of those operations, in Helmand province, has proven to be a relative bright spot, as American and British forces hold territory in a region long plagued by Taliban violence. Lt. Aiden Katz, a Marine platoon commander in Helmand, said his forces came under Taliban fire on Friday while on foot patrol in the countryside.
After a 30-minute firefight with Taliban militants hiding in trees and behind walled-off fields, the Americans called in air support and the gunmen disappeared after Marine Harrier jets strafed the area.
Locals complain that the Taliban "are using their homes, using them to fight Afghan forces," said Katz, 23, of New York City. "We're maintaining pressure on Taliban areas."

Sickening. You can trust these guys as far as you can throw them.

HD1911

10-03-09, 23:42

Man that blows. And we are dying for those shitheads?

civilian

10-04-09, 00:11

Surprised it hasn't happened more. I was always on my toes when working around liaison in Iraq for just this reason.

jtb0311

10-04-09, 05:35

There were some raids in Nuristan over the past 24 hours that killed another 8 GIs. Bad weekend.

Kentucky Cop

10-04-09, 21:34

CarlosDJackal

10-04-09, 21:48

Knowing freind from foe has always been an issue when fighting with other nationality. We faced the same issue when we fought against the Native Americans so it really shouldn't surprise any of us.

thedog

10-04-09, 22:09

News is reporting that this was the bloodiest day in 8 years for our men and woman fighting. 8 soldiers lost their lives in a what is called a "fierce battle" today. My thoughts are with their family's today. Thank you to all who has or is currently serving....

Ky Cop

"Fierce" for us, the US/Coalition and we lost 8 (horrible) usually means the other guys suffered ALOT more. But, again, not always. Prayers for the US/Coalition!

dog

SpartanArms

10-04-09, 22:12

thedog

10-04-09, 22:18

Knowing freind from foe has always been an issue when fighting with other nationality. We faced the same issue when we fought against the Native Americans so it really shouldn't surprise any of us.

Native Americans? I was expecting you would say the Vietnamese, but I guess that is UN P/C. Can't compare todays war with Vietnam, the Dems might jump on board!!
"We" you say? "other nationality"? Hmmmmmm....

I won't go off here. But, honestly, there are many "Native Americans" or mixed bloods who may see your post here as, well, maybe a bit off...
I don't want a flame war or anything. I just think your example could have been better. Best to you and yours, friend!

Dog

armakraut

10-05-09, 00:47

From H. John Poole's - Tactics of the crescent moon

"The Afghans have learned well how to repel powerful invaders. They do so not by conventional defense, but by discouraging occupation."

"Much of the mujahideen's tactical success was due to its lack of organization. A Soviet agent would have found nothing to infiltrate, no irreplaceable head to cut off, and no standardized method to expect."

"While the Afghan uprising may have been somewhat impromptu initially, it didn't stay that way for long. By tradition Afghans like to pile into a powerful interloper from every direction, fall back, then repeat the process. That is the essence of a Maoist mobile defense. That every attacker shares the same objective takes the place of orders from above."

"The Afghan mujahideen wanted to discredit the puppet regime and segment/isolate its forces. To do so, they attacked infrastructure and sidestepped response. While under assault, they moved backwards. When their opponent retreated, they were close on his heels."

"Like the enemy in Vietnam, the ISI wanted to create the impression there was no security. By doing so, it could make its opponent assume a defensive posture."

"Ammunition and fuel were favorite targets of the mujahideen. They watched for such trucks in convoys and they attacked their respective storage facilities."

"The mujahideen would only defend when backed into a corner. With little firepower, they relied on surprise during both offense and defense."

"While not nearly as tactically sophisticated as an East Asian guerrilla, the individual Afghan fighter had the field skills, initiative, and courage to make him a natural infiltrator."

"... rebels became trusted vendors at a bus stop to attack it more effectively."

"The Afghan rebel was fearless and relished close combat. He expected to be cut off and outnumbered, and prepared accordingly. He spent much of this time outdoors and could easily blend in with his surroundings. He had two conflicting traits: hospitality and vengeance. He felt protective of foreign asylum seekers and obligated to take revenge for any killing of his family or tribe."

There are some noted differences between how the Taliban operates now and how the Afghan rebels operated against the soviets. For one the Taliban raises big time animosity among their fellow afghans because unlike the Rebels, they punitively target individual Afghans out of personal animosity, or greed. This is the main reason why they can't get a large scale jihad going against NATO forces. We aren't bad guys, and they're chalk full of brash bad guys that behead, torture and humiliate their own people.

Mac5.56

10-05-09, 01:00

Carlos,

I hear what you're saying. The fact that most of those Afghans have more loyalty to their own specific tribe / village and almost none to their central govt. doesn't help matters either.

And meanwhile in D.C., Obama does.....(wait for it).....nothing.:confused: How f'ed up is that? Still no action on McCrystal's request for troops. He just sits there crying in his beer over losing the Olympics to Rio. What a douche.

I know I am going to get blasted all to hell for this but I have to ask...

I realize the discontent with leadership. I also realize the asymmetric nature of these conflicts. But, my question is what exactly would you all consider to be a winning approach to this conflict? We can bitch and moan all we want about leadership, but the reality is that good people are being killed right now. How do we win the conflict and move on?

556frags

10-05-09, 01:44

a1fabweld

10-05-09, 02:22

Carlos,

And meanwhile in D.C., Obama does.....(wait for it).....nothing.:confused: How f'ed up is that? Still no action on McCrystal's request for troops. He just sits there crying in his beer over losing the Olympics to Rio. What a douche.

My feelings exactly.

CarlosDJackal

10-05-09, 08:31

Native Americans? I was expecting you would say the Vietnamese, but I guess that is UN P/C. Can't compare todays war with Vietnam, the Dems might jump on board!!
"We" you say? "other nationality"? Hmmmmmm....

I won't go off here. But, honestly, there are many "Native Americans" or mixed bloods who may see your post here as, well, maybe a bit off...
I don't want a flame war or anything. I just think your example could have been better. Best to you and yours, friend!

Dog

I must apologize to anyone who took offense to my previous post, I should have been a lot clearer. I wasn't trying to be PC or targetting any one race, creed or color. I was just using the first Americans as an example to point out that our Nation have had to deal with this long before we were a Nation.

This is the normal pattern for anyone who has had to fight any type of Insurgency in country that is not their own. It happened here when the first Europeans (Spaniards, English, Portugese, etc.) waded ashore. It probably happened when the first Asians walked into this continent using land bridges. It happened to Ghengis Khan, Alexander the Great, the Romans and even to the Spartans during their fight against the Persians at Thermopholy (sp?).

Damn, some people can get so PC-sensitive!! :rolleyes:

mjp

10-05-09, 08:35

Hearts and minds…

hearts on the floor, minds on the wall.

CarlosDJackal

10-05-09, 08:58

...And meanwhile in D.C., Obama does.....(wait for it).....nothing.:confused: How f'ed up is that? Still no action on McCrystal's request for troops. He just sits there crying in his beer over losing the Olympics to Rio. What a douche.

Say what you will against Dubya, at least he did listen to the Commanders on the ground. Specially when they asked for more troops.

IMHO, this is a sure sign of a micro-manager. Kinda reminds me of how Klinton and Aspin ran that debacle in Somalia. :eek:

556frags

10-05-09, 08:59

hearts on the floor, minds on the wall.

I understand what you are saying but not everyone there is the enemy. We need to win the people over so that they reject the Taliban ETC and see us their friend. We have to gain and hold their trust.

Mac5.56

10-05-09, 11:34

Damn, some people can get so PC-sensitive!! :rolleyes:

Your telling me! Your making accurate historical points, points that honestly can't be argued if one uses history and reason as the source of one's information. I knew what you were trying to say, it's amazing that some people didn't.

armakraut

10-05-09, 11:38

Fewer than 10% of the population wants the Taliban back in power, it is entirely winnable, but like Vietnam, that doesn't mean it's going to be won in Washington DC.

SIGguy229

10-05-09, 11:55

I know I am going to get blasted all to hell for this but I have to ask...

I realize the discontent with leadership. I also realize the asymmetric nature of these conflicts. But, my question is what exactly would you all consider to be a winning approach to this conflict? We can bitch and moan all we want about leadership, but the reality is that good people are being killed right now. How do we win the conflict and move on?

I'll tell you right now--the only way we are going to "win" is to prevent the Taliban (and other insurgent groups) from having influence in Afghanistan. In short, this is a war of ideas--a war between CF/GIRoA and insurgents, except were not fighting over land, we're fighting over people--hamlets, villages, towns, cities and those that live there. The terrain is people, not mountains...

To prevent the Taliban from having influence is to counter it with a government elected by the people. I will say upfront there is some jacked up stuff going on with their current presidential election--it ain't perfect, nor should we expect it to be (hello, 2000, 2004). We also need to train the Afghan National Security Forces to be able to operate on their own--which requires trainers--and not everyone is cut out to be a trainer or a mentor.

Mentoring in Afghanistan is not the same as Iraq--Iraq had a military force and structure (that we kicked the crap out of). ANSF is a mixture of former TB, HIG, Northern Alliance, refugees from Pakistan and Iran, even some mercenaries. Trying to get them to understand how to operate as a unit (much less, PCCs, PCIs) is going to take more than a couple of 1-year rotations...

My thoughts....this is a 25 year war...but politically, I'm afraid the CinC will try to get this wrapped up in the next 3 years....that is impossible. I dont' say that as a defeatist---I say this based on my last 9 1/2 months working with the ANSF....and I'm just seeing progress where there was none when I got here.

FromMyColdDeadHand

10-05-09, 12:26

Carlos,

I hear what you're saying. The fact that most of those Afghans have more loyalty to their own specific tribe / village and almost none to their central govt. doesn't help matters either.

And meanwhile in D.C., Obama does.....(wait for it).....nothing.:confused: How f'ed up is that? Still no action on McCrystal's request for troops. He just sits there crying in his beer over losing the Olympics to Rio. What a douche.

Say what you will against Dubya, at least he did listen to the Commanders on the ground. Specially when they asked for more troops.

IMHO, this is a sure sign of a micro-manager. Kinda reminds me of how Klinton and Aspin ran that debacle in Somalia. :eek:

I think this all points to McCrystal being whacked pretty soon. That will give Obama the scapegoat he always like to invoke and get a general in there he can control.

chadbag

10-05-09, 12:32

I think this all points to McCrystal being whacked pretty soon. That will give Obama the scapegoat he always like to invoke and get a general in there he can control.

It will make Obama look like a fool (not that he needs any help). He just put McChrystal in there a few months ago.

TRD

10-05-09, 12:53

I think this all points to McCrystal being whacked pretty soon.

That very well could happen....

It will make Obama look like a fool (not that he needs any help). He just put McChrystal in there a few months ago.

but that is a good point as well.

Here is an interesting news article. The WH is ticked at McChrystal for speaking the truth. I love it how he slams the door on the drone-and-missle war idea.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6259582/Barack-Obama-furious-at-General-Stanley-McChrystal-speech-on-Afghanistan.html#

FromMyColdDeadHand

10-05-09, 13:08

Why is it that when Dr. Hansen at NASA complains that he is only allowed to make thousands of comments about Global Warming the left charges that 'W' is trying to shut him up, but when a general makes one comment, they all of a sudden dust off their copies of the constitution and make him out to be the next Benedict Arnold???

FromMyColdDeadHand

10-05-09, 13:11

It will make Obama look like a fool (not that he needs any help). He just put McChrystal in there a few months ago.

Let's just say that I'm not really hip on getting on a "Ron Brown Airlines" plane with him.

BiggLee71

10-05-09, 16:45

Mac5.56

10-05-09, 17:20

It will make Obama look like a fool (not that he needs any help). He just put McChrystal in there a few months ago.

Your right. Good thing Bush never cycled through generals, or pressured them into resigning.

edited to add: I'm just saying that this is part of the political game. People get forced out of office under new or current administrations. I just get amazed at the collective memory of American's when it comes to remembering stuff that happened only a few years back. It's like once "the other team" does something, then it's fine to jump up and down screaming that the "other guy" is an idiot, when really one's own team pulled the exact same moves not even 4 years prior.

CGoodwin

10-05-09, 17:35

Our problem here is implicit in the dichotomous nature of our nation at this point in history. At almost no other time in the USA's history has there been such a sharp divide in political views and attitudes coupled with nearly a stalemate in the electorate. One side gains power, the other side paints them as a bunch of pooch-screwers, and gains power back. Basically like a land war in Asia, oh knid of like the topic at hand! We need some way to guarantee the international commitments that we make regardless of the way that the politcal winds are blowing.

Also, if Obama were any less of a politcal animal who blows with the breeze of public opinion and tries to make it look like he was on that particular side of that particular issue the whole time while tearing down those around him to make himself the shining star.

Despicable!

chadbag

10-05-09, 17:43

Your right. Good thing Bush never cycled through generals, or pressured them into resigning.

edited to add: I'm just saying that this is part of the political game. People get forced out of office under new or current administrations. I just get amazed at the collective memory of American's when it comes to remembering stuff that happened only a few years back. It's like once "the other team" does something, then it's fine to jump up and down screaming that the "other guy" is an idiot, when really one's own team pulled the exact same moves not even 4 years prior.

I don't doubt Bush forced some Generals out. But where did Bush make a high profile change in command to the head general of the current war hot spot and then sh*tcan him a few months later?