• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NATO Backs McChrystal Strategy

War is war. Tactics and strategy don' suddenly take on new meanings depending on if a war is conventional, or unconventional.

Oh my God! I nearly missed this gem of wisdom from you, Sarge.

Are you an O/C at JRTC? For God sakes I hope not if you say something like this. Yeah, actually they do change, constantly. Haven't you been over there? It's called trying to keep up with the enemy and adapt to the operational environment. You know, like when the insurgents figured out when we got better armor on our trucks, so they made the IEDs bigger? They changed tactics. So did we, then they did, and so on. How can you be a senior NCO, an 11B at that and say something so rediculously stupid? God if you were in charge we would still fight Napoleonic tactics against the Taliban! Ha! Incredible!


The Rand Report? What units did those guys serve in?

Only the most prestigous think tank in DC that a ton of retired Generals work for.

Hawkish jingoists love to cite Rand all the time for FP/NS studies.

C'mon, man.
 
In Afghanistan, it is vital that American and NATO troops get out of their protected bases to work alongside Afghan forces and build trust with civilians. In some ways this may be trickier than in Vietnam, as our troops will have to navigate the tribal and ethnic rivalries that have long divided Afghan society.

[...]

In Afghanistan, combat does little good unless allied or Afghan forces remain behind to keep the Taliban from simply moving back in.

[...]

Allied forces in Afghanistan may have to accept increased risks to themselves as the price of protecting the population. There have been some grumblings that they are hampered by the rules of engagement, and perhaps in platoon-level operations that it true. But Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top American commander in Afghanistan, is right that Western forces have to cut down on civilian deaths caused by air power and reckless use of force.

[...]

President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan has no signature triumph like Land to the Tiller, nor has he made many efforts to reach out to average Afghans. Perhaps Washington should make some of its support to his government contingent on anticorruption efforts and delivering real services to his people.

[...]

Given the diversified population of Afghanistan there has been too much emphasis on central government — if the Karzai government lags in giving money and supplies to local and tribal leaders, the United States should consider doling out more aid directly to them.

[...]

In Afghanistan, a continuing security presence in contested areas will be key to getting Afghans and former insurgents to aid the war effort. As long as they fear Taliban reprisal, locals will stay silent.

[...]

Improve security: Protection of the people (not body counts, as in the earlier period) became the measure of progress in Vietnam. The appropriate metrics to watch in Afghanistan are probably economic growth, the percentage of children attending school and health data, along with freedom of movement within and between population centers.

[...]

Similarly, the Taliban uses the Pakistan border as its own barrier, and American drone attacks can do only so much. Either Washington must find a way to get the Pakistanis to step up the fight against the terrorists, or consider operations across the border.

[...]

President Obama has said that Afghanistan is a war of necessity. If so, he must put his political capital behind it. As he and his advisers plan the new course for the war, he must also come up with a new approach for selling it to Congress and the American people.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/opinion/18sorley.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=vietnam&st=cse

These are snippets from an article by Lt. Col. Lewis Sorley (Ret.) and they point out what we need to do in Afghanistan to win.

Lewis Sorley, a retired Army lieutenant colonel, is the author of “A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America’s Last Years in Vietnam.”
 
Very True. Afghanistan's location (land-locked) also prevents the Army from deploying Mechanized forces to the AO. They must depend on light, airborne, air assault and striker units to carry the load in A-stan, because the 1st CAV, 1st Armored or any other Tank BDE won't be coming to help. They can't get into the country.

Iraq continues to plague us. Many brigades that could go to A-stan to help are STILL on orders to Iraq, a conflict that is over for us. All that is left is to haul all of our crap out. I wish the Iraqis would just ask us to leave.

Surely you're not suggesting that mech units take the lead in Afghanistan, Cap? I think someone already made that tactical mistake.
 
Cap, in counter-insurgency operations, holding ground is not a barometer of success. If the enemy isn't interested in holding ground, then we shouldn't be either.

They are...remember the word "sanctuary". That's what we want to prevent.

We should interested in one of two things: interdicting the enemy on his on turf, or drawing him out so we can engage him. Actually, we should be doing both.

Right; we do both; taking ground from him. Attack him in his strongholds, clear the area of the enemy and hold the ground; not to let him back in.

You actually explained it pretty well for me.
 
Surely you're not suggesting that mech units take the lead in Afghanistan, Cap? I think someone already made that tactical mistake.

No way. I'm mearly saying that is harder to resource because we can't use any MECH BDEs which are nearly half the Army.

I would send the MECH BDEs w/o their equipment. Light!
 
They are...remember the word "sanctuary". That's what we want to prevent.

That's why we want to present a threat on his home turf, where he feels most comfortable.
 
That's why we want to present a threat on his home turf, where he feels most comfortable.

Exactly. Attack him, take his ground, hold it, build it, secure it and don't give it back. Perfect COIN analysis. Exactly what we did in Iraq.
 
No way. I'm mearly saying that is harder to resource because we can't use any MECH BDEs which are nearly half the Army.

I would send the MECH BDEs w/o their equipment. Light!

I agree. Looks like you learned a little something as an FSO. Hangin' with those grunts learned you something.
 
Exactly. Attack him, take his ground, hold it, build it, secure it and don't give it back. Perfect COIN analysis. Exactly what we did in Iraq.

i.e. destroy the enemy and his ability to wage war. You're catchin' on, Cap. Hang in there, you'll be a commander one day.
 
Very True. Afghanistan's location (land-locked) also prevents the Army from deploying Mechanized forces to the AO. They must depend on light, airborne, air assault and striker units to carry the load in A-stan, because the 1st CAV, 1st Armored or any other Tank BDE won't be coming to help. They can't get into the country.

Iraq continues to plague us. Many brigades that could go to A-stan to help are STILL on orders to Iraq, a conflict that is over for us. All that is left is to haul all of our crap out. I wish the Iraqis would just ask us to leave.

When Obama orders the Afghanistan troop increase they will likely come from Iraq.
 
I agree. Looks like you learned a little something as an FSO. Hangin' with those grunts learned you something.

I loved the Infantry. I asked for it as a branch...but the Army decided I would make a better artilleryman. Which has been OK. I've got all the schools and good assignments...but the best time of my life was as a 2LT in an INF CO. in Iraq. Loved it.
 
i.e. destroy the enemy and his ability to wage war. You're catchin' on, Cap. Hang in there, you'll be a commander one day.

In 6 weeks, to be exact.
 
I loved the Infantry. I asked for it as a branch...but the Army decided I would make a better artilleryman. Which has been OK. I've got all the schools and good assignments...but the best time of my life was as a 2LT in an INF CO. in Iraq. Loved it.

What? They made you go be a gun bunny? Man, I'm sorry. Wow, just wow. I didn't know that. I'll have to take it easy on you from now on.
 
Maybe you should read The Art of War also? A war is a war. No matter how it's fought. Just because it's "unconventional" (when in all seriousness what the terrorists are doing is about as old a tactic as war itself) doesn't mean that you throw out ALL tactics.

What gets me is that so many want to play at war. If we are loosing the war on terror then it is because our leaders are only playing at it. They are not conducting a War.

In a real war innocents do die. In a real war you do what ever it takes to destroy your enemy. There is no such thing as a "civilized war", in a real war.

Edit Note: Corrected spelling mistake.

When we get in a real war, I'll give it a read.
 
What? They made you go be a gun bunny? Man, I'm sorry. Wow, just wow. I didn't know that. I'll have to take it easy on you from now on.

Officers don't get to pick their branch. We request one and the Army decides. You didn't know that? Sometimes OCS guys can get a branch prior to OCS, but not ROTC or West Point. We roll the dice! It could have been worse; I could have gotten Chemical or some pogue crap. Artillery really isn't that bad. We kind of get the best of both worlds.


Getting your own battery?

I am! I'm pretty fired up. I'm sick of being on staff.
 
Why doesn't Obama use his fantastic charisma to convince our allies to send more troops to Afghanistan?
 
Officers don't get to pick their branch. We request one and the Army decides. You didn't know that? Sometimes OCS guys can get a branch prior to OCS, but not ROTC or West Point. We roll the dice! It could have been worse; I could have gotten Chemical or some pogue crap. Artillery really isn't that bad. We kind of get the best of both worlds.

Yeah, I know how it works. I know that strack-assed butter bars get what they ask for, too. That's the great thing about being an NCO, we're worth our weight in gold, so they're not going to tell us we can't jine the infantry.

But, you are the King of The Battlefield. Arty is certainly better than some ***** REMF branch of arms, no doubt about that. You coulda been branched friggin Finance! I would desert if something like that happened to me...lol.



I am! I'm pretty fired up. I'm sick of being on staff.

Congragulations, Redleg! Now you can where red socks with your dinner uniform. Some day, you might even get your St. Barbara's Medal and you can make the list like my ole man.
 
Last edited:
A United Nations-backed panel had nullified nearly a million ballots counted in Mr. Karzai’s favor — a third of his total — following an election on Aug. 20 that was marred by epic levels of fraud and vote stealing.

Mr. Karzai had vigorously resisted the panel’s findings, and seriously considered overriding them and declaring himself the winner. It was only Senator Kerry’s relentless efforts, and a round-the-clock lobbying press by American and European leaders, that staved off political disaster.

[...]

Mr. Emanuel suggested that Mr. Obama would not want to dispatch more Americans to fight and die for a government widely seen as illegitimate by the Afghan people.

[...]

The ability of the Afghan state to govern — to keep order, to build roads, to deliver basic services — is virtually nonexistent outside the capital.

Ultimately, the events of last week demonstrated that politics in Kabul and the war in the countryside are inextricably intertwined. As Mr. Emanuel suggested, no number of foreign troops can defeat the Taliban unless the government they are defending retains the support of ordinary Afghans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/weekinreview/25filkins.html?hp

Obama won't decide until after the Nov. 7th election, I'd bet.
 
Yeah, I know how it works. I know that strack-assed butter bars get what they ask for, too. That's the great thing about being an NCO, we're worth our weight in gold, so they're not going to tell us we can't jine the infantry.

But, you are the King of The Battlefield. Arty is certainly better than some ***** REMF branch of arms, no doubt about that. You coulda been branched friggin Finance! I would desert if something like that happened to me...lol.

I don't know what I would have done if the Army would have really screwed me. I probably would have just enlisted.



Congragulations, Redleg! Now you can where red socks with your dinner uniform. Some day, you might even get your St. Barbara's Medal and you can make the list like my ole man.

Thanks! But I'm not into the nerdy artillery stuff like red socks. I make fun of those guys usually! I'll get St. Barbs someday, I'm sure. I'm not sweating it.

I'd rather bring all my boys home safely from combat...
 
Steve Coll, author of the excellent book on Afghanistan, Ghost Wars, penned this today in the New Yorker. Regardless of your politics, I suggest that you read this.

War and Politics

Afghanistan’s deterioration cannot be blamed on one man, and certainly not on Karzai. After the Taliban’s fall, he was a symbol of national unity in a broken land—for several years, he was perhaps the only Afghan leader able to attract the simultaneous confidence of northern Tajik militias, southern Pashtun tribes, and international aid donors. The landslide he won in the 2004 election truly reflected his standing.

Gradually, however, Karzai seemed to succumb to palace fever and corruption. An unfortunate blend of ego and passivity hobbled him; he could neither manage the American presence in his country nor turn its failures to his advantage by remaking himself as a convincing nationalist. For years, the Bush Administration accepted Karzai’s limitations, and did nothing to create conditions from which a plausible alternative might emerge. In 2008, as another election approached, President Bush’s advisers at last sensed trouble; some of them considered trying to dump Karzai. In the end, however, Bush chose a policy of neutrality, which the incoming Obama Administration endorsed.
 
Back
Top Bottom