Intelligent Military Tactic?

Praxeas · #1 02-14-2010, 11:46 PM

Are you guys keeping track of the offensive in Afghanistan?

Apparently it's rather brutal with heavy fighting. The marines and afghan soldiers encountered lots of bombs, booby traps and mines and fierce gun battles...

Well here is the part that gets me: It was announced a few weeks ahead of time that there would be an offensive. They wanted the Taliban to think it over and hopefully just leave.

What it did was give them a heads up and a week or so worth of time for the Taliban to dig in and set traps..

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,585888,00.html

Aquila · #2 02-14-2010, 11:51 PM

Sounds like a dumb move to me. Unless there's something else going on we don't know about.

n david · #3 02-15-2010, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Are you guys keeping track of the offensive in Afghanistan?

Apparently it's rather brutal with heavy fighting. The marines and afghan soldiers encountered lots of bombs, booby traps and mines and fierce gun battles...

Well here is the part that gets me: It was announced a few weeks ahead of time that there would be an offensive. They wanted the Taliban to think it over and hopefully just leave.

What it did was give them a heads up and a week or so worth of time for the Taliban to dig in and set traps..

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,585888,00.html

I noticed that as well. Couldn't believe it ... but then, this administration is all about being "fair," so they wanted to make sure the Taliban had an opportunity to leave or defend themselves.

Whomever designed this strategy needs to be gone. They should either be fired or placed on the front line.

crakjak · #4 02-15-2010, 08:28 AM

We have to play fair now, if we are going to be blowing up things and killing bad people we need to warn them!! Right?

As usual the US makes war with one hand tied behind, which lengthens the war and ultimately a lot more solders are killed. The left has brainwashed a whole generation.

The US is too powerful we have to dumb down the strategy so we are good sports!

Good grief, if it is worth going to war, it is worth making a quick work of it. Oh, if it were so simple!! Of course, it is not.

Praxeas · #5 02-15-2010, 07:09 PM

Something else that I find absurd is the "law" that says if other countries think you responded too harshly to a first attack, you should be condemned...

Ok now THINK...in a war where an enemy is trying to kill you and your country men is the best tactic

A) just kill as many as he kills
B)As the UN how many bombs to drop before hand or
C)make sure the enemy never kills any more of your country men again

C makes the best sense to me

Sam · #6 02-15-2010, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Something else that I find absurd is the "law" that says if other countries think you responded too harshly to a first attack, you should be condemned...

Ok now THINK...in a war where an enemy is trying to kill you and your country men is the best tactic

A) just kill as many as he kills
B)As the UN how many bombs to drop before hand or
C)make sure the enemy never kills any more of your country men again

C makes the best sense to me

Our young men and women are going into rough unknown terrain trying to fight an unseen enemy who has the favor of the local population (or at least has the local population afraid of them) and who is familiar with the land. We told them we were coming. We told them how long we'd be there. What chance to we have?

One solution would be to carpet bomb and cluster bomb the whole area until it looked like a newly plowed field but many would just hide in caves and holes and come back out after we pull out to continue doing what they've been doing for years. About the only way we can win this is to kill so many Taliban that there are not enough of them left to be effective. But then when the surviving children grow up they will just carry on what the adults are doing now.

Praxeas · #7 02-15-2010, 10:27 PM

carpet, cluster bombing won't work. This is village pretty much with a lot of civilians

U376977 · #8 02-16-2010, 12:10 AM

Whatever happened to "shock and awe?"

Praxeas · #9 02-16-2010, 01:36 AM

Replaced by juke and jive?

n david · #10 02-16-2010, 06:20 AM

This is quite simply unbelievable ... US soldiers are complaining about the new rules of engagement which were updated last year because of "public outrage over civilian deaths" in Afghanistan. Talking about unnecessarily putting our soldiers lives in danger.

Quote:

"They're using our rules of engagement against us," he said, adding that his platoon had repeatedly seen men drop their guns into ditches and walk away to blend in with civilians.

If a man emerges from a Taliban hideout after shooting erupts, U.S. troops say they cannot fire at him if he is not seen carrying a weapon — or if they did not personally watch him drop one.

What this means, some contend, is that a militant can fire at them, then set aside his weapon and walk freely out of a compound, possibly toward a weapons cache in another location. It was unclear how often this has happened. In another example, Marines pinned down by a barrage of insurgent bullets say they can't count on quick air support because it takes time to positively identify shooters.

Quote:

The rules seek to put the troops in the "right frame of mind to exercise that right," Shanks said. They require troops to ask a few fundamental questions:

_ Even if someone has shot in my general direction, am I still in danger?

_ Will I make more enemies than I'll kill by destroying property, or harming innocent civilians?

_ What are my other options to resolve this without escalating the violence?

Are you kidding me!? If someone shoots at me, you better believe I'm shooting back asap. I'm not going to sit there trying to figure out the questions listed above.

Any current/former military who served in the middle east here?

Source