Much needed support

[gunner]

At last the US provide much needed additional combat support, in Afghanistan, which will hopefully have an effect...

But what will this effect accomplish?

U.S. launches 'major operation' in Afghanistan - CNN.com


"Almost 4,000 Marines and sailors, along with several hundred Afghan security forces and British troops, worked to clear Taliban militants from population centers in the Helmand River valley."

Paul

 

[gunner]

Although its early days, the offensive has moved at a startling pace. Lets hope the ground covered can be neutralised helping the Afghanies to get back some kind of normality.
Unfortunately there's obviously a bumpy road ahead with the Taliban resorting to there familiar Guerilla tactics, of roadside bombs etc.

The Associated Press: US Marines push deeper into southern Afghan towns

"Taking territory from the Taliban has always proved easier than holding it. The challenge is especially great in Helmand because it is a center of Afghanistan's thriving opium production, and drug profits feed both the insurgency and corrupt government officials."

Commiserations to the family of the highest ranking officer, LT Col, to have been killed in operations since the Falklands war.

"On Wednesday, a British lieutenant colonel was killed in an explosion in Helmand. Lt. Col. Rupert Thorneloe, commander of the 1st Battalion Welsh Guards, was the highest-ranking British officer killed in Afghanistan".




Paul

 

[repeter]

This is taking the fight to the Taliban. So far, in Afghanistan, we have been fighting a defensive war after the invasion because we were spread too thin. Now, with the influx of troops, we can stamp out pockets of resistance in remote regions, or even simply far away regions.

The Air Mobile Attack we launched was the pinnacle of military might, something Heinz Guderian would have been proud of. Our para's going behind enemy lines was yet another bold move, with great rewards. The Taliban didn't know see what hit them, and never wll because we move so freaking fast, all they see is the dust behind our kick-a** troops.

In a conventional war, by now you would see tens of thousands of dead enemes, hundreds of destroyed tanks, and an army of POW's. Not to mention the fact that their government center would soon be captured.

 

[gunner]

This is taking the fight to the Taliban. So far, in Afghanistan, we have been fighting a defensive war after the invasion because we were spread too thin. Now, with the influx of troops, we can stamp out pockets of resistance in remote regions, or even simply far away regions.

The Air Mobile Attack we launched was the pinnacle of military might, something Heinz Guderian would have been proud of. Our para's going behind enemy lines was yet another bold move, with great rewards. The Taliban didn't know see what hit them, and never wll because we move so freaking fast.
QUOTE]

As has been mentioned the coalitions ability to move around the battlefield at lightning speed has never been in doubt. The doubt creeps in-in there ability to hold the ground.

Paul

 

[repeter]

As has been mentioned the coalitions ability to move around the battlefield at lightning speed has never been in doubt. The doubt creeps in-in there ability to hold the ground.

Paul

Holding ground is unnecessary in a conventional land war, true and that causes it to be our weakness. But, we have more waves of troops going in to secure key road junctions, and towns/villages right? Our commanders aren't giong to just pass by and do nothing, at the very least they will have some of the shock troops hang back and secure key areas.

 

[gunner]

Holding ground is unnecessary in a conventional land war, true and that causes it to be our weakness. But, we have more waves of troops going in to secure key road junctions, and towns/villages right? Our commanders aren't giong to just pass by and do nothing, at the very least they will have some of the shock troops hang back and secure key areas.

Modern Warfare as you have said moves extremely fast. From my experience of Dessert Storm in 91 front line troops do not partake in holding responsibilities, and rely on other troops to fill the void. So in answer to your question those voids will need to filled, and fast.

Afghanistan is a vast country with open expanses and cave complexes i,m sure your aware. With the US providing the relevant troops, combat personnel, they are less inclined to savour the mundane task or have sufficient numbers to perform it adequately [19,000 troops] is actually not an overwhelming amount.
Lets hope, and i,m sure we have learnt from Iraq, the importance of training the indigenous population to control there own security and this time round it will be more of a priority.
Its a pity we don't have more willing partners to put boots on the ground at the dirty end...

Paul

Paul

 

[sam_w]

Its a pity we don't have more willing partners to put boots on the ground at the dirty end...

UK=Good
Rest of NATO=Worthless

Much of the material support that NATO allies provide is minimal at best, and of that mostly in logistical, medical, etc..support services. It has become too comfortable for many in NATO to make the assumption that the Anglos (US/UK) will do all the dying, and they can just write a check. Except in this circumstance, they are not writing the checks even.

What is even more incredible is the amount of materials and financing these NATO allies will provide in terms of training local police and general combating of the opium poppy growth. Too lazy to look up the numbers at the moment, but the overall amount spent is a mere fraction of what EU pays in total to fight the heroin trade (to which something like 95% comes from Afghanistan). Again do not quote me on the numbers, but I think we all get the general idea.

The news today is that after the September elections in Afghanistan there will be a full military review. My hopes is that the review can create a actionable strategy that can be sold to the rest of NATO. Considering the losses so far this month that the UK has had, I think it is inconceivable to expect this to be an open ended conflict.

 

[gunner]

UK=Good
Rest of NATO=Worthless

Much of the material support that NATO allies provide is minimal at best, and of that mostly in logistical, medical, etc..support services. It has become too comfortable for many in NATO to make the assumption that the Anglos (US/UK) will do all the dying, and they can just write a check. Except in this circumstance, they are not writing the checks even.

What is even more incredible is the amount of materials and financing these NATO allies will provide in terms of training local police and general combating of the opium poppy growth. Too lazy to look up the numbers at the moment, but the overall amount spent is a mere fraction of what EU pays in total to fight the heroin trade (to which something like 95% comes from Afghanistan). Again do not quote me on the numbers, but I think we all get the general idea.

The news today is that after the September elections in Afghanistan there will be a full military review. My hopes is that the review can create a actionable strategy that can be sold to the rest of NATO. Considering the losses so far this month that the UK has had, I think it is inconceivable to expect this to be an open ended conflict.

As you are aware we [the UK] have had a bad 10 days, with the loss of 15 troops.

U.K. losses mount in Afghanistan - Afghanistan- msnbc.com

With the US loosing a number of troops

Mounting Casualties in Afghanistan Spur Concern - WSJ.com

Lets hope the hard fought ground can be cleared of Taliban for a long enough period to give the civilian population enough hope to return and proceed with making somekind of normal routine [whatever that is for Afghanies].
Even if the rest of NATO offered some financial assistance to the UK government, we could then at least provide the troops with the mobility they are severely lacking [helicopters].


Paul

 

[gunner]

It seems the much needed support, given be the US, is enabling British troops to actually go on the offensive-rather than conducting a defensive campaign.
Unfortunately its coming at a pretty high price

Operation Panther's Claw: how British troops are hunting the Taliban to the end - Telegraph

With one Platoon of Welsh Guards suffering extremely high casualties [not all serious]

"A single platoon of 30 Welsh Guards had suffered 19 casualties as the Taliban desperately fought to stop a cordon being drawn around them. "

"For the first three days, the gun battles were constant, and progress meagre. The Taliban knew the British were coming and set up a multitude of booby traps. "

Lets hope its all worth it.

Paul

 

[gunner]

The Helicopter, or lack of, debate shows no sign of going away

Government slaps down minister over shortage of helicopters - Telegraph

"In an exclusive interview, Lord Malloch-Brown told The Daily Telegraph that “we definitely don’t have enough helicopters”. "

Lord Malloch-Brown is the most senior Cabinet member to show support for the need for more mobility in the form of Helicopters, its a pity he was not a little more vociferous when he perhaps had some influence.

along with the two most senior serving Military personnel too voice concern

"Last week Gen Sir Richard Dannatt, the head of the Army, criticised Mr Brown and ministers for failing to supply enough men, vehicles and equipment. Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, the Chief of Defence Staff, also insisted that more helicopters would save lives."

Edited to add, for comparison. The American contingent of 4000 Marines turned up with 100 Helicopters. The British have around 28 [depending on what source you use] for the whole of our 9200 troops.

Lets hope demand meets the need. And pretty damn soon.

Paul

 

[repeter]

The Helicopter, or lack of, debate shows no sign of going away

Government slaps down minister over shortage of helicopters - Telegraph

"In an exclusive interview, Lord Malloch-Brown told The Daily Telegraph that “we definitely don’t have enough helicopters”. "

Lord Malloch-Brown is the most senior Cabinet member to show support for the need for more mobility in the form of Helicopters, its a pity he was not a little more vociferous when he perhaps had some influence.

along with the two most senior serving Military personnel too voice concern

"Last week Gen Sir Richard Dannatt, the head of the Army, criticised Mr Brown and ministers for failing to supply enough men, vehicles and equipment. Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, the Chief of Defence Staff, also insisted that more helicopters would save lives."

Edited to add, for comparison. The American contingent of 4000 Marines turned up with 100 Helicopters. The British have around 28 [depending on what source you use] for the whole of our 9200 troops.

Lets hope demand meets the need. And pretty damn soon.

Paul

Ugh, why the hell can't they just send in some Sikorsky's, and shut the arguement down...as a matter of fact, we need some more as well...

 

[gunner]

It seems Operation Panthers Claw was a success. Achieving the desired affect of driving the Taliban out

http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/afghanoperation.pdf

Total UK fatalities 10

But surprise-surprise we need more troops to secure the area

Britain will need more troops in Afghanistan, say army chiefs - Times Online

"Britain may need to send more troops to Afghanistan despite the success of Operation Panther’s Claw, military chiefs admit.

Brigadier Tim Radford, commander of Task Force Helmand, said that the existing troops could not be expected to mount further significant operations without reinforcements.

The scale of the challenge was revealed yesterday as it emerged that British soldiers have faced nearly 1,000 roadside bombs in the past three months. Although 3,000 troops managed to drive out about 500 Taleban during the five-week offensive, they will be fully deployed holding an area in Helmand province about the size of the Isle of Wight, their commanding officer admitted"

And a special thanks to the US Military for the assistance in our mobility there Helicopter support was invaluable [again]

Paul