Frightening how politicians can take us into these situations (not just Afganistan) without very clear and specific strategic objectives, an indentifiable end-game and a post-conflict adjustment plan. Given none of this is laid out in advance, no wonder none of them are ever held accountable at the end of it. 🙁

Those Afghan/mujahadean/taliban fighters have got pretty good at repelling invaders….

Frightening how politicians can take us into these situations (not just Afganistan) without very clear and specific strategic objectives, an indentifiable end-game and a post-conflict adjustment plan. Given none of this is laid out in advance, no wonder none of them are ever held accountable at the end of it.

It’s because they’re not soldiers, who won’t listen to the advice of their top brass due to their ideologies/egos and the brass for the sake of their jobs then have to run with what their puppet masters tell them to do.

Politicians are civilians who expect the army to serve them – quite rightly so but then we come to one of the main dilemma’s in democracy…..we’re governed by professional politicians…human resources/public relations types…..with no real understanding of the subjects that they make decisions about.

.it’s to make the conditions in whatever country and the people who inhabit it opposed to the insurgency….. insurgencies do not work if they don’t have the support of the people.

This in spades. We are leaving too soon. We’ll be back there again in our lifetimes.

The cost in human life,human suffering and cash in these flawed adventures is astronmical.
I’m sure it would be far cheaper and more effective in every respect just to offer all comers a large cash grant and passage to another country and then let the remainder just get on with it with the threat of ultimate force if they start f88cking about outside the borders.

The good news is that the Conservatives have said they’ll pull out of the EU Human Rights gig if they win the next election. As the UK only stopped capital punishment for murder, I believe that Blair could then be hanged for Treason.

The two things are separate issues.

Teamhurtmore (for me) a series of stupid events led to WWI. The mother of all waste.

Nahhhh … use it as a training ground. Stay there.

bwaarp – Member
Glad people like you arn’t in control of military ops……the quote about making others die for their country isn’t applicable here…those people effectively don’t exist……there’s no conventional army to kill…. the idea of counter insurgency isn’t to eradicate an opposing enemy…..because you’re chasing ghosts most of the time…..it’s to make the conditions in whatever country and the people who inhabit it opposed to the insurgency….. insurgencies do not work if they don’t have the support of the people.

Has counterinsurgency actually worked anywhere in the 60 years it’s been in and out of favour?

Malaya?
Now they had the right tactics…….

wrecker – Member

Malaya?
Now they had the right tactics…….

1. It worked there because there was a limited supply of proxy foreign forces. I doubt many of the proxy forces managed to swim across South China Sea.

2. There was no PC in those days but just plain old proper war.

3. They starved off supply by encircling the communities. No one going in and no one going out …

If they really want to win the war they need do the above again … which is rather impossible because of the mountains.

In Afghanistan you get constant supply of proxy fighters from all over (landlocked surrounded by “similar” kind of people) … just like the West supplying proxy fighters against Soviet Union in the good old days of cold war.

Look at the Korean war where the real fight was actually with the Chinese rather than the Korean. Similarly in Vietnam.

Yes, why not the talibs or AQ try their luck with the the land of Dear Leaders? Reason is simple because it is the land of the pork. Yes, pork taste good. Bacon is nice. They are afraid that they might end up loving pork. Human Rights? You Will eat pork!

😈

Syria surprises me. The uk and France are prepared to arm AQ as the lesser of two evils vs Iran/Russia.
Fair reply chewkw, but that wasn’t the question, was it? Malaya was, as you said a no bollocks all out war. If the politicos want victory, the instructions are written although some don’t have the stomach for it.

wrecker – Member

If the politicos want victory, the instructions are written although some don’t have the stomach for it.

Because they are contradicting themselves with Human Rights. How can they go into war with Human Rights? War is about eliminating and exterminating until one side bow as simple as that.

Has counterinsurgency actually worked anywhere in the 60 years it’s been in and out of favour?

Colombia, Ireland, Uganda, Turkey, Algeria, Peru and Chechnya to name a few.

I agree. They should rip up the ROE and go at it. It’s a bit more than that though, they need to saturate the area with boots so that they can take ground and keep it. Try to stem the flow from pak. Dominate the local areas. The tribes will back whoever they think will win. They may say thanks for the school or whatever, but they’re too wise to back a losing side. They’ve seen it all before. Blair sent our military to war, the least they could do is let them fight one on equal terms.

War is about eliminating and exterminating until one side bow as simple as that.

Counterinsurgency isn’t, note the statistics for the tactic “crush them”

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2010/RAND_MG964.pdf

bwaarp – Member

War is about eliminating and exterminating until one side bow as simple as that.

Counterinsurgency isn’t, note the statistics for the tactic “crush them[/quote]

You need all the tactics but most importantly get rid of the Human Rights if you are going to use any of those tactics.

Nope, none of the tactics outlined in that document require the removal of hoooman wights. In fact they probably support the idea of human rights, see the tactic “legitimacy (government)” and “legitimacy (force)” – things that a lack of respect for basic human rights tend to ignore.

As Che once put it….

Where a government has come into power through some form of popular vote… the guerrilla outbreak cannot be promoted, since the possibilities of peaceful struggle have not yet been exhausted.

15 Good COIN Practices

The COIN force adhered to several
strategic communication principles

The COIN force signi?cantly reduced
tangible insurgent support.

The government established or
maintained legitimacy in the area of
con?ict

The government was at least a partial
democracy.

COIN force intelligence was adequate
to support effective engagement or
disruption of insurgents.

The COIN force was of suf?cient strength
to force the insurgents to ?ght as
guerrillas.

The government/state was competent

The COIN force avoided excessive
collateral damage, disproportionate
use of force, or other illegitimate
applications of force.

The COIN force sought to engage and
establish positive relations with the
population in the area of con?ict

Short-term investments, improvements in
infrastructure or development, or property
reform occurred in the area of con?ict
controlled or claimed by the COIN force

The majority of the population in the
area of con?ict supported or favored the
COIN force.

The COIN force established and then
expanded secure areas.

The COIN force had and used
uncontested air dominance.

The COIN force provided or ensured the
provision of basic services in areas that it
controlled or claimed to control.

The perception of security was created
or maintained among the population
in areas that the COIN force claimed to
control.

.
.
.
.
.

Bad Coin Practices (I’ve ticked the ones that cover ‘Stan with an X)

The COIN force used both collective
punishment and escalating repression.

X – The primary COIN force was an external
occupier.

X – COIN force or government actions
contributed to substantial new
grievances claimed by the insurgents.

X http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-14883253 – Militias worked at cross-purposes with
the COIN force or government.

The COIN force resettled or removed
civilian populations for population
control.

X (to an extent) – COIN force collateral damage was
perceived by the population in the area
of con?ict as worse than the insurgents’. (When yanks drop 2000lb JDAM’s into weddings on a more than irregular basis it tends to do this kind of thing)

X (to an extent) – In the area of con?ict, the COIN force was
perceived as worse than the insurgents.

The COIN force failed to adapt
to changes in adversary strategy,
operations, or tactics.

The COIN force engaged in more
coercion or intimidation than the
insurgents.

X (maybe more willing to die anyway) – The insurgent force was individually
superior to the COIN force by being
either more professional or better
motivated.

The COIN force or its allies relied on
looting for sustainment.

X – The COIN force and government had
different goals or levels of commitment.

But things like facts and logic won’t alter your right wing Daily Mail views will they Chewkw, just like they didn’t in the last thread we met in.

bwaarp – Member
Has counterinsurgency actually worked anywhere in the 60 years it’s been in and out of favour?
Colombia, Ireland, Uganda, Turkey, Algeria, Peru and Chechnya to name a few.

Sorry can you give more detail…I though Colombia was still fighting the war against insurgents, and how did it work in Algeria, it was granted independence? Don’t know about the others will have a look.

I only ask because of this pretty comprehensive (to my layman’s eyes) take down of Counterinsurgency theory:

How to Kill a Rational Peasant

So am interested to hear differing views.

Colombia was still fighting the war against insurgents

It’s worked in so far as they’ve contained FARC and brought them to the negotiating table.

As for Algeria you got the wrong time frame – read the document because I don’t feel like getting done for copyright issues.

The good news is that the Conservatives have said they’ll pull out of the EU Human Rights gig if they win the next election. As the UK only stopped capital punishment for murder, I believe that Blair could then be hanged for Treason.

The two things are separate issues.

Cold you explain?

I was (am) under the impression the death penalty still stands for those offenses other than murder (for which the death sentence was dropped), but is not used because it’s against the Human Rights Act.

I was (am) under the impression the death penalty still stands for those offenses other than murder (for which the death sentence was dropped), but is not used because it’s against the Human Rights Act.

No that law was actually repealed. They’d have to legislate for it again.

” It is a wretched country where the natives stop killing each other long enough only to turn on any foreigner with pure hatred. Then they go back to the unforgotten blood feud.”

British report into the Afghan wars, bit over 100 years ago.

and what ? you’ve requoted it on here because you think this obviously racist, myopic, colonial worldview holds true today ?

real bright spark aren’t you.