Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Slims · 05-19-2009, 02:43 PM

Counter Insurgencies are tricky things. Sometimes an increased presence is the worst possible option, and sometimes it is essential.

We have a new commanding general who has served in SOF units for nearly his entire career. I would assume he knows which option is appropriate for each region of Afghanistan.

In friendly areas, an increased presence allows more civic functions, police patrols, stability, and an opportunity for a free(r) society to grow, prosper, and become immune to the insurgency.

In unfriendly areas, an increased presence may well encourage resentment and provide a good recruiting tool for the insurgents (as well as more targets).

I know one of the big sticking points in Afghanistan has been a lack of air assets and a substantial part of the 'mini-surge' has been aviation...which would allow our soldiers to fly directly to strongholds rather than drive mined roads.

One of the tendencies of any major power is to consolidate into large bases, but in FID and/or COIN missions the emphasis needs to be in many, smaller outposts that are more 'among the people' where the units living there get a very good local perspective and are able to influence their areas all the time. This is one of the directions we seem to be going now, but it requires more support, people to stand guard, set up electricity, etc.

The surge in Afghanistan is very dissimilar to the one in Iraq. They are both complex strategies with very different overall approaches, though there is some overlap.

In Iraq, the surge was intended to be part of a large effort at hitting the critical mass necessary to actually contain the violence enough to allow things to settle down. Afghanistan has been under-manned since the conventional army got involved in 2002, and has been basically on-hold since the kickoff of Iraq in 2003. Now our military is finally able to give it the attention they would have years ago if other events had not prevented them from doing so.

05-19-2009, 02:43 PM	#65 (permalink)
Slims Eccentric insomniac Location: North Carolina	Counter Insurgencies are tricky things. Sometimes an increased presence is the worst possible option, and sometimes it is essential. We have a new commanding general who has served in SOF units for nearly his entire career. I would assume he knows which option is appropriate for each region of Afghanistan. In friendly areas, an increased presence allows more civic functions, police patrols, stability, and an opportunity for a free(r) society to grow, prosper, and become immune to the insurgency. In unfriendly areas, an increased presence may well encourage resentment and provide a good recruiting tool for the insurgents (as well as more targets). I know one of the big sticking points in Afghanistan has been a lack of air assets and a substantial part of the 'mini-surge' has been aviation...which would allow our soldiers to fly directly to strongholds rather than drive mined roads. One of the tendencies of any major power is to consolidate into large bases, but in FID and/or COIN missions the emphasis needs to be in many, smaller outposts that are more 'among the people' where the units living there get a very good local perspective and are able to influence their areas all the time. This is one of the directions we seem to be going now, but it requires more support, people to stand guard, set up electricity, etc. The surge in Afghanistan is very dissimilar to the one in Iraq. They are both complex strategies with very different overall approaches, though there is some overlap. In Iraq, the surge was intended to be part of a large effort at hitting the critical mass necessary to actually contain the violence enough to allow things to settle down. Afghanistan has been under-manned since the conventional army got involved in 2002, and has been basically on-hold since the kickoff of Iraq in 2003. Now our military is finally able to give it the attention they would have years ago if other events had not prevented them from doing so. __________________ "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill "All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act out their dream with open eyes, to make it possible." Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence