![]() |
| |||||||
| SitRep A place to discuss news and issues on current military situations around the world. (Please always be mindful of OpSec & CommSec) |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,759
| UK soldiers patrol 'Little Afghanistan' If I've read it correctly they've captured the feel of the Hindu Kush mountains with the flat, lowland canal-ways of Norfolk British Army builds mock Afghan village in English countryside - CNN.com |
| | |
| | #2 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Texas
Posts: 1,732
| Interesting idea and a good one if it lends to the implementation on the battlefield of winning hearts and minds. I think the only way to achieve success in Afghanistan is combined action platoons of coalition forces and local militias living together in a village, working together as well as patrolling together. Hopefully programs like this will help coalition forces bridge the enourmous cultural gap. |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Canvey Island, Essex
Posts: 4,029
| Cant see any successfull out come from the Afgan conflict. no luck in the 1890's and the same problem now, no held ground so the Taliban dissapear only to return once coalition troops have left. |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 3,446
| Agree with you trackend. Problem goes back further. Hell, even Alexander the Great had problems with these people. Tough to understand but shooting at each other is something of a national past time over there. It's what they do. There is no solution. It's tribal, it will go on. |
| | |
| | #5 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Texas
Posts: 1,732
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #6 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,759
| The coalition isn't trying to invade Afghanistan that's the key difference between the 19th century debacle and what's happening now. With a concerted hearts and minds drive this is winnable. U.S. launches 'major operation' in Afghanistan - CNN.com |
| | |
| | #7 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 3,446
| Define "winnable"? |
| | |
| | #8 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Texas
Posts: 1,732
| |
| | |
| | #9 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Corona, California
Posts: 1,534
| ![]() Just curious where this thread is heading now. Wheels
__________________ Cheers Wheelsup_cavu ![]() Wheels's Photos - Time lapse build of an F/A-18 Super Hornet - Lock N' Load |
| | |
| | #10 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,759
| It's not going anywhere I don't think there was anything particularly contentious about describing Afghanistan as 'winnable'. Coalition action in the country has the backing of Karzai and the Helmand governor seems pretty upbeat about the chances of success. Regardless of whether he's egging up the prospects of success or not, this has Afghan approval and includes the continued involvement of their military. That provides a gulf of difference between what the coalition could potentially achieve in-country and what the last modern, large-scale military incursion (the USSR) was trying to accomplish by invasion. Unlikely in itself to seal the overall peace and security of the country but a building block, nonetheless; a battle in the war if you like. Yes, I'd say that was winnable but that's winnable as opposed to won. |
| | |
| | #11 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 3,446
| I understand your definition of winnable and gotta be honest, I don't think it's going to happen. It would be nice if it did, but to think it's a country, culture, lifestyle and viewpoint is going to change from that followed for centuries (if not thousands of years) just because a different group thought it up, is folly. Kharzai stays as long as the Coalition stays, Coalition stays as long as Al Queda stays, Al Queda stays as long as they are a benefit to the Taliban. Taliban stays as long as....they hold both sides of the border? They keep their local villagers under their thumb? They keep the drug trade alive and kicking in the face of Coalition attempts to get rid of it. You name it, A-stan is in the middle of one very convoluted place with a ton of people on all sides throwing their .02 in. Trying to get a hold on it is like trying to grab jello. I hope your right Colin. Hope they pull it off and the taste of modernity, coupled with Coalition efforts, support of Kharzai, ect, ect, helps turn it towards a more modern outlook. But with the majority of the people illiterate, indifferent and probably looking at the Coalition as just the next round of foriegners bucking up the newest Govt, I definitely have my doubts. |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |