Jump to content
LongLeftFlank

MOUT and urban counterinsurgency (and CM)

Recommended Posts

Jeez...  Even the official admission of 44% is terrible. 

Since the main reason for western intervention in Afghanistan over the centuries has been to stop the Russians (and now Chinese) outflanking Pakistan to acquire ports on the gulf, and to get access to oilfields in Central Asia, and given the west's history of success in this endeavor, maybe just let the Chinese in with our blessing and let them sort it out (heh).  

There is nothing like overstretching an empire that is more likely to degrade and implode it.  

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LongLeftFlank That would make an interesting overlay with the LWJ maps, looks like Resolute Force are holding the major population centres, but the countryside is firmly in the hands of the insurgents.....There's a very familiar pattern, eh?  :rolleyes:

3 hours ago, Erwin said:

maybe just let the Chinese in with our blessing and let them sort it out (heh).

There's a big difference, the Chinese are invited guests, NATO not so much.....In Afghanistan that's a very big deal.  ;)

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

There's a big difference, the Chinese are invited guests, NATO not so much.....In Afghanistan that's a very big deal.  ;)

Huh? The Chinese are invited by the same government that invited the NATO forces (which is to day was setup after NATO took out the Taliban government). How is that any different? Clearly the politics of the two are different - I'm not trying to say they are the same. But the status as invited is just the same. The Chinese are just as invited or not as anyone else to the Taliban.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have complete confidence that "welcome guests" will turn into hated enemy when they realize Chinese intentions to stay and exploit...

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let's parse this Week article which encapsulates the current conventional (defeatist) wisdom:

https://theweek.com/articles/794399/afghanistan-endless-war

US goals:  
- They must renounce violence 
- break ties with al Qaeda
- Accept the protections of women's rights in the Afghan constitution, and 
- Negotiate directly with (accept authority of) the Afghan government

Talib goals:
- Taliban-ruled medieval society, and al Qaeda 
- ISIS would have free rein there to plan and carry out attacks on the U.S. 

US resources:
- 15,000 US troops
- armed drones and airstrikes
- Afghan forces number about 300,000
- The population of Kabul has shot up from 1.5 million (2001) to almost 6 million

Talib resources:
- 20,000 to 40,000 fierce and committed fighters
- annual budget of an estimated $2 billion (foreign funding)
- lucrative international opium and hashish trades, which employ nearly 600,000 Afghans
- Taliban now rule more territory than they have at any time since 2001
- Pakistani military also allows the Afghan Tal­i­ban to retreat into its territory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IanL said:

Huh? The Chinese are invited by the same government that invited the NATO forces (which is to day was setup after NATO took out the Taliban government). How is that any different? Clearly the politics of the two are different - I'm not trying to say they are the same. But the status as invited is just the same. The Chinese are just as invited or not as anyone else to the Taliban.

I think you'll find the Chinese have been talking directly with the Taliban in Qatar.  :ph34r:

3 hours ago, Erwin said:

Have complete confidence that "welcome guests" will turn into hated enemy when they realize Chinese intentions to stay and exploit...

Nope that will suit the Taliban fine.....So long as the Chinese don't start trying to run the place and they pay all their 'taxes', all will be well.  ;)

Building pipelines.....Fine just pay the necessary taxes.

Building roads.....See above.

Building schools and demanding girls can go to them.....You figure it out!  :rolleyes:

Building nations - See Afghanistan, History 2001-2018

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

US goals:  
- They must renounce violence - Forget it, these are Afghans.
- break ties with al Qaeda - Not going to happen, the two are too tightly enmeshed in Afghanistan.
- Accept the protections of women's rights in the Afghan constitution, and - Forget it, these are Afghans.
- Negotiate directly with (accept authority of) the Afghan government - Not going to happen, the Afghan government is viewed as a puppet by Taliban, direct US-Taliban talks are already underway.

Talib goals:
- Taliban-ruled medieval society, and al Qaeda - Yup, that appears to be the way the cookie crumbles, but the US seems to be able to live with Al Qaeda just fine elsewhere.
- ISIS would have free rein there to plan and carry out attacks on the U.S. - Nope.  Taliban appear to hate ISIS slightly more than the US, they are a rival to the Islamic authority of the Emirate of Afghanistan.

Just my thoughts.  ;)

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

So long as the Chinese don't start trying to run the place

AFAIK Pakistan is already upset with the Chinese as the Paks realized that the huge expensive projects the Chinese sucked them into put the Paks too deep in debt/are unaffordable and the Paks have to sign over rights to ports etc.  The Chinese are basically using the same predatory lending methods of unscrupulous money lenders throughout history.  (Probably learned from us.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to have the same view regarding China. As long as they pay the appropriate bribes I doubt the Taliban will care who invited them or not. As to Pakistan, they will go with whomever continues to sell them arms and with US deals in jeopardy......

the US problem is there is no leaving and there is no staying.  Al Qaeda forced us to intervene and the continued threat forces us to stay. There is and won’t be any stable regime. Just finished reading Katanga 1960-1963. Some interesting parallels when you have a “nation” that is fundamentally a patchwork of tribal loyalties and foreign powers expecting something more united.  

The US relationship to the Saudis defines our role via a vis the Shiite Sunni conflict and unfortunately our allies are also our worst enemies. Talk about one convoluted messed up situation.  You can’t make up s**t this f**ked up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Erwin said:

AFAIK Pakistan is already upset with the Chinese as the Paks realized that the huge expensive projects the Chinese sucked them into put the Paks too deep in debt/are unaffordable and the Paks have to sign over rights to ports etc.  The Chinese are basically using the same predatory lending methods of unscrupulous money lenders throughout history.  (Probably learned from us.)

Nope, whitey had nothing whatsoever to teach the Middle Kingdom when it came to usury or the extortion of tributaries and satrapies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to get this thread back on MOUT as opposed to general current events:

"Battle of Algiers" is available on YouTube, in the original French with subtitles. It makes many Top 10 / most realistic war flick lists, although it is not one in a conventional sense, and is used in counterinsurgency training. 

https://youtu.be/f_N2wyq7fCE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Trying to get this thread back on MOUT as opposed to general current events:

Fair comment.....Thread took a bit of a swing after the battle of Ghazni, but we don't seem to have a thread for the Afghan war and it's a very viable setting for CM:SF2 scenarios, especially if we can persuade Steve & Co. to give us some CM:BS type toys (Predator/Reaper) a little way down the road.

For lack of anywhere else to post it, SWJ have some information on the content of US/Taliban discussions:  http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/afghanistan-peace-talks-stick-us-bases-united-states-wants-2-taliban-none

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Trying to get this thread back on MOUT as opposed to general current events:

"Battle of Algiers" is available on YouTube, in the original French with subtitles. It makes many Top 10 / most realistic war flick lists, although it is not one in a conventional sense, and is used in counterinsurgency training. 

https://youtu.be/f_N2wyq7fCE

Yeah I watched that just before going to Algiers a couple years back while also reading A Savage War of Peace.  There were a few historical sites to see, but I wasn't allowed to wander much (company policy not gov't restriction).  Great movie and very accurate historically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×