The Germans can now shoot back!

[bookworm_020]

Talk about going too PC during a war!

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25852356-2703,00.html

[GoldenRivet]

its a shame what the German Military has become over the past 69 years.

a once dominant force which marched across much of the globe... reduced to polite warnings on the field of battle.

all of the great generals throughout history are laughing at man's modern excuse for war.

Mars help us :nope:

[Pwnerator]

So far, Germany doesnt even admit to being in a war. For many politicians, its still a "humanitarian mission" where "violent situations might arise".

Humanitarian mission my ass....

[TarJak]

Hang on I need to consult my handbuch before posting a stunning response...:hmmm: Oops too late.:D

[Skybird]

Yes, political ambitions have seriously messed up orientation of the Bundeswehr mission in Afghanistan. However, to get this a bit more correct: the main difference now is that before, German soldiers immediately had to stop fighting and shooting once an attacker turned away, they were not allowed at all to shoot at fleeing enemies, even if they just had launched an attack or blown up a bomb. This now is allowed (a Green politician yesterday complained on radio about Germans now shooting Afghans into the rear...). Also they were denied to open fire preemptively in the preparatory phase of an obvious attack, this also now is allowed.

The German position on the war is very much confused, and disconnected from the realities. That the senior Dummschwätzer in the defence minstry still denies that there is a war going on in Afghanistan, which also is the official policy of the government and most politicians in the Bundestag, is a symptom for that. But in parts that is also owed to the complex legal constellation around the war in Afghanistan, and the lacking legal basis for the dimension of the Western military engagement there, a legal basis that is such that it stopped short of legitimising an official "war" in Afghanistan. Admitting that one is waging a war there would mean to admit in public that one is breaking international law, or better: that one is going beyond those means that had been legitimised to be used in Afghanistan. If that does not sound nice: "war is not allowed in Afghanistan". The Germans are aware of that fact - and took it as a welcomed excuse in the past to stay out of the real nasty actions. In some other countries, this unwelcomed legal circumstance simply gets ignored.

The whole situation is very stupid. Beyond the legal implication, the orientation of the Germans shows that the German policy is very disoriented and confused, no matter the status regarding legitimation of war in Afghanistan, so it is not really an important detail excusing the Germans. The German strategy had it's merits in the early years, when it showed superior successes, compared to the American strategy of that time. But then the Taliban came back after the Americans prematurely left Afghanistan to itself for too long, and ruined that German strategy, and what is left in practicing it takes place under the cover of American and allied combat missions. When that change occured some years ago, Berlin should have made a decision of either staying in Afghanistan, but massively changing one's strategy and widening the military mandate of the Germans, or to pull out completely. What we have now is a Gordian knot of super-foul compromises.

And if the British complain about having too few helicopters, they should ask the Germans about their equipement. The Germans depend for every rescue mission, for every major shift of forces on foreign helicopters, since they have almost none. Since it is no war there, we do not need them, you know.

It is not the soldiers's fault, so do not blame them - blame the German politicians. I knew some who were there, and got their first-hand feedback. Maybe their ideals sometimes are over-ambitious and misled when going there - but a lack of determination to even fight you cannot excuse them of. It's just that their political leaders are binding their hands on their back.

Since I cannot see any realistic assessement of Afghanistan in German policy, no realistic strategic planning, no vision of what could be acchieved realistically, no sufficient material support for the troops, and no idea of how to define exit strategies and -criterions, I would like to see the troops being pulled out completely. I cannot justify to risk their lives for such a messed-up political confusion. In thinking so, I fall into the group of those 85% of the German population who wants the troops out better yesterday than today, but my motives are different, since most Germans reject the very perspective of German soldiers fighting with weapons overseas. Different to that principal rejection, I am questioning the political leadership and it's lack of wisdom. If you do war, do it in full, and not on a dilletant's niveau. If you are not ready to do it in full, don't do it at all.

It all has been done so stupid from the very beginning. Not only from the German's side, btw. Now everybody is trapped in the Afghan maze.

Britain's Miliband wants to negotiate with those who once were called "mankind's worst enemies", which is revealing in itself, and he talks of "moderate Taliban".

Moderate Taliban. Now think of that contradiction in itself: a moderate extremist.

[XabbaRus]

Miliband is an idiot with no clue as to the world.

I agree there is no such thing as a moderate Taliban.

[Skybird]

Politicians, bah. Great in solving problems that without them would not even exist.

http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/6205/breadwigcom0100.gif (http://img31.imageshack.us/i/breadwigcom0100.gif/)

[Jimbuna]

I suppose the 'moderate' one would be the one standing on the left.....without a weapon on view :hmmm:

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/7443/talibanfighters.jpg (http://img43.imageshack.us/i/talibanfighters.jpg/)

[Skybird]

I suppose the 'moderate' one would be the one standing on the left.....without a weapon on view :hmmm:


No, that guy is a collateral.

[SUBMAN1]

I suppose the 'moderate' one would be the one standing on the left.....without a weapon on view :hmmm:

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/7443/talibanfighters.jpg (http://img43.imageshack.us/i/talibanfighters.jpg/)

He has a weapon. Stock of a russian variety rifle is clearly seen under the sling.

Of course, the barrel is not showing, so he is a moderate. :D

-S

[Jimbuna]

No, that guy is a collateral.

He has a weapon. Stock of a russian variety rifle is clearly seen under the sling.

Of course, the barrel is not showing, so he is a moderate. :D

-S

hehe :DL

[FIREWALL]

It's called ROE. Been There, Done That. :down:

[Dan D]

A friend who is s soldier in the Bundeswehr and who will be on his third mission to Afghanistan soon has told me that they did not even have light mortars let alone something heavier in the past. They only had fire arms to defend themselves when they get attacked. So when some guys in the hills would fire one two or shells into the camp, which they do from time to time to remind the Germans of their presence, they had nothing to shoot back. The roof of the canteen in the camp e.g. had a huge hole caused by such an act of provocation.
The Dutch army guys in the neighbourhood for example would just pull out their heavy howitzers and send some shells back into the hills.

German troops in Afghanistan so far are instructed to act more like Police less than Military. This was possible because the circumstances allowed it. In the area where the Bundeswehr has the responsibility the situation was more like it is in former Yugoslavia today, where troops are there to show presence to calm the situation.

The relationship with the civilian population has been good so far. The soldiers are trusted not feared, no killing people and breaking things.

The situation seems to change now with Taliban infiltrating into that area and looking for a fight aiming to destabilise that part of Afghanistan as well.

This may lead to a different approach which is up to the policy makers to decide.

[Skybird]

They have had mortars in the past already, but were not allowed to use them for real. They were used for sending flares at night only. not before the current German offensive, first of it's kind, the German were using their heavier weapons: mortars and Marder-IFVs.

On the relation with civilians, I have heared different reports. The once trustworthy Afghans do not trust the germans that much anymore, and the germans no longer have heydays when leaving the camp. Since longer time now every leaving of the camp is a combat patrol, ready to fight and expecting the worst. Civilians meet them with reluctance now. In the early years you could have seen Germans walking on foot, without helmets. that is over since long. Since years it is full combat gear and helmet, wepaons ready, huge groups, hoping not to have to leave vehicles.

This description is from a guy coming home from Mazar-e-Sharif last autumn. The media also paint a different picture since longer time. and already in 2004, I think, the German commander of that time was complaining that the German camp "Warehouse" is almost defenseless against artillery strikes from the surrounding mountains overwatching the valley, leaving the camp completely depending on the good will of the other side. The Germans have no artillery of their own. Back then they had 5 helicopters of which 2-3 used to be undergo constant repairs. They have no tanks as well. The German tanks in Afghanistan, Leopard-2A6ers - are run by the Canadians, who absolutely love them.

[Schroeder]

We don't need heavy gear down there, it's not a war yadda yadda.:woot:

:timeout:

[Kptlt Thomsen]

It's called ROE. Been There, Done That. :down:

Having been there twice myself..I agree...PC ROE's SUCK!:down::down::down:

[Onkel Neal]

I suppose the 'moderate' one would be the one standing on the left.....without a weapon on view :hmmm:

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/7443/talibanfighters.jpg (http://img43.imageshack.us/i/talibanfighters.jpg/)


:har::yeah:

[CaptainHaplo]

Rules of Engagement - Official - You must be shot at before you fire, you must not remain engaged against a fleeing target, etc...

Rules of Engagement - Unofficial - He had a gun - He is dead - He can't say he wasn't shooting at us.

Sure you can get into some trouble with that - and some have - but that is because they used the logic to attack first and ask questions later. A keen eye, constant vigilance - will keep you alive more than most realize. Its not perfect - but if they are shooting at me - I consider it a "high intensity conflict" regardless of what some politician says.

[Kptlt Thomsen]

Rules of Engagement - Official - You must be shot at before you fire, you must not remain engaged against a fleeing target, etc...

Rules of Engagement - Unofficial - He had a gun - He is dead - He can't say he wasn't shooting at us.

Sure you can get into some trouble with that - and some have - but that is because they used the logic to attack first and ask questions later. A keen eye, constant vigilance - will keep you alive more than most realize. Its not perfect - but if they are shooting at me - I consider it a "high intensity conflict" regardless of what some politician says.


As an old expression from my former line of work states:
"Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6".

Here endeth the lesson....

[bookworm_020]

As an old expression from my former line of work states:
"Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6".

Here endeth the lesson....

Best to avoid being in that situation altogether!:up:

[Kptlt Thomsen]

Best to avoid being in that situation altogether!:up:

If your job requires you to go..you go...especially when you KNOW before hand that this particular job COULD put you in harms way...