British military giving up victory hopes for Afghanistan

[Skybird]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle4882597.ece

Britain's most senior military commander in Afghanistan has warned that the war against the Taliban cannot be won. Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith said the British public should not expect a “decisive military victory” but should be prepared for a possible deal with the Taliban.

His assessment followed the leaking of a memo from a French diplomat who claimed that Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, the British ambassador in Kabul, had told him the current strategy was “doomed to fail”.

Carleton-Smith, commander of 16 Air Assault Brigade, which has just completed its second tour of Afghanistan, said it was necessary to “lower our expectations”. He said: “We’re not going to win this war. It’s about reducing it to a manageable level of insurgency that’s not a strategic threat and can be managed by the Afghan army.”

Trapped in the Afghan maze.

[Jimbuna]

Hardly able to manage our home finances here in the UK so what makes us think we can manage any other countries :p

[SUBMAN1]

Wasn't reducing the Taliban to a manageable level always the goal so that we can leave? Same for Iraq? How is this news? This may be news for some if they have been sleeping for the last 5 years.

Yawn.

-S

[Hitman]

Trapped in the Afghan maze.

I'd rather say "Trapped in the XXI century human rights logic"

In the XIX or XVIII century they'd just made a little genocide, emptying the land from any living form capable of holding a gun or sword, and that would have been it all.

Before starting military campaigns, some politicians should be reminded that the rules have changed a lot from some centuries ago, and that you no longer have the "easy solutions" at hand.

[mrbeast]

IMHO anyone who thought military action was going to be the sole soluton to Afghanistan was labouring under a very grave misunderstanding of the situation.

The military can only go so far; at some point we are going to have to sit down and talk to some of these people and try to find an acceptable political solution.

I think Afghanistan could be a success but not at the current rate or strategy all were doing is becoming sucked into a stalemate situation of unending anti-insurgency warfare; something which the Russians can tell us all about, if the UK has forgotten its 19th Century colonial experiences there.

[nikimcbee]

We would be doing better if our military tactics weren't being shackled by PCness . We need to smash this scum with everything we have and not let up. If they store troops/weapons in a mosque, it's not a church anymore, it should be a @#$%#%ing target!

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by mrbeast

...The military can only go so far; at some point we are going to have to sit down and talk to some of these people and try to find an acceptable political solution....

Hahahaha! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: That's the funniest damn idea I've seen out of you yet! Sit down an negotiate with the same people who sent 4 aircraft and thousands of lives to their deaths. Sharia law is all that will appease them politically! Are you ready to accept that? Ready to bow down to their religion and pay tax if you don't? Do you ever think anything through? Just a question.

-S

[CCIP]

Newsflash: the people that hijacked those 4 aircraft died on the aircraft...

I think you're also confusing Al Quaeda, Taliban and anti-government tribal groups. They're not all the same thing.

There needs to be more pragmatism than this, that's for sure. You can lump everyone into black-and-white categories, and that way just make enemies of everyone. Which I don't think even the US can afford.

[Skybird]

Negotiating with religious extremists who want Pakistan on their trophylist as well as southern ex-soviet republics, and later all world, is not really tempting. You can only negotiate the timetable for them getting their will. That is because they are religious fanatics.

Continuing with this strange carricature of a determined war is not an option, and will lead nowhere.

A determined, uncompromised war in afghanistan and pakistan, also hurts precious western feeling, and is no realistic to be expected to ever become a reality.

And pulling out also nobody wants.

That's the perfect deadlock. Well done!

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Newsflash: the people that hijacked those 4 aircraft died on the aircraft...

I think you're also confusing Al Quaeda, Taliban and anti-government tribal groups. They're not all the same thing.

There needs to be more pragmatism than this, that's for sure. You can lump everyone into black-and-white categories, and that way just make enemies of everyone. Which I don't think even the US can afford.

Al Queida is not allowed to move without Taliban approval at the time. So don't give me that nonsense. And just who do you think the anti-gov tribals are?

-S

[CCIP]

I think it's a more complex situation than that. What can be construed as a unified movement from the outside is actually a very fractalized tribal structure. You can't negotiate with Taliban or Al Quaeda leaders, that's true. But given the structure of the society there, you're not going to win if you fail to engage the tribal politics there. As I say, it'll simply turn pretty much everyone against you.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by Hitman

I'd rather say "Trapped in the XXI century human rights logic"

In the XIX or XVIII century they'd just made a little genocide, emptying the land from any living form capable of holding a gun or sword, and that would have been it all.

Before starting military campaigns, some politicians should be reminded that the rules have changed a lot from some centuries ago, and that you no longer have the "easy solutions" at hand.

Exactly. We (any modern western nation, really) can't fight and win these wars anymore. The only reason we're trying is because they brought their viking raider tactics to our turf, and something "had to be done". I think we look like fools for staying there so long.

PD

[UnderseaLcpl]

Britain's most senior military commander in Afghanistan has warned that the war against the Taliban cannot be won. Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith said the British public should not expect a “decisive military victory” but should be prepared for a possible deal with the Taliban.

He thinks that because he is completely worthless and has no understanding of warfare besides what he was taught by some idiot that has never been to war. Typical officer. Only a complete idiot would say “We may well leave with there still being a low but steady ebb of rural insurgency.”
As if insurgency was in some kind of immediately finite supply

The U.S. military believes that counter-insurgency operations involve having enough troops to prevent illegal activity via a constant military presence and a "show of force", and it does work, for a short time.

That's all well and good in the short term, which is what most officers look at. All they have to consider is whether or not their command is seen as effective by Washington bean-counters.

But in the long-term that policy doesn't work. Insurgents just go underground until the military presence eventually abates. Then they make their move.

Time and time again, the U.S. military has made the mistake of underestimating the insurgents. And yes, they (the insurgents) generally ARE stupid. Their marksmanship is terrible, and they frequently bypass real tactical opportunities in favor of making suicidal attacks. But they aren't so stupid that they can't do some damage.


Proper policy would be utilizing pro-coalition Arabs and Iraqi or Afghan Americans as a sort of "neo-KGB". They could use the insurgents' advantages against them; Blending in with the populace, striking when the enemy does not expect them, a total understanding of Islamic culture, the willingness to fight for their country. Terror would be their weapon against terror.


Now, the General does have a point if you apply what he says to worldwide terrorism, specifically in the realm of Islamic extremism. The War on Terror will fail because it does not address the problem, it only addresses the sypmtoms. IMO, the best thing the U.S. could do at this point is to simply get out altogether and return to an isolationist policy that focuses on domestic issues and limited government. Split Iraq into 3 countries. One for the Kurds, one for the Sunnis and one for the Shiites. Iraq never should have been a country in the first place. The Brits created it out of thin air after WW1. It's like Czechoslovakia. Who in their right mind would put the Czechs and the Slovaks together in the same country? Whatever. Mistakes were made, the Brits are our friends, the Iraqis are not. Once Iraq is divided into three nations, they will be so busy fighting for their own survival (against each other and neighboring nations) they won't have the time or the wherewithall to conduct any insurgent activities.


As far as Afghanistan goes, I don't really know. I have no experience in that theatre. I'm pretty sure that we could somehow take advantage of the tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan, or maybe Pakistan and India, but I don't know how, specifically.

The important thing is that the U.S. should pursue an isolationist policy devoid of foreign intervention and foreign aid. It should pursue a domestic policy of economic and personal freedom. The resultant worldwide economic dominance would give us a lot of power and make us nigh untouchable, since our economic welfare would be so integral to the economies of other nations.
In this fashion, we would at least have the money to pursue a limited policy of domestic welfare and foreign aid to nations that we like, should we want that.


In any case, conventional military presence is not the solution to an insurgency. In fact, it is one of the worst responses possible. It just gives them targets.

[PeriscopeDepth]

As far as the "tensions" between Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the US; I highly recommend Steve Coll's "Ghost Wars". I'm only half way through it, but pretty f'in interesting. IMO.

PD

[XabbaRus]

Subman, and could you explain what manageable levels are? You can't manage them, they'll come back, however with the type of warfare needed you will never ever subjugate them. Go and read up on every conflict in Afghanistan from the British Empire to the Soviet debacle.

If you want a military solution we will never ever leave. There comes a point when you have to negotiate. Once again you are seeing everything in your black and white world.