Hi, the story of the use of A 10's Thunderbolts in Afghanistan seemed to be rather unusual for use of massive air power in a war which is being an hearts and minds battle. Without in any case berating the excellent effort being done by teh US AF pilots and teh many nations whcih have contributed forces in Afghanistan who are doing an excellent job of bringing order to that hapless nation after years of conflict, I am only questioing the policy of massive air power in a localised internal security scenario, where every terrorist killed only adds to another one or three or five or what ever. So the policy of use of air power against the Taliban in Afghanistan is what I would like to seek a clarification on. I see no wisdom in this, only creating ever more new enemies. The Afghans respect no one, they are friends only with what they call as thier guests. And at present despite teh great sacrifices made by teh trooops the US of ISAF is sadly not being regarded as guests by teh common Afghan. the time is to review the strategy and stick to a strong ground battle one, with restoration of order in teh country at the earliest. thanks. rahulb
Use of Air Power in Afghanistan
- Thread starter rahulb
- Start date
I for one cannot understand the mentality of anyone opposing UN peacekeeping troops, anywhere! The world has spend hundreds of millions of dollars aiding that country, including for the past 5-6 years much of their manpower. Instead of fighting a lost cause, why do these fascists warlords continue to wage war? They are not winning any sympathy whatsoever targeting UN peacekeepers from the rest of the world. They are also not rebuilding their nation either.
I think its time for Muslim nations to supply all of the peacekeeping forces in Afghanistan. Nothing but Muslim forces it seems will win the hearts of the Afgan population. Its time for NATO and other UN nations to bail out. Muslim nations from Iran to Indonesia, including those from the former Soviet Union should be able to fulfill the UN mission entirely in Afghanistan.
And I am almost coming to the same conclusion with Iraq. Except with Iraq, the forces need to be entirely Arabs. Its time for other Arab nations to put up the land forces needed to defend the present government of Iraq. Arab nations from Egypt east should be able to fulfill the UN mission entirely in Iraq. While a few years ago the Sunnis seem to be a major problem, today its the Shiites that are causing the most trouble, even though they have control of the present government.
It appears that efforts from other nations are not welcomed whatsoever in the Muslim world, no matter how sweet our Western Christian intentions are.
And I think these UN peacekeeping missions support from their citizens are wearing out in the West, Europe and the Americas. Why are so few coming forth for the present new enlarged mission in Lebanon? It seems to me that the Muslim world wants a bloodbath in their own countries! Is power that important?
I think its time for Muslim nations to supply all of the peacekeeping forces in Afghanistan. Nothing but Muslim forces it seems will win the hearts of the Afgan population. Its time for NATO and other UN nations to bail out. Muslim nations from Iran to Indonesia, including those from the former Soviet Union should be able to fulfill the UN mission entirely in Afghanistan.
And I am almost coming to the same conclusion with Iraq. Except with Iraq, the forces need to be entirely Arabs. Its time for other Arab nations to put up the land forces needed to defend the present government of Iraq. Arab nations from Egypt east should be able to fulfill the UN mission entirely in Iraq. While a few years ago the Sunnis seem to be a major problem, today its the Shiites that are causing the most trouble, even though they have control of the present government.
It appears that efforts from other nations are not welcomed whatsoever in the Muslim world, no matter how sweet our Western Christian intentions are.
And I think these UN peacekeeping missions support from their citizens are wearing out in the West, Europe and the Americas. Why are so few coming forth for the present new enlarged mission in Lebanon? It seems to me that the Muslim world wants a bloodbath in their own countries! Is power that important?
Last edited:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #3
Hi Toby, I quite understand your sentiments. It is really frustrating to see all those sacrifices going waste as the daily resistance continues. You are absolubtely right that the indigenous forces are the best to control the internal situation anywhere in the World. Till these in Afghanistan and Iraq come up to the expectations though, there is no option but for the west to play policemen, else there will be anarchy and more Bin Ladens.
The only contention I am making is that it may be perhaps better to use soft power, an iron fist in the velvet glove policy rather than using air power and in turn antagonising the local populace. that is what the Soviets did and if the west too apes them than the result may not be entirely satisfactory. thanks, rahulb
The only contention I am making is that it may be perhaps better to use soft power, an iron fist in the velvet glove policy rather than using air power and in turn antagonising the local populace. that is what the Soviets did and if the west too apes them than the result may not be entirely satisfactory. thanks, rahulb
mikehotwheelz
New Member
Sea Toby said:
The Kurds in the north maybe Muslim but they are not Arabs and would be justifiably extremely nervous of any foreign Arab peacekeeping force on their land, given the history of persecution of their people.
Also the Afghanis wouldn't care if you're Christian or Muslim if you're on their land they want you out. This is an intensely TRIBAL culture where loyalty barely stretches further than the extended family.:jump
Last edited:
I have read many accounts that it takes two years to make great soldiers. Why can't the Afghan army handle an insurrection within its own territory? The UN has been there 5 years.
Its the same with Iraq, and twice as long for Bosnia. I beginning to think these nations are incapable of governing themselves and are on the UN gravy train.
Even a child eventually has to either swim or sink.
Its the same with Iraq, and twice as long for Bosnia. I beginning to think these nations are incapable of governing themselves and are on the UN gravy train.
Even a child eventually has to either swim or sink.
mikehotwheelz
New Member
IMO Iraq is now in a state of civil war. The Kurds, the Sunnis and the Shia who hate each other with equal measure are fighting to control the oil producing areas of the country before the inevitable division of the country. Saddam was prepared to do things we in the West are (rightly) not prepared to do to keep the country together.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #7
Hi there I think it is right for you to question why it has taken the Afghan Army five years to come up to some expected standards. But the situation there is too complex. There has been no state governance there for at least a decade or so. There is no concept of a modern army only militias, the leadership is corrupt and some of them have been accused of mass killings and so on. There is no incentive for the Afghans to come together as a nation as they are still in the feudal mind set. But things will change, another five years or may be even ten years, these things take long to resolve. NATO troops have to be on board at least for another five years and now with the UN commitment in Lebanon, how is it going to affect the NATO Forces, is worth watching:ar15
You have to wonder what the soldiers on the ground who are being sent into harms way would think about not having air support.
I wouldn,t use it in built up areas but in the hills away from civilians i would use it for all it,s worth.
In Afganistan the world needs to speed up reconstruction efforts and out hussle the Taliban we need visable improvments that the Afgan can see.
I wouldn,t use it in built up areas but in the hills away from civilians i would use it for all it,s worth.
In Afganistan the world needs to speed up reconstruction efforts and out hussle the Taliban we need visable improvments that the Afgan can see.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #9
policy on air power in afghanistan
Steve I do agree that the soldiers in Afghanistan will feel really let down if they do not have the air power. One may also argue that it can be used in unpopulated areas. However as we all know there are bound to be accidents and also the terrorists are not above placing human targets to show government forces in poor light in certain areas.
Under the circumstances if the policy is such that air power will not be used, just as no conventional artillery is being used, we may be able to drive home the point to the people, that we are fighting the terrorists on virtually equal terms and no excessiver force is being used despite grave provocations.
This i feel could be a good hearts adn minds measure which will go a long way in controlling the peace rather than stray sucesses in shooting down terrorists by Thunder bolts.
No doubt if the target is very important as one of the key leaders, then precision strikes may be the answer, but otherwise, I think air power in insurgency situations may not be very paying on the whole.
Thanks
Rahulb
Steve I do agree that the soldiers in Afghanistan will feel really let down if they do not have the air power. One may also argue that it can be used in unpopulated areas. However as we all know there are bound to be accidents and also the terrorists are not above placing human targets to show government forces in poor light in certain areas.
Under the circumstances if the policy is such that air power will not be used, just as no conventional artillery is being used, we may be able to drive home the point to the people, that we are fighting the terrorists on virtually equal terms and no excessiver force is being used despite grave provocations.
This i feel could be a good hearts adn minds measure which will go a long way in controlling the peace rather than stray sucesses in shooting down terrorists by Thunder bolts.
No doubt if the target is very important as one of the key leaders, then precision strikes may be the answer, but otherwise, I think air power in insurgency situations may not be very paying on the whole.
Thanks
Rahulb
As far as accidents go they will be few and far between with the precision weapons that are available but i understand your point that even one is a disaster.
Intel is so important they have to make damn sure they are hitting the right people.
Bottom line if Afganistan is ever going to get of the ground and become something the population needs to be able to read and write,education is the key as well as building infrastructure it really is i guess you could say 20% military and 80% education and reconstruction.
Intel is so important they have to make damn sure they are hitting the right people.
Bottom line if Afganistan is ever going to get of the ground and become something the population needs to be able to read and write,education is the key as well as building infrastructure it really is i guess you could say 20% military and 80% education and reconstruction.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #11
Its a long haul
Steve, You are absolutely right, there is definitely a need for a holistic view and its a long haul, education is definitely an issue and it is not building schools only but also till the generation which is in schools now grows up and understands the role of education and modernisation, civilised behaviour and how it makes a difference to thier lives, will there be a lasting change. What that means is a period of 15 to 20 years at least one generation if not two. This period can be shortened only if the people see their lives changing before their eyes and not their brothers getting killed, what ever wrongs they may have committed, becuase very few people will like to see their brethren howso ever wrong they are being killied by people who are not thier own.
Thus there is an interim period, when the AFghan army and police understand the necessity of a modern law and order system and how it functions. Once they start catching their own kith and kin, then the foreing troops can live. So we can shorten the period for say five years.
Well that to my estimate is the time line in Afghanistan.
Thanks
rahulb
Steve, You are absolutely right, there is definitely a need for a holistic view and its a long haul, education is definitely an issue and it is not building schools only but also till the generation which is in schools now grows up and understands the role of education and modernisation, civilised behaviour and how it makes a difference to thier lives, will there be a lasting change. What that means is a period of 15 to 20 years at least one generation if not two. This period can be shortened only if the people see their lives changing before their eyes and not their brothers getting killed, what ever wrongs they may have committed, becuase very few people will like to see their brethren howso ever wrong they are being killied by people who are not thier own.
Thus there is an interim period, when the AFghan army and police understand the necessity of a modern law and order system and how it functions. Once they start catching their own kith and kin, then the foreing troops can live. So we can shorten the period for say five years.
Well that to my estimate is the time line in Afghanistan.
Thanks
rahulb
Airpower is a great equalizer on the battlefield. This summer the taliban have been massing against NATO forces in battlion size formations to create a mismatch. Thanks to airpower they have lost alot of their manpower. The A-10 is the only USAF aircraft built specifically as a CAS aircraft. Here is an A-10 supporting 3Para in Afghanistan. Video link is under picture titled mobile phone video.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5324004.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5324004.stm
The A-10's in my opinion is much better at CAS. The USAF and USB fast movers do a great job at the other mission types, but the A-10 is designed for one mission only - supporting grunts. Breaking that 10,000 ft ceiling so to speak.
By the way I saw where you guys had a great mongolian dinner to celebrate the halfway point in your cruise.
By the way I saw where you guys had a great mongolian dinner to celebrate the halfway point in your cruise.
Guess what they sang... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUH27yeoUk4tomahawk6 said:By the way I saw where you guys had a great mongolian dinner to celebrate the halfway point in your cruise.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
A-10's can now drop LGB's and JDAM themselves can't they??? I think for a scenario such as Afghanistan with it's negligible air threat, that A-10 is the perfect fixed wing aircraft, particularly now that it has received the new precision guided munitions capability and new targetting pods (Litening perhaps?).Big-E said:
It's inherent extended loiter capability, relatively large payload capability and "toughness" make it well suited to dropping/firing ordnance at "fleeting" groups of insurgents...
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
It'd also be hard to identify your target precisely though at that altitude I'd imagine.Big-E said:
I'd imagine one group of people looks much like another, even if you can tell that closely. Hard to successfully conduct "hearts and minds" if you drop on friendly's from that sort of altitude I'd reckon too...