View Full Version : Afghanistan- strategic plan?
sunshine band
26th Nov 2008, 19:34
Now, forgive me if I missed a bit after nodding off in various briefings, but shouldn't we have some kind of strategic plan for Afghanistan? If we do, what is it, and if we don't, why are we there and why are we putting people in the firing line?? I can't find anything- can someone enlighten me?
SB
The Gorilla
26th Nov 2008, 20:05
Strategy?? Isn't that a board game that gets peddled around every Christmas?
I am afraid that that is the only version MOD seem to know!
Anybody see the Policeman on TV yesterday, you know the one who is trying to train the Afghanis not to sniff/grow/sell coke!
Not very inspiring..
:O
fergineer
26th Nov 2008, 20:14
Yep that clip even made it down here to NZ and your right it filled me with confidence. The plan as you say probably non existant which is why no-one has seen it......
RileyDove
26th Nov 2008, 21:01
I think the strategic plan is rather akin to the1930's were the RAF did pretty much the same job with Hawker Hinds when the natives got restless.
Zimbabwe would be a better place to go where the peolple look to be in the crap quite literally (and was once embraced as an ex member of the Empire)!
pr00ne
27th Nov 2008, 00:24
RileyDove,
"Zimbabwe would be a better place to go "
Oh f****ing brilliant! Just what would you do when you got there?
Haven't we learnt a few rather painful lessons of late about invading other peoples countries?
GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU
27th Nov 2008, 11:15
Afghanistan was quite happily sat in its own little poo pile until shortly after some wily oriental gentlemen flew some big aeroplanes into an even bigger building in Noo Yoik. The men who run the land of the big buildings decided that the bad men who’d done this bad thing must have been trained and supported in Afghanistan. As the Government of Afghanistan were either incapable or un interested in putting the bad men in their boxes, the men who run the land decided it would be a good idea to enter Afghanistan to take on the bad men. To do this, though, they needed their NATO friends to join them so that it would look as if it was part of the World War on Terror. In the course of that grand crusade, Afghanistan was broken.
As the best black president the Americans never had said; “you break it, you own it."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1844476 (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1844476)
As regards Zim, arguably, we do have some responsibility to sort it out. We did hand it over, without suitable training, to some people who have a natural aptitude for breaking things. We can’t, of course, as we would alienate all Africa and most of the Commonwealth in doing so. Apart from that, we now have no Forces to do it with.
Sunk at Narvik
27th Nov 2008, 13:10
We (you) are there to keep the Chinese out.
Modern Elmo
27th Nov 2008, 14:19
As the Government of Afghanistan were either incapable or un interested in putting the bad men in their boxes,
What Afghan government, aside from the Talebs?
the men who run the land decided it would be a good idea to enter Afghanistan to take on the bad men.
As compared to appeasing the bad men, which I assume to be your preferred course of action?
To do this, though, they needed their NATO friends to join them so that look as if it was part of the World War on Terror.
Why do you say, "Look as if" ?
In the course of that grand crusade, Afghanistan was broken.
Wrong. Aghanistan was already broken.
What on earth do they want it for?
Modern Elmo
27th Nov 2008, 14:25
What on earth do they want it for?
Which "they" and what "it"?
If "they" = USA, then the answer is, Americans are in Afghanistan to deny international terrorists a safe haven.
No no, I meant the Chinese. SOmeone said we were there to deny it to the Chinese, so I asked why the Chinese would want it...
GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU
27th Nov 2008, 18:20
Modern Elmo. I would like to thank you for your response to my Post. You drew my attention to my earlier mongy typing. Much appreciated :ok:
I would also like to thank America for making the World a safer and better place; except that I can't actually stretch my imagintion to that.
collbar
28th Nov 2008, 17:25
The Chinese have recently signed a multi million $ contact for mineral rights in exchange for infastructure construction. Looking at the chinese past history in Africa, The afgans probably have a better chance of getting that construction from them(the Chinks) than us...
Green Flash
28th Nov 2008, 17:30
.... and the chinese have a land border with Afg. Oh yes, they'll be in sooner or later. They'll play the long game, and win.:sad:
Was at a dinner in London recently at which one speaker was the recently retired AG, Lt-Gen Freddie Viggers.
He was very proud to point out that NATO forces have never been tactically defeated in Afghanistan yet (I'm sure its been close though, down to the last box of bullets and all that...), which seemed to me to be a rather subtle dig at the absence of a strategy.
RileyDove
28th Nov 2008, 18:54
Proone- I think the logical answer as to what to do would be to try and stop the spread of Cholera for starters and maybe address some of the people who are dying from starvation and Mugabe's policies . This would in some way repay the debt to the Rhodesian's who supported and fought for Great Britain in our hour of need. It would also help to secure the political future of a country which could easily in future become another Somalia.
RileyDove
28th Nov 2008, 19:02
Elmo - I think your missing a key point in that the U.S directly supported the war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in terms of both training and weaponry. When that war was over the Taliban moved in and provided some kind of discipline admittedly of a harsh kind. This was directly because of the power vacuum left by the defeat of the Russians.
What is clear is that Afghanstan was a training base for Al Qaida - probably more so than Pakistan but not by a lot. Essentially by taking on the whole country rather than eradicating and restricting the movements of terrorists it's made the situation somewhat worse and given a rallying cause
for a whole world of new terrorists.
Modern Elmo
29th Nov 2008, 00:46
Essentially by taking on the whole country rather than eradicating and restricting the movements of terrorists it's made the situation somewhat worse and given a rallying cause for a whole world of new terrorists.
What do you mean by "taking on the whole country" as opposed to "eradicating and restricting"?
"Eradicating the movements of the terrorists" -- I'm glad you agree that that's the right policy. Eradicate terrorists, and their movements will cease, no?
"A rallying cause" -- translation: "It's the West makes dem poor youfs go bad."
Pontius Navigator
29th Nov 2008, 11:19
What do you mean by "taking on the whole country" as opposed to "eradicating and restricting"?
You seem confused. "taking on the whole country" seems pretty clear. It means bombing anything anywhere even if only a wedding party rather than TIC. Also not just one country if the media reports are correct.
"Eradicating the movements of the terrorists" -- I'm glad you agree that that's the right policy. Eradicate terrorists, and their movements will cease, no?
But as do you agree it is the question of how - just the terrs and not the whole country?
"A rallying cause" -- translation: "It's the West makes dem poor youfs go bad."
Your point? I think it really means that if you come in my back yard when I don't want you too then I would get might pissed off even if you were my friend yesterday.
translation - you might have helped me defeat the Lesser Satan but that does not give you the right as the Greater Satan to occupy my country.
I know we say that we were invited in by the legitimate Government. Oddly enough the USSR was also invited in by the 'legitimate' government.
I'm Off!
29th Nov 2008, 17:43
Our battles are directed?????
eastern wiseguy
29th Nov 2008, 18:39
Plan is to keep the Taliban at bay till they get sick of fighting and wrap in.
I have a name for it......Operation Banner.....oh wait
Seeing as over the last 150 years we have given it a go, then the Russians and now us again, without much success I would have to say, don't you think its about time we tried plan B ?
YouTube - over the hills and far away (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Gix8l5OWBws&feature=related)
Fall in lads behind the drum,
Colours blazing like the sun,
Along the road to come what may,
Over the hills and far away,
Oe'r the hills and far away
Through Basra, Kandahar and Lash
"King" Gord commands and we obey
over the hills and far away
Good to see that the saying "History is condemned to repeat itself" is not yet redundant.
minigundiplomat
30th Nov 2008, 22:42
Not too bothered about the strategic plan, but as I am sat watching my life tick by at the APOD, could we have a bloody tristar please????
Hmmmm??? Maybe?????
BarbiesBoyfriend
30th Nov 2008, 23:46
Hmmm. Strategy and tactics.
Strategy: What are we trying to do? Why are we here? What do we hope to achieve?
Tactics: Who is shooting at us? How to kill him? watch out for that grenade!
Strategy
Tactics
Best not to confuse them.
The strategic plan is to make India and Pakistan to like each other. That way the Pakistanis would start to view the militancy in the tribal areas as the security priority.
But things are getting pear shaped.
Caspian237
1st Dec 2008, 04:50
It is often forgotten that large areas of Aghanistan really are booming under ISAF protection and are showing positive signs of reconstruction and improvement. These are the places that so called NATO allies are desperate to cling to and so avoid the real fighting in the South and East along the porous border with Pakistan. So I think it is fair to say that the war is being won in parts of Afghanistan.
As for the more dangerous parts, well even Pakistan has been unable to tame its NW Tribal areas and has had to adopt a laissez faire policy for the last 60 years. I think we can only act as a buffer for the peaceful regions and assist in the training of Afghan security forces so that one day they can deal with the issue in their own way.
And the current strategy in the lawless regions? As far as I know from my (uneducated) observations they are employing the so called Ink Blot strategy. That is, they create zones of security (the ink blots) and work at expanding these towards one another so that eventually the whole area is pacified. Of course when you figure in the poppy growing an the unsecure border then it seems like a god awful mess. We can only hope that somebody knows what they are doing!