Camp Bastion attack
 

BBC news reporting that up to six Harriers have been destroyed in the attack the other night.

Something we all know was probably going to happen at some time......

Having served there and seen the security, that takes balls whichever way you look at!

Semper Fidelis leathernecks.

Not good at all. Sad to hear of the 2 marines and other wounded.

A lot of balls to carry out that attack, almost guaranteed to be a suicide mission.

Just as well the Americans got such a good deal on our harriers !
Seriously though metal bits can be replaced its the soft sqidgy bits that fly and look after them am more worried about getting hurt .
Hope all well , be safe

Agree.

That deal on the British Harriers will look even sweeter now
they need them operational.
.

Well done 51 Sqn
 

If the report in the DT is correct:

Prince Harry targeted in fatal Taliban attack on 'impregnable' military base - Telegraph

Good to hear the lads managed to get some smash down on terry.

As said in the article, the art of propaganda, something they seem to be
very good at (ref raiding it to get at Harry).

Long term planning while waiting for the right time to attack ?

The Taliban's claims do however, raise some valid concerns. Harry is a HVT and this could show their resolve in seeking to take him out. I bet every SAM they have (and will be supplied by Iran) will be taking shots at Apaches from hereonin. I think it was a mistake to ever announce him serving there. I would imagine it offers no solace to the families of the US Marines killed in the attack that the only reason for the audacious attack was to target Prince Harry. I now think it more sensible to get him out of there.

Grim

Absolute bollocks!!

1. The reason given for the attack by the Taliban in their first press release gave no mention of Harry, only the anti-muslim film.

They then saw the press talking about Harry so jumped on the bandwagon.

2. The idea that the Taliban will start attacking Apaches is frankly brilliant. If only they did that more often we would have won ages ago. Bring them on.
ditto frontal assaults on large bases. It is far easier to defend a base than patrol to find the buggers.

3. Dont be such a wuss. I bet you are a crab.

I agree with Grim, so there! :=

Tourist, guess you are a pongo:

Please could you explain this, presumably to reveal their location? Obviously no details required just the logic.

And, I agree with you on your other points.

Ex-Crab

Exascot

Exactly that.

The Taliban are doing rather well because they fight asymetrically.

If we can get them to start fighting against fixed defensive positions and fearsome weapons like the Apache instead of going to ground when they appear then bonus!

Ex-RN:ok:

First off sincere condolences to the families of the USMC who lost their lives. Secondly BZ to the FP boys for fighting off the attack. Thirdly respect and regards to anyone down range.

Seriously though; I think that there are probably grounds for a good discussion here. I am very conscious that one way or another we end up discussing the 'what ifs' of a specific serviceman being wounded or worse in a war. Sensitive ground and fortunately unique (we don't for example have a thread on ARRSE wondering if L/Bdr Davis will make it and what would happen if he didn't). I proffer the following:

1. When we go after a HVT it is usually due to his position within the enemy C2 structure. Harry has no part in ours.

- I therefore assume that people talk of him as a HVT because public opinion and support for the op would drop catastrophically (perhaps even forcing withdrawal) if the unthinkable happened. I remain unconvinced myself that this is the case (although it might be - I am not the general public and only get one vote). I think it just as likely that public opion would be galvanised. I also consider the chance of it happening to be very small.

2. The science of ridding this world of HVTs is incredibly complex. The kill chain required is complex. I think that we can credit the enemy with cunning and bravery, but I remain unconvinced that they can, other than with a very lucky shot, plan on this sort of thing against the person in question. They seem to do very well using IEDs and suicide bombers at shurahs, weddings and funerals to hit HVTs...but a AH pilot flying in and out of Bastion? A symmetrical HVT if you will. Not convinced.

3. The enemy is competent and committed. Can someone point out to me how they would be any more competent or committed due to the presence of a single person in Bastion? I don't see how they can, or why they would, 'up their game', without falling into the trap of meeting our chaps/ chapesses head-to-head.

I am sure some or most will disagree but I look forward to the discussion. Dare I hope it will be adult and balanced? I would re-iterate how sensitive I think this subject is and again, my condolences to those that lost loved ones in the fight.

Antelope, as he had qualified as an Apache operator it was a racing certainty that he would gom to Bastion. As he has a public profile it would soon be realised where he was.

Tourist is equally correct (though I hate to admit agreeing with him). It is accepted that an attacking force needs local superiority of at least 3:1. In this instance the TB clearly achieved that. If they attempt to repeat this type of action then Tourist is right although TB will still try to achieve local superiority.

Which would you prefer, to patrol and be ambushed or to defend a fortified position?

The Taliban don't often shoot at AH because if they do and we identify the firing point they are dead - simple as that, it's a Card Alpha engagement. To say that all of a sudden they're going to start targeting AH just because Harry is in theatre is quite simply ludicrous.

The Taliban would love to shoot down any aircraft but the vast majority of insurgents are incredibly afraid of us and have a quite sensible inbuilt sense of self preservation so they don't normally to it.

I personally quite enjoy hearing via ICom that they're getting "the big thing ready" as it will mean guaranteed trade!

To think the Yanks brag!

I have drawn up a chair, got my popcorn out, and am going to sit back and enjoy this discussion!

Does one Suicide Bomber trump the 3:1 rule?

Does a single Afghani Police Officer or Soldier who turns his Weapon on Friendly Forces trump the 3:1 rule?

The Taliban always scurry like Rats whenever an Apache flies over their valley?

This is a new kind of War....and there are going to be some wins and some losses.....we have to be honest and admit when each occur.

The most important thing is we must not believe our own propaganda....that can only end in tears.

While Cryptkeeper's right, there are ways that the Taliban are capable of taking a pot shot at something and then rendering themselves unviable targets; even your most hardened AH gunner isn't going to follow them into a civilian-packed area once the attack has ceased.

I remember being told that a lot of old MANPADS kept by pro-Taliban forces are never considered for use as they're one shot weapons, and once used, the owner loses the bragging rights of having such a weapon. Perhaps the possibility that they'll take down a Prince means more will be tempted to pull them out?

Plus, if there are any arms being supplied by other nations, surey the chance to kill Harry would mean they might add a few MANPADS to their deliveries?

SASless, you clearly don't understand the word 'local'.

One armed man in a room of unarmed men trumps the 3;1 rule everytime.

The 3:1 rule applies to Conventional Warfare and conventional thinking of tactics/strategy.

Down through the ages, as methods and technology altered the application of force during combat, perhaps that old rule has been outdated for the types of conflict we find ourselves confronting now.

Certainly in an Insurgency type conflict.....it is far more than 3:1 advantage the defending forces will have to have in order to prevail as it will have to secure and hold large areas with numerous defensive positions which are all vulnerable to attack as well as the lines of communication and supply.

That is the key to Asymetrical Warfare.....the advantage generally lies with the Insurgents to be able to initiate the action when it best favors them and puts the defenders at the disadvantage.

An excellent example has been given.....one guy with a rifle or LMG takes a pop at a helicopter, patrol, or convoy....then legs it back into a village or town...or does so from within the village surrounded by innocent civilians.....and now look at the amount of people, equipment, and logistics required to find him and neutralize that threat.

I think it is time to pack our stuff, fold our tents, and bring the Troops home. Once again....the Afghans have shown the outsiders that winning in Afghanistan can only be done if one does not overstay your welcome.

Mmmm, assuming they did manage to down an AH and the above happens, what's the difference between that and a suicide bomber?