Lessons from Afghanistan on guerrila warfare

Search

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
If memory serves, Russia had a wee problem trying to take over the place, too ...



Aaugh!
by William S. Lind

This Sunday’s sacred ritual of Mass, bagels and tea with the Grumpy Old Men’s Club was rudely disrupted by the headline of the day’s Washington Post: "U.S. Airstrikes Rise In Afghanistan as Fighting Intensifies." Great, I thought; it’s probably cheaper than funding a recruiting campaign for the Taliban and lots more effective at creating new guerrillas.

Getting into the story just made the picture worse:

"As fighting in Afghanistan has intensified over the past three months, the U.S. military has conducted 340 airstrikes there, more than twice the 160 carried out in the much higher-profile war in Iraq, according to data from the Central Command…

The airstrikes appear to have increased in recent days as the United States and its allies have launched counteroffensives against the Taliban in the south and southeast, strafing and bombing a stronghold in Uruzgan province and pounding an area near Khost with 500-pound bombs."

One might add, "The Taliban has expressed its thanks to the U.S. Air Force for greatly increasing its popular support in the bombed areas."

(snip)

Of course, all this is accompanied by claims of many dead Taliban, who are conveniently interchangeable with dead locals who weren’t Taliban. Bombing from the air is the best way to drive up the body count, because you don’t even have to count bodies; you just make estimates based on the claimed effectiveness of your weapons, and feed them to ever-gullible reporters. By the time Operation Mountain Thrust is done thrusting into mountains, we should have killed the Taliban several times over.

(snip)

Aaugh! The last time a nation’s civilian and military leadership was this incapable of learning from experience was under the Ching dynasty.

Perhaps it’s time to offer a short refresher course in Guerrilla War 101:

• Air power works against you, not for you. It kills lots of people who weren’t your enemy, recruiting their relatives, friends and fellow tribesmen to become your enemies. In this kind of war, bombers are as useful as 42 cm. siege mortars.

• Big, noisy offensives, launched with lots of warning, achieve nothing. The enemy just goes to ground while you pass on through, and he’s still there when you leave. Big Pushes are the opposite of the "ink blot" strategy, which is the only thing that works, when anything can.

• Putting the Big Push together with lots of bombing in Afghanistan’s Pashtun country means we end up fighting most if not all of the Pashtun. In Afghan wars, the Pashtun always win in the end.

• Quisling governments fail because they cannot achieve legitimacy.

• You need closure, but your guerilla enemy doesn’t. He not only can fight until Doomsday, he intends to do just that – if not you, then someone else.

• The bigger the operations you have to undertake, the more surely your enemy is winning.

The June 19 Washington Times also reported that

"The ambassador from Afghanistan traveled to America’s heartland to promote his war-torn country as the "heart of Asia" and a good place to do business…"

In his region, "all roads lead to Afghanistan," he said…

Asia doesn’t have any heart, and Afghanistan doesn’t have any roads, not even one we can follow to get out.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lind/lind98.html
 

bushman
Joined
Sep 22, 2004
Messages
14,457
Tokens
I was chatting to a huge ex-russian military chap from Belarus a month or two ago and he said we're wasting our time because we're fighting unpaid rebels.

They aint in it for the money, unlike our guys.

The English didn't sort out the Highlands of Scotland until they depopulated the place via the Highland clearances.
 

role player
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
3,302
Tokens
russia lost the cold war too, they always lose

Keep listening to the losers. America didn't even have to fire a bullet to beat them.
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Jointpleasure said:
Keep listening to the losers. America didn't even have to fire a bullet to beat them.

Russia lost primarily due to military overreach. Wars are expensive. Wars you can't win even moreso, as there are few (financial) benefits to reap after the fact.
 

Rx. Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
3,699
Tokens
xpanda said:
Russia lost primarily due to military overreach. Wars are expensive. Wars you can't win even moreso, as there are few (financial) benefits to reap after the fact.

I can think of a few benefits to reap by defeating Islamofascism.
 

role player
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
3,302
Tokens
xpanda said:
Russia lost primarily due to military overreach. Wars are expensive. Wars you can't win even moreso, as there are few (financial) benefits to reap after the fact.

One huge benefit is life insurance, to help insure 9/11's don't occur every other full moon is a preventative health benefit. Member, life is good!

Cheaper Iraqi oil sold here in the good old US of A will benefit the non income taxpaying American greatly as they aren't picking up the tab of the war anyways.

The Marshall Plan outright SUCKS!
 

Rx. Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
3,699
Tokens
Jointpleasure said:
Cheaper Iraqi oil sold here in the good old US of A will benefit the non income taxpaying American greatly as they aren't picking up the tab of the war anyways.

LOL...Federal Income Tax is illegal, as many RX posters have recently learned.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
649
Tokens
#1) Russia losing the cold war has nothing to do with what that man in Belarus said. History has proven many times what he said. A motivated rebel force more often then not will eventually prevail over a occupying force. #2) On a geopolitical scale the costs of projecting power are becoming worse and worse and we most certainly are paying thru the nose on this one.
#3) Want cheaper gas? Get the value of the dollar back up. That will help much more then getting Iraqi oil. Of course a cheaper dollar helps the rich most of all and that is what this administration is best at helping.
 

New member
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Messages
250
Tokens
xpanda said:
Perhaps it’s time to offer a short refresher course in Guerrilla War 101:
• Air power works against you, not for you.
• Big, noisy offensives, launched with lots of warning, achieve nothing.
• Pashtun always win in the end.
• Quisling governments fail .
• You need closure, but your guerilla enemy doesn’t.
• The bigger the operations you have to undertake, the more surely your enemy is winning.

Maybe so X, but confusing a war on terror with any other war in history is beside the point. Perhaps it’s time to offer a refresher in US Politics 101.
• Who wins in the end doesn't matter - only the November elections matter.
• Whoever controls the media wins.
• As long as more American troops aren't killed, all is cool.
• With a bottomless debt to finance everything, all is cool.
• Halliburton and friends of the administration get to make lots of money, all is cool.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,630
Messages
13,570,633
Members
100,833
Latest member
bhushanoils
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com