The War in Afghanistan

WolfBear

Well-known member
Pretty much all of this can be claimed for Rhodesia, and we saw how that worked out. Global opinion turned decidedly negative on Israel after the Gaza War, even among Evangelicals in the United States. If the Taliban victory results in an Islamist Indonesia and Malaysia throwing their weight behind the Anti-Israel factions in the Middle East, that's a huge shift in resources, raw military power, etc against Israel. You don't have to be better than your opponent on the tactical level, you just have to drown them in resources.

Honestly going to be wild if the Taliban humiliating the United States in 2021 results in that Palestinian prophecy of defeat of Israel by 2048 being made into a reality.

Which Gaza War specifically are you talking about here? And Yes, I do suspect that Israelis are going to prefer to become pariahs like Russia or South Africa were than to give up on their dreams. Or at least right-wing Israelis.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
and the West Bank present a demographic challenge the Israelis cannot solve without genocide.

Or ethnic cleansing. That said, though, annexing only the West Bank will make Israel around 40% Arab, which isn't a majority but is still too close for comfort. No one in Israel wants to annex Gaza any longer. Not worth it.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder


So turns out the suicide bomber who killed our troops during the pull out could have been stopped by a sniper, but the sniper was denied permission to fire, and ended up losing his left leg and right arm to the blast.

Our troops didn't have to die that day, nor did those civies, and who ever denied permission to fire on the suicide bomber need to be court martialled publicly.
 
Last edited:

Wargamer08

Well-known member


So turns out the suicide bomber who killed our troops during the pull out could have been stopped by a sniper, but the sniper was denied permission to fire, and ended up losing his right leg and right arm to the blast.

Our troops didn't have to die that day, nor did those civies, and who ever denied permission to fire on the suicide bomber need to be court martialled publicly.

Typical. At this point, it's exactly what I expected. A failure on all levels of the chain of command.

People look at this kind of behavior and think the very same leadership can prosecute a war against Russia of China?
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Typical. At this point, it's exactly what I expected. A failure on all levels of the chain of command.

People look at this kind of behavior and think the very same leadership can prosecute a war against Russia of China?
Definitely not with State Department, battle lawyers or whoever deciding whether snipers are to take a shot or not, or having to OK each artillery fire mission. Those absolutely need to be out, especially in a conventional war. No sane country fights this way. A military can either focus on PR or fighting, with full knowledge that the other category will suffer.
 

King Arts

Well-known member


So turns out the suicide bomber who killed our troops during the pull out could have been stopped by a sniper, but the sniper was denied permission to fire, and ended up losing his right leg and right arm to the blast.

Our troops didn't have to die that day, nor did those civies, and who ever denied permission to fire on the suicide bomber need to be court martialled publicly.

Bacle you are being too harsh on the soldiers. Yes the officer made a bad call. But you were not there you don’t know what was going through that man’s head or why he thought the order to not shoot was good. Because here is the thing many of our soldiers are in lose lose situations. In this case he chose to not kill and he gets punished, but what about a few days later with the drone strike that killed an air worker with a few kids. That other officer made a more aggressive choice and people back here in the states safe like you condemn it.
 

Wargamer08

Well-known member
To add it is easier to build Antiship Missiles and Mines than it is to build ships. And you can saturation strike the entire CCP invasion force with the combined might of the Japanese, Taiwanese and US Navy.
And none of that matters if the people at the top refuse to give the order to fire and the people at the bottom obey until it's too late. Wars are fought by men, not missiles. And evidently, some changes need to happen.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Definitely not with State Department, battle lawyers or whoever deciding whether snipers are to take a shot or not, or having to OK each artillery fire mission. Those absolutely need to be out, especially in a conventional war. No sane country fights this way. A military can either focus on PR or fighting, with full knowledge that the other category will suffer.
The guy said he was told they had not arrested the suicide bomber 'in order to protect an asset'.

So whatever asset the sniper was told about was deemed more valuable than the lives of the US military personnel and civies gathered near the gate.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Bacle you are being too harsh on the soldiers. Yes the officer made a bad call.
It's worse than this.
Soon after, Vargas-Andrews and his team spotted the bomber but were told to stand down by a commander in charge. "We reassured him of the ease of fire on the suicide bomber," Vargas-Andrews said. "Pointedly, we asked him for engagement authority and permission. We asked him if we could shoot. Our battalion commander said, and I quote, 'I don't know.'"
As i said, typical GWOT problem - highest parts of chain of command micromanaging troops to try avoid PR messes at any cost.
Battalion commander couldn't make the call, guess he needed someone higher up to ok it, just for a sniper to take a shot...
That's the result.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
Basically the result if the US opening fire even with one bullet could lead to a firefight.
The Commander probably had orders and he had to figure out if he could okay it.

He didn't know because if he made the call, and he be wrong ir a firefight leads to more? That is what he was thinking.
He also probably needed clearance from higher to make such a call.

It is stupid I know but thays COIN for ya.

LSCO is diffrent and we know this
 

Agent23

Ни шагу назад!
Definitely not with State Department, battle lawyers or whoever deciding whether snipers are to take a shot or not, or having to OK each artillery fire mission. Those absolutely need to be out, especially in a conventional war. No sane country fights this way. A military can either focus on PR or fighting, with full knowledge that the other category will suffer.
I think it has something to do with all of the stupid shit the USA pulled in Vietnam a few decades earlier, coupled with the fact that the Afghans have a clannish, vendetta and honor-driven culture that means that you will get the whoever you have killed's ten cousins/brothers/other relatives pissed at you and eager to try out their new AKs.

It's worse than this.

As i said, typical GWOT problem - highest parts of chain of command micromanaging troops to try avoid PR messes at any cost.
Battalion commander couldn't make the call, guess he needed someone higher up to ok it, just for a sniper to take a shot...
That's the result.
Sounds like somebody forgot to inform everyone involved that this was basically a frigging evacuation under fire.
Which means that the rules of engagement change from pussyfooting around to kill anything thet looks at the LZ funny.
 

Jormungandr

The Midgard Wyrm
Founder
Bacle you are being too harsh on the soldiers. Yes the officer made a bad call. But you were not there you don’t know what was going through that man’s head or why he thought the order to not shoot was good. Because here is the thing many of our soldiers are in lose lose situations. In this case he chose to not kill and he gets punished, but what about a few days later with the drone strike that killed an air worker with a few kids. That other officer made a more aggressive choice and people back here in the states safe like you condemn it.
...You're kidding, right?
 

King Arts

Well-known member
...You're kidding, right?
What specefically? That we should not be too harsh on the the officer that was on the ground, because as Zach said the officer would have been fucked either way. It's a problem with those who set up the ROE and they will never face a punishment for that, because it would be practically impossible in any democracy.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
Basically, it comes down to PR.
"Marine starts firefight and kills innocent local" and it leads to then assaulting the airport and doing worse.

Sadly we will never know
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top