How to beat the Taliban in Afghanistan / Pakistan (and win the war on terror)

[Civy]

The nuclear war this plan ends up with would make the problem it starts out with trying to solve, minor in comparison. The bit where it suggests grabbing the satelites of and dropping bombs including tactical nuclear weapons on a nuclear armed state seems to suggest a miscalculated analysis or mis-understanding of cause and effect. Not that I know much of anything on this stuff

 

[Warwick]

At least it gave me soemthing to laugh about for approx 5mins till I realised he is actually serious!!!
Sadly its never that easy, the politics itself in that part of the world is mind boggling and the wish list of equipment would bankrupt us.....

 

[Yossarian]

I am more concerned on what's being ignored on fixing the root of a constant American Military actions on the Middle East period.

 

[VDKMS]

I am more concerned on what's being ignored on fixing the root of a constant American Military actions on the Middle East period.

That might be an interesting new tread: What would have happened if the US did not interfere in post WWII conflicts (Korea, Vietnam, Berlin Air lift, Iraq, etc.)

 

[Yossarian]

That might be an interesting new tread: What would have happened if the US did not interfere in post WWII conflicts (Korea, Vietnam, Berlin Air lift, Iraq, etc.)

We have gone from fighting communsim to securing financial interest.

We are not allowed to think otherwise, our news in not allowed to report that.

Sound familiar?

 

[Peter Dow]

For Malala, education and freedom - the AfPak Mission is to defeat the Taliban

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlWprzgSwqA"]Malala Yousafzai - getting better every day - YouTube[/ame]

The first part of the video is a Sky News report detailing the scheduled reconstructive surgery planned to be carried out on Malala Yousafzai at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, England.

A titanium plate is to be fitted to Malala's skull and a cochlear implant to help her recover hearing in her left ear.

The second part of the video is news footage of Malala set to the music "It's getting better" sung by Cass Elliot.

The video concludes with the following end message from me Peter Dow for my AfPakMission channel video as follows.

We love Malala.
We hate the Taliban.
We are the good people.
The Taliban are evil.

The good people of Pakistan and all the world wish Malala
to get better every day.
Our military should kill every Taliban and help the world
to get better every day.

First the victory prize by wiping out the Taliban.

Then there will be peace
and time for peace prizes.
We have a war to win first.​

Malala spoke to the camera before her surgery and the following video was released after her surgery.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGLKqd89BaA]Malala Yousafzai Announces Malala Fund to Support Girls' Access to Education (YouTube)[/ame]

Support the Malala Fund | Vital Voices

Then after her surgery ...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ndab8hPmC8U]Malala Yousafzai speaking after surgery in England (YouTube)[/ame]

Malala Yousafzai speaking to her consultant after surgery to reconstruct her skull and to implant a hearing device.

Broadcast on BBC News on February 4, 2013

Transcript

Malala says

"I'm feeling alright and I am happy that the operations, both the operations are successful and you know, it was that kind of successful that now they have removed everything from me and I can also walk a little bit, I can talk and I'm feeling better and it doesn't seem that I had a very big operation, it seems that just a little bit anaesthetic injection just for five hours and then I wake up."

Consultant says

"Yes, but it was five hours, it was not a small procedure but you look remarkably good for it"

Malala says

"But it was very nice because there is no drainage system and I think everything is fine, it's better."

Consultant -
"Good"

Malala

"Yeh"

Consultant -

"and what are you looking forward to next?"

Malala
"I think that I will just get better very soon and there will be no problem, I would hear after one month, in this ear, I hope and the thing is that my mission is the same, to help people and I will do that."

Consultant -

"Yes and what do you think of your treatment so far then, can you remember that?"

Malala -

"If I try to speak about my whole treatment, it started in Pakistan and they did a very successful and a very good operation of me and God gave me a new life because of the prayers of people and because of the talent of doctors.

Here in Birmingham in Queen Elizabeth Hospital, here they did the operation of my nerves so after four or five months my left hand side of the face would work, Insha' Allah.

They took care, a lot of care of me, intensive care and I think I'm inspired from the doctors and nurses - they are like my mother and father because for ten days my mother and father were not with me but I had a lot of doctors and nurses who took care of me as if they were my parents."

Peter Dow of AfPak Mission channel says -

Please subscribe to the AfPak Mission channel on YouTube offering videos and links to inform the West's mission to help free the people of Afghanistan, Pakistan and the rest of the world from the terrorism of the Taliban and other jihadi Islamo-fascist terrorist enemies by achieving a final, total victory over the enemy by the adoption and execution of a competent military strategy to crush the enemy utterly and thereby to win the war on terror, and not ever to contemplate peace negotiations with the enemy Taliban nor with any of their state-sponsors.

If you would like to beat the enemy Taliban then this AfPak Mission channel is the channel for you.

Please watch the videos in the featured Playlists, especially the uploaded videos and the two videos in the Secret Pakistan playlist.

Visit the channel links
to Twitter, where you can follow AfPak Mission

and to the AfPak military strategy blog posts.

A new image for the For Freedom Forums gallary avatars -

 

[Peter Dow]

....I'm no tier one foriegn policy maker...I am no seasoned combat veteren...

But here's some points to bust your balls dear sir.

A.If this had any logic or usefulness at all...Then applying it 10 years after the fact is honestly trivial.

Better late than never.

B.If this was affordable at all, then refer to point A.

In war the most expensive option is to pay the enemy's costs as well as your own, as we have been paying Pakistan's costs.

It is like a protection racket, you don't save money by paying the gangsters. It's cheaper to pay the police to arrest the gangsters.

C.If this is how the entire Western world worked, then we'd have screwed up something worse already preceding 9/11 and would be still working on that.

I am not describing how the entire Western world works.

D. Any human being who fantasizes over application of equippment to solve all problems is either a weekend hobbyist lacking of a military background or a defense contractor.

Actually, my strategy employs mostly distance and secure perimeters to defend bases and supply roads. It was the Pentagon and the UK MOD who decided the way to go was ever bigger and more expensive MRAPs but driving along insecure mined roads and seeing if your vehicle can take the bang. (I can design MRAPs as well though.)

You seem to sway towards only one of these categories, and I mean you ain't the BASF or General Dynamic's type.

I don't understand your point.

E. Also it's easy for us to stand back and point out what hasn't worked in the past, because that's the luxury of history, the military commanders and World Leaders in 2001 and at the dawn of Enduring Freedom did not have that, they did not have an Afghan Playbook with the knowledge gained from a decade of operations there, they did the best their professional knowledge allowed at the time. So to state what hasn't worked now so arrogantly and obviously as if it were common sense is to smack the faces of those first guys in.

And I don't know about you friend, but I wouldn't smack those ladies and gents in the face.

Because your undefeatable Taliban can attest to what happens after that.

The way I see it is lions led by donkeys. The ordinary soldiers, who have my total respect and admiration, have been let down by poor generals and poor politicians not hiring better generals.

And the Taliban are not "undefeatable".

 

[Peter Dow]

If you do not tackle the madrasses in Pakistan who spits out brainwashed fighters day after day then the war in Afganistan is useless. It is no use trying to dry out a flooded room without turning off the taps.

Correct. The madrasses are led by the Taliban, students many of whom received their indoctrination at the University of Jihad, a primary target of my strategy against the Taliban.

The madrasses are isolated and very easy for the Pakistani police to close down if there was a political will, or if the politicians were not scared of being assassinated by the Taliban for closing them down.

It will help if we force a confrontation by bombing the University of Jihad and dispersing any concentration or command HQ of the Taliban. This will reveal the Taliban's masters as an obviously weaker military and political force than people imagined they were and therefore would help Pakistanis to find the courage to confront the madrassas.

 

[Peter Dow]

The nuclear war this plan ends up with

The plan doesn't end with a nuclear war. A nuclear war is not at all likely since Pakistan loses more from a nuclear war than we do and we don't need to start a nuclear war.

However, a good strategy should game through all the options as so we need to lay out that we are not going to be intimidated into inaction by Pakistani nukes.

Just like we gamed the nuclear war options out in the cold war but never fired any nukes in anger. Chill.

would make the problem it starts out with trying to solve, minor in comparison.

For the Pakistanis especially, that's why they won't start a nuclear war with us.

The bit where it suggests grabbing the satelites

Oh come on now. Grabbing the satellites is a no brainer. That should have been done on 9/12, the day after 9/11.

of and dropping bombs including tactical nuclear weapons on a nuclear armed state seems to suggest a miscalculated analysis or mis-understanding of cause and effect. Not that I know much of anything on this stuff

No you don't seem to.

 

[Peter Dow]

At least it gave me soemthing to laugh about for approx 5mins till I realised he is actually serious!!!
Sadly its never that easy, the politics itself in that part of the world is mind boggling and the wish list of equipment would bankrupt us.....

I've never said "spend more". Spend less if you like, but spend it wisely and not on the Pakistani state when it could close down the Taliban in an afternoon if it wanted to.

 

[Capt Frogman]

Nurse!!!!!!!

 

[Tankboy]

I get really worried,when people reply to there own posts.

 

[Tankboy]

So do I!

 

[Capt Frogman]

Must be all that rohypnol Highway Man's dosed you with!

 

[BritinBritain]

I get really worried,when people reply to there own posts.

At least they get a sensible answer.

 

[Yossarian]

At least they get a sensible answer.

I have no Idea what you are talking about!

 

[Yossarian]

I have no Idea what you are talking about!

That would be up surd!

 

[KevinTheCynic]

I'll never forgive myself, I just couldn't ignore this...

A chain of bunkers that stretch along an MSR that runs for hundreds of kilometres. One bunker per kilometre to be manned while all others are left empty and it's manned by only three personnel!

Call me simple, after all I'm only from a family that has had at least one member from every generation for the last 120 years serve in the military and when I joined I only served in the Reserve for a decade (and "only" in Infantry and Recce at that!) so my maths are obviously completely wrong here...

The distance from Herat to Khandahar is approx 560km so that's 560 manned bunkers multiplied by two for two sides of the MSR = 1120 manned bunkers total.
Multiply that by three men per bunker = 3360 troops.
That's just one section of road. We haven't even calculated the "mobile reaction depots".
I'm just wondering who will be left to actually go out on patrol? Does Afghanistan even have that many soldiers!

And then, then!, he discusses a mode of operation for a machinegun that totally defeats it's raison d'être!
But what would I know, I only crewed a machinegun for half a decade as No2, Gunner and SFMG leader and instructed on the theory of machinegun fire.
<facepalm>

I don't know whether to laugh or cry...

 

[Peter Dow]

I'll never forgive myself, I just couldn't ignore this...

Well thank you for your detailed consideration of my plans.

A chain of bunkers that stretch along an MSR

Main Supply Route?

that runs for hundreds of kilometres.

It's a big country. In fact, it's more than 2400 kilometres for a network of road / rail main supply routes something like this.

Don't quibble about the exact routes there. That was knocked up in about 20 minutes.

One bunker

They are armoured lookout and firing positions, not deep holes to hide away in. So I've preferred to use the words "fortified machine gun nest or pillbox". Bunker maybe sounds too defensive a term.

per kilometre to be manned while all others are left empty and it's manned by only three personnel!

Most of the time, yes.

I had posted this image in post #7 to give a picture of the concept but I note that imageshack stopped serving the image so I have re-uploaded it again.

The graphic I used is of WW2 era pill-boxes. Hopefully the budget would stretch to fortifications with armoured sights, better camouflage etc.

Call me simple, after all I'm only from a family that has had at least one member from every generation for the last 120 years serve in the military and when I joined I only served in the Reserve for a decade (and "only" in Infantry and Recce at that!) so my maths are obviously completely wrong here...

OK well I have never served but once worked as a maths teacher so hopefully we can complement each other's skills.

The distance from Herat to Khandahar is approx 560km so that's 560 manned bunkers multiplied by two for two sides of the MSR = 1120 manned bunkers total.

Manned 24/7.

Multiply that by three men per bunker = 3360 troops.

On duty at any one time for the 1120 pillboxes,.

Yes but there are 3 shifts so that's 3 times as many needed for 24/7 operation or 10080 troops for one day's operation.

In addition there would be officers and reserves to staff a 24/7 operation.

For a 25% reserve of 5 reserves per kilometre, 8 reserves per mile
Force including reserves is 25 infantry per kilometre, 40 infantry per mile

For a 50% reserve of 10 reserves per kilometre, 16 reserves per mile
Force including reserves is 30 infantry per kilometre, 48 infantry per mile

So for a 560 km route that would be 14,000 guard force including a 25% reserve or 16,800 guard force including a 50% reserve.

Then some more support forces on top.

That's just one section of road.

Right.

We haven't even calculated the "mobile reaction depots".

You didn't but I just did. The figures I just quoted include the mobile reaction depots which are where the guards spend their off duty time. The mobile reaction troops are just the very same guards who are off-duty back at the depot being called back on emergency reaction duty.

I'm just wondering who will be left to actually go out on patrol?

The only routine patrolling is when the guards travel to their pillboxes every day going on and off duty. For additional security, the guards could have a dog as well.

The whole zone either side of the route is watched 24/7.

Setting up a secure perimeter defence either side of a route is a completely different and better plan of security compared to intermittent patrolling of a route which leaves the route unwatched some of the time which allows enemy to plant mines, set up ambushes and doesn't really do a good job of securing a route.

Does Afghanistan even have that many soldiers!

Oh I think the US and allies are paying for hundreds of thousands of Afghan troops on paper but whether we are paying for good troops is another question altogether.

The green troops need to be reorganised to answer to NATO, not Karzai, as I have explained in post #11.

If there's not enough capable Afghans then employ mercenaries from surrounding countries, from the neighbouring Stans and India mostly I would suggest.

And then, then!, he discusses a mode of operation for a machinegun that totally defeats it's raison d'être!

It's a different mode of operation when you are operating from an armoured position that can't be suppressed and you've no real interest in suppressing a tiny sneak attack which is hoping to sneak past to plant a few mines on the road.

There you don't want to give a small enemy group of only a few Taliban notice that they have been spotted by making a lot of noise and scaring them off. You want the enemy to come right on in, thinking they are unseen, so you that you can wait until you've got a clear shot to make the kill. Here the mode of operation has something similar to a sniper's job about it.

It's different if you are facing a full-frontal assault on the pillbox by a larger force in which case then the rapid-fire mode of the machine gun can come into its own, though the radio call for support from the mobile reaction force is equally essential.

But what would I know, I only crewed a machinegun for half a decade as No2, Gunner and SFMG leader and instructed on the theory of machinegun fire.
<facepalm>

Well I think my tactics are sound.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry...

Crying or shouting with anger is more appropriate for all the good soldiers we have lost to road side bombs and poorly secured supply routes, bad strategy and tactics and a war run by donkey generals leading our lion troops to their deaths.

This war always was, and still is, an easy win but as well as a competent defence we also need a more aggressive attack as well but you don't seem to be asking any questions about the offensive we need.

 

[Capt Frogman]

Quick, someone get Whitehall on the phone! We've got a military tactical genius here!!!