Article

2007-07-26 Afghanistan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2007-07-26 08:48|| || Front Page|| [3 views ] Top
File under: Taliban

#1 The enemies of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan(including DoD lawyers) continue to deliberately put innocent Afghans into harms way by attacking ANA and Coalition Forces in populated areas, said Army Maj. Chris Belcher, a Combined Joint Task Force- 82 spokesperson.

There, a little added detail.

Posted by Jack is Back!">Jack is Back! 2007-07-26 09:16|| 2007-07-26 09:16|| Front Page Top

#2 Great news, Chuck. I guess your request for a body count ignited an overkill of sorts. 160 to 0 !
ONE HUNDRED and SIXTY to ZERO !

'Hey guys, somebody named Chuck in the US wants body counts.'

Posted by wxjames 2007-07-26 09:36|| 2007-07-26 09:36|| Front Page Top

#3 While this is a kill ratio we can definitely live with, the kill rate is still much too low to win a war by killing - we still have to succeed in converting the people to desire (or at least tolerate) peace in order for us to 'win'.

Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore 2007-07-26 09:38|| 2007-07-26 09:38|| Front Page Top

#4 This is why I prefer to think of it in terms of military units.

8-13 Squad
25-60 Platoon
70-250 Company
300-1,000 Battalion
2,000-3,000 Regiment
3,000-5,000 Brigade
10,000-20,000 Division
30,000-50,000 Corps
50,000-60,000 Army

Looking at Iraq and Afghanistan, if the enemy were a conventional army, what would you estimate their total losses so far?

It is actually less important that you look at our losses vs their loses, than to imagine the impact of their losses on their ability to wage war.

That is, what remains of al-Qaeda is mostly replacements, their original leadership having been so annihilated that few remain. But the new ones are far less experienced or skilled than the many who fought Russia in Afghanistan. The average age of their leaders is probably 22 years old and falling.

They have no experienced leaders of any kind who have successfully accomplished *any* offensive operation. They have *always* lost their battles, and usually with great loss of life. None of their tactics have proven militarily significant.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-07-26 10:22|| 2007-07-26 10:22|| Front Page Top

#5 I might add that it is also useful to estimate, when an enemy leader is captured or killed, their approximate equivalent military rank. Zarqwari would have been perhaps a General (4-star), with the various Emirs of big cities being Major Generals or Brigadiers.

"Senior al-Qaeda leader" could be thought of as a Major to a Colonel in rank. "Cell Leader" or "IED or car bomb facilitator" as a Captain or Major.

You can see how much punishment they have received in Iraq, this way.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-07-26 10:39|| 2007-07-26 10:39|| Front Page Top

#6 Further, with the lack of any combined force injuries inflicted by the Taliban, this engagement is another humiliating defeat for the enemies of Afghanistan

Posted by trailing wife 2007-07-26 11:04|| 2007-07-26 11:04|| Front Page Top

#7 I have often thought a possible supporting strategy would be to allow the Taliban to have a section of Afghan for their own as long as they don't molest the rest of the country. That way the inhabitants can live under a Sunni Islamic Paradise.

Posted by mhw">mhw 2007-07-26 12:47|| http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/]">[http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/] 2007-07-26 12:47|| Front Page Top

23:57 newc
23:56 newc
23:55 newc
23:51 newc
23:48 Super Hose
23:48 newc
23:42 Super Hose
23:37 StumpRanchSteve
23:31 Super Hose
23:26 Super Hose
23:12 Super Hose
23:11 trailing wife
23:09 trailing wife
23:04 Pappy
22:58 crosspatch
22:43 Anonymoose
22:36 Pappy
22:29 3dc
22:29 anymouse
22:25 trailing wife
22:24 Pappy
22:10 Gary and the Samoyeds
22:10 trailing wife
22:08 Gerthudion Choper6698