You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Afghanistan
Brits finding more Taleban than expected
2006-06-21
LASHKAR GAH, Afghanistan - There are greater numbers of Taleban rebels putting up a fight in southern Afghanistan than expected by the newly-deployed British military, a senior commander said. British troops are however still more than a match for the militants as seen in clashes earlier this month, the commander told reporters at a British base in Lashkar Gah, the provincial capital of Helmand province.

The British commander, speaking late Tuesday on condition of anonymity, said the military had underestimated the strength of the hardline Islamic Taleban when it drew up plans to deploy in the restive southern region 16 months ago. Now that 3,300 soldiers are assembling in Helmand, where they are taking over control of security from the US military, they are beginning to see a different picture. “I suppose the most significant difference has been the extent to which the Taleban have had some successes this year and are probably in slightly greater numbers then we might have expected after the excellent work done by our American predecessors,” the commander said.

Quizzed on what he meant by the larger presence, the commander said he was talking about hundreds not thousands of rebels.
All with, as it turns out, Pakistani papers ...
Also they had shown their determination with a series of suicide bombings over the winter months -- a period when militants normally go to ground. “It is an indication of the boldness and the resilience of the organisation because ... they will stay and fight,” he said.
Yeah, yeah, okay, enough hand wringing, the BBC is happy. Now go get the Taleban.
The commander noted, however, that the level of Taleban activity was only the same as for the latter half of last year. They “haven’t come out hugely more than they were last year and they haven’t come out 10 foot tall either,” he said.

The Taleban has a hard core of “hundreds not thousands” of members, with other factions also taking part in the fight, according to the commander. “What we have detected and read about is over time these people are going to make a decision about which they think is going to be the winning side,” he said, insisting that it would be the Afghan government supported by NATO.

British troops, under the umbrella of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, are due to take over control of security in the whole of Helmand by the end of July. They have already pushed faster and deeper than expected into the north of the province since the start of June. In that time, the force has had three significant clashes with militants, losing one British soldier with dozens of rebels killed.
Which is the important point.
“Our recent events here have demonstrated how, with the right sort of focus, we can definitely overmatch the Taleban and we can do it in a clever and surgical way,” the commander said.

Turning to the long-term view of the mission to put Afghanistan back on its feet, through development programmes, good governance and security, the commander indicated that it may take at least 20 years. “If you were to talk about the totality of the effort to produce a self reliant Afghanistan you could be talking a couple of decades plus,” he said.

NATO forces, however, would likely stop taking the lead on security much sooner, the commander said. The goal is to build up the Afghan army and police to take over from the foreign troops in the way the US-led coalition is attempting to hand back control of security to their Iraqi counterparts. “We will achieve a similar sort of inversion, I would suggest, some time in the next four to five years give or take,” said the commander.
Posted by:Steve White

#25   ...and British troops are issued plenty of ammo, and have effective marksmen training; plus they have excellent LMGs with plenty of ammo.

Not to mention their expertise with the bayonet.
Posted by: mrp   2006-06-21 19:52  

#24  So many talis, so little ammo.
Posted by: mcsegeek1   2006-06-21 16:07  

#23  The British commander, speaking late Tuesday on condition of anonymity,

Bet you won't be gtting any more comments from the British Commander, you blew the "Anonymity" bit in the first sentence.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2006-06-21 15:07  

#22  I think you are right on the money Frank G.
They can produce them almost as fast as we can shoot them.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2006-06-21 10:48  

#21  wetwork against the appropriate Pakland madrassah leaders is called for....
Posted by: Frank G   2006-06-21 10:08  

#20  True.
Posted by: Howard UK   2006-06-21 09:37  

#19  the brits won plenty of battles with Martini Henry's which were an advanced general infantry breech loader at the time. The lost at Isandlwana cause they split a small force, and didnt dig in. Of course the Zulus took big casualties, but that was their strategy, they had a much larger and more poorly equipped force.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2006-06-21 09:37  

#18  Comparing the Talevan to the Zulu is an insult Howard. Come on mate!
Posted by: Besoeker   2006-06-21 09:31  

#17  doc - I think we're focussing on the 90th anniversary of the Somme at the moment - but Isandlwana is certainly up there - along with our previous foray into Afghanistan. Caution be thy watchword...
Posted by: Howard UK   2006-06-21 09:29  

#16  Were they showing their determination or their ethnicity? I thought Afganis looked down on suicide bombings.

And they do. Winners don't suicide: be it the Japanese before the Turkey shot or Pashtuns basking in their (usually short-lived) XIXth century victories over the British. Chechens don't suicide either.

Only losers, people who think they don't stand a chance at trading shots with the ennemy, will resort to suicide warfare. That is why Arabs resort to it. Now could be that the daisy cutters have convinced Pashtun that they can't win normally but I still think most suiciders are Arabs.
Posted by: JFM   2006-06-21 08:38  

#15  The British Army should remember their Little Big Horn: Isandlwana.

At Issanwhana the Briotish had single shot Martini Henrys (for God's sake that was thirty years after American Civil war, why they were still equipped Martiny Henrys).

Aklso your link is the typical PC thrash like mass produced by the Ward Churchills who thrive in American univeristies: notice the pro-Zulu tone and how the Zulu casualties are grossly minimized: Victor Davis Hanson places them at about 3 times more and I have trouble believing that the Zulus lost barely more men that the British knowing the high standards for marskmanship who have been a constant in the British army
Posted by: JFM   2006-06-21 08:30  

#14  Was is their business, and business is good!
Posted by: Besoeker   2006-06-21 08:26  

#13  Remember, from the other day, Brig. Butler said that there was no Taliban offensive. No wonder they're surprised.
Posted by: Chuck Simmins   2006-06-21 08:19  

#12  Also they had shown their determination with a series of suicide bombings over the winter months -- a period when militants normally go to ground.
Were they showing their determination or their ethnicity? I thought Afganis looked down on suicide bombings.
Posted by: Chinter Flarong9283   2006-06-21 08:06  

#11   All with, as it turns out, Pakistani papers ...

But surely those are the classic Pakistani forgeries!
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-06-21 07:13  

#10  The British Army should remember their Little Big Horn: Isandlwana.
Posted by: doc   2006-06-21 07:05  

#9  Infra-red detectors, long-range sniper rifles, and frisk-'em-all tactics should be doing the job. However, from what I heard this action is only an offensive spike, and will dissipate until the Pakistan mosques get a new dose of venom.
Posted by: Shurt Angaimble9728   2006-06-21 04:17  

#8  Because the politicians and stick-in-the-mud generals in Washington DC decided that repeating rifles would "encourage the waste of ammunition" by the troops. So the cavalry got issued Colt and Remington pistols with the new cylinders for brass cased ammo, and single shot breechloaders like the Trapdoor Springfield. This happened almost immediately after the Civil War. The only advancement that the assorted morons permitted was brass cased ammo, since that was a much better all-weather approach and helped standardize each shot's powder use and range. The repeaters were sold off as surplus, and many wound up in the hands of the Indians -- who used them on the 7th Cavalry.
Posted by: Shieldwolf   2006-06-21 04:08  

#7  I don't understand: AFAIK the Union cavalry had repeating rifles well before the end of the Civil war (example: in the battle where Jeb Stuart was killed).

Why was Custer's regiment using single shots over a decade later?
Posted by: JFM   2006-06-21 03:47  

#6  Custer's men died because they were effectively outnumber about 10-1, they had single shot Trapdoor Springfields and a large number of the Indians had repeating rifles, and Custer both left his Gatling guns behind and split his forces. I don't see the Brits doing anything that harebrained in Afghanistan. Plus, the Brits can call on Apache helicopters, F-15, F-16, FA-18, Harrier, A-10, and AC-130U gunship air support; and the simply marvelous light artillery pieces that the British Army was smart enough to buy in 1980s and 90s. And the SA-80 for all of its faults is a true assault rifle, and British troops are issued plenty of ammo, and have effective marksmen training; plus they have excellent LMGs with plenty of ammo.
Posted by: Shieldwolf   2006-06-21 02:37  

#5  Target rich environment. That's all I have to say.
Posted by: twobyfour   2006-06-21 02:25  

#4  Re. #2
It's too bad Custer didn't have air support.
Posted by: Chuck   2006-06-21 01:58  

#3  One Word:

Gurkha.

Posted by: Oldspook   2006-06-21 01:13  

#2  Good for them. I worry though, that they might have a Custer(TM) moment:
"I say, where did all those indians talibans come from?"

Still, I wish them good hunting.
Posted by: N guard   2006-06-21 01:11  

#1  Simply put: need some more bullets
Posted by: Captain America   2006-06-21 00:25  

00:00