If only we never adopted rules of engagement. Back to what it was in WW2. I garantee the Taliban would think twice before expressing extreme violence.
It's hard to fight something you cannot find unti'll it finds you. If WW2 nations were in the same conflict. They would have just bombarded the entire country and anybody left alive is considered lucky and would be too afraid to step up.
Despite that being a in-humane war tactic. Just saying the only way to win this war as fast as everybody would like is just to bomb all the shitholes known to spawn Taliban recruits.
The way we are doing it which is a credit to modern rules of engagement that tries it's best to put civilian lives first over all else.
With that in mind, it is going to be very difficult and time consuming. IMO they should just shut off all cell phones and radios, etc that doesn't belong to military personel. Deny the enemy communication. Get the ANA to setup stronger border patrols and get the new Afghan Air Force to base all there air power on Pakistan/Afghanistan patrols. Get a NATO troops surge and go to village to village and just take out all taliban resisters.
Use the whole Medieval management method of like having Castles surounded by villages. The castles being the stronghold of troops that get send out to defend the villages or keep order, etc.
Take one village and garrison it for example that is surrounded by other villages and use the garisson in that village to defend reconstruction projects for that whole model village thing and use the garrison to do patrols only in the surrounding villages.
It splits up the troops but it allows a wider range of village control and defense. Denying the Taliban villages to recruit from, get arms, hide arms or just hide in general.
That is how I would do it because simple patrolling the same areas over and over again waiting for the Taliban to regroup, rearm and find you and attack you is horrible.
Canadian_Mind
CKA Super Elite
Posts: 6642
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:03 am
Bacardi you really have no idea what they are doing over there do you?
Guy_Fawkes
CKA Super Elite
Posts: 5321
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:43 am
What you mean its not like that?! But but but, thats whats its like in the video games and the dudes I play with are thats what its like for reals!
PENATRATOR
CKA Elite
Posts: 3230
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:22 am
Bacardi4206 Bacardi4206:
If only we never adopted rules of engagement. Back to what it was in WW2. I garantee the Taliban would think twice before expressing extreme violence.
.
This from an NDP supporter? Interesting indeed.
ASLplease
CKA Elite
Posts: 4183
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:30 am
You can't stop the NATO conferences from happening. There are too many politicians that love their expense paid trips and $10 per cup coffee.
Akhenaten
Forum Elite
Posts: 1734
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:38 am
I would like to see NATO get together and redefine or reinterate exactly what will define victory in Afghanistan for the public. This latest election screw up has really hurt any sense of legitimacy the mission had. I support the mission and always have but there have been some serious PR blows to it lately and right now sustaining collective political will of the member states to see this to the end is the Achilles heel of the mission.
Last edited by Akhenaten on Mon Nov 02, 2009 9:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
ASLplease
CKA Elite
Posts: 4183
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:46 am
I apreciate that you support the mission, but who says that continued occupation has anything to do with victory? why can't it just be security for the civilians?
CKA Elite 
