Aussie troops in Afghanistan

[lil ANZAC]

Here are two excerpts from separate articles out of Sydeny Morning Herald.

Article 1: Pressure is building on the federal government to send more troops to Afghanistan with a renewed plea by its government for the return of Australian forces to the conflict-ravaged country.

Afghan Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah has called for more help from Australia to stem escalating violence in his country after the shooting down of a US helicopter by Taliban forces last week highlighted fresh security concerns.

Article 2:Australia is considering sending more troops to Afghanistan, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said today.

Any comments on the matter? Australia has currently only one serviceman there currently working in clearing mines but should Australia looking to a larger defence force contribution?

 

[knightrider4]

Personally I dont have a problem with it. It gives the diggers operational experiance and in the long run is invaluable.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I don't have any problems with this either. Other than the Government's likelyhood of using SASR personnel for what are essentially conventional Infantry tasks, simply because it's cheaper than equipping the infantry properly so that they can conduct these sorts of operations...


If the Government were to deploy a battalion group or similar "supported" by a specwarops contingent I'd be all for it. Deploy only another SASR Squadron and we'll simply see more specwarrie operators quit for more lucrative jobs "now that they've got their operational experience up"...

 

[Supe]

There's talk of Australian forces taking command role in Basra, while some of the Brit units redeploy to Afghanistan. That implies to me, that further Australian troops will be required to go to Iraq. If that is the case, sending ADF soldiers to Afghanistan doesn't make sense. Much better tofulfil one obligation properly, than try and do too many things at once and end up doing a half arsed job.

The Australian gov could request the Kiwi's send more guys over to Afghanistan in order to boost numbers that the ADF will be unable to provide. NZSAS is already over there.

This could involve an extra 200 to 300 Australian defence personnel in Iraq on top of the 450-strong al-Muthanna deployment and the existing embassy security and coalition forces headquarters detachments in Baghdad.
link

 

[Aussie Digger]

This has only been mooted because the Brits are apparently preparing to pull out. If this happens Australia's position could well become untenable. The brits provide most of the logistical support ALL the medical, aeromedical casevac and Aviation capabilities.

The Brits are also responsible for securing the town of Samawah and the outlying deserts, whilse the ADF contingent is responsible for securing "Camp Smitty", the approaches to Camp Smitty and providing the QRF forces. If the Brits left we'd be responsible for FAR more than an extra 200-300 troops on the ground.

All of 2nd Cav Regt, 5/7RAR and a good proportion of the rest of 1 Brigade would have to be deployed. Along with helo's (probably Blackhawk and Chinooks) from 5 Avn Regt and specwarries from SASR would have to go to, simply to replace the forces that are already there.

All these forces however would STILL not equal what the Dutch deployed to secure the area in the first place...

If this occurred we'd see John Howard's "resolve" because it'd be the biggest deployment since East Timor and probably the greatest deployment of actual combat power since Vietnam...

 

[Supe]

If this occurred we'd see John Howard's "resolve" because it'd be the biggest deployment since East Timor and probably the greatest deployment of actual combat power since Vietnam...

In light of the attacks on London and Australian support and sympathy, it's possible that Howard will use that to leverage support for upping ADF numbers in Iraq, more than the proposed the few hundred the article mentions. My bro-in-law might end up back in Iraq.

 

[Aussie Digger]

SPECIAL FORCES TO DEPLOY TO AFGHANISTAN
​

A Special Forces Task Group made up of approximately 150 personnel will deploy to Afghanistan for up to one year as part of Australia’s increased commitment to the fight against terrorism.
The Prime Minister made the announcement today following a decision of the National Security Committee of Cabinet.

Defence Minister Robert Hill said the highly trained soldiers will be employed in a variety of roles similar to those performed during 2001 and will work closely with our Coalition partners.

"It is intended that the Special Forces Task Group will deploy into Afghanistan for up to one year in about eight weeks time," Senator Hill said.

"These tasks will be targeted against terrorist groups and their supporters and are likely to include combat patrolling of remote regions as well as reconnaissance and surveillance operations.

"The Special Forces Task Group will be made up of SAS soldiers, Commandos and logistic support elements who will work with American Special Forces."

In addition, the Government has tasked the Australian Defence Force to develop options for deploying a Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT). Any PRT, if sent, would be deployed next year and would support community rebuilding efforts to improve the quality of life of Afghan people.

"Further liaison and detailed planning will now be undertaken with the Afghanistan Government and Coalition partners to help in the development of options," Senator Hill said.

Senator Hill said the United Kingdom, United States and Afghanistan Governments have previously expressed support for any new deployment Australia might be willing to make.

"Australia made a commitment to Afghanistan as part of the international effort to remove the Taliban and give the Afghan people a chance of peace and stability.

"The Taliban was successfully overthrown and good progress has been made in building democracy and the economy and in reducing the level of human rights abuses. But the country remains fragile and it is very important that this progress is consolidated to help the new Afghan Government achieves its goals."

"The wind down of operations in East Timor and the Solomon Islands has also given us the military capacity to make a further contribution to Afghanistan in Australia's national interest."

Obtained from www.defence.gov.au

I KNEW they'd take the cheap option of simply sending specwarries. Watch them bleat in Government in around 12 months when the specwarries all continue leaving the ADF in droves, now that they'll have their "operational deployment" up...

 

[bloodyeddy]

I don't have any problems with this either. Other than the Government's likelyhood of using SASR personnel for what are essentially conventional Infantry tasks, simply because it's cheaper than equipping the infantry properly so that they can conduct these sorts of operations...


If the Government were to deploy a battalion group or similar "supported" by a specwarops contingent I'd be all for it. Deploy only another SASR Squadron and we'll simply see more specwarrie operators quit for more lucrative jobs "now that they've got their operational experience up"...

Couldnt have said it better mate, being a current member of an infantry battallion and we are sick and tired of sitting on the bench while the gov sends specwarries or poges on token deployments, if they want to address the retention problem giving the infantry a fair dinkum deployment would go a long way to solving that problem let alone the tasks that definately are infantry tasks being handed over for a cheaper commitment through spec forces or poges. Its either too dangerous (send spec forces) or we only require niche forces (send poges) and we will keep them as safe as possible. I didnt joint the infantry to be kept safe, we want to do our job, nothing more.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Couldnt have said it better mate, being a current member of an infantry battallion and we are sick and tired of sitting on the bench while the gov sends specwarries or poges on token deployments, if they want to address the retention problem giving the infantry a fair dinkum deployment would go a long way to solving that problem let alone the tasks that definately are infantry tasks being handed over for a cheaper commitment through spec forces or poges. Its either too dangerous (send spec forces) or we only require niche forces (send poges) and we will keep them as safe as possible. I didnt joint the infantry to be kept safe, we want to do our job, nothing more.

The other negative of this is that it creates a division within the services where Regs are seen as "Pandas". The capacity for resentment to build up between Regs and Specwarries is palpable.

 

[bloodyeddy]

Yes, this could be true to a certain extent but i dont see much hostility towards sf blokes at work if any. Its not their decision after all. But the pandas comment is spot on, I will be discharging next year along with an enormous amount of diggers from my battallion which i am positive will not be able to be replaced for some time. I dont know how much i can get away with saying here so will not go on much suffice to say manning shortages will be a big problem soon if not already.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Yes, this could be true to a certain extent but i dont see much hostility towards sf blokes at work if any. Its not their decision after all. But the pandas comment is spot on, I will be discharging next year along with an enormous amount of diggers from my battallion which i am positive will not be able to be replaced for some time. I dont know how much i can get away with saying here so will not go on much suffice to say manning shortages will be a big problem soon if not already.

I just think sending specwarries all the time is daft. If you want to stop recruitment churn, if you want to stop leakage and reduce the flow of "historical knowledge" then there has to be a process where regs are used more often.

the whole lesson of going on these kinds of ops is that it lifts baseline capability across the board.

I'm wondering whether the hold back on recruitment is being done as they ar aware of a mass leakage coming and are seeing it as a temp backfill.

the worry is that overall skillsets will go down. you can't keep on bringing in warrant officers to teach young dogs old dogs skills...

in real terms regs going off would have been far better - its not as if they can't do the job.

this other exercise will just see specwarries, 4C op's and maybe a brace of ADG's go off and keep the knowledge too restricted anyway.

 

[Stryker001]

The ADF send what they can, at present 150 is all we are capable of sending. Its going to be a long war on both fronts, so in time other ADF personnel may well get the chance to practice their craft.

Personally I feel any commitment made in fighting the war on terror is a good thing for Australia and the rest of the world even if they can't understand it or don't appreciate the commitment made by the Australian Government and the ADF.

 

[Aussie Digger]

The ADF send what they can, at present 150 is all we are capable of sending. Its going to be a long war on both fronts, so in time other ADF personnel may well get the chance to practice their craft.

Personally I feel any commitment made in fighting the war on terror is a good thing for Australia and the rest of the world even if they can't understand it or don't appreciate the commitment made by the Australian Government and the ADF.

The Australian Army currently has 5 infantry battalions "sittng around doing nothing". The only infantry we have deployed at present is a single company from 5/7 RAR as part of the Al Muthana taskforce and a roughly platoon strength detachment from 6RAR as part of the Embassy Security detachment in Baghdad. The rest of the infantry battalions are at home not doing any other than normal peace time activities.

The Government has plenty of conventional forces it could send to Afganistan. A complete battalion group would be no problem at all at present and could be rotated every 6 months almost indefinitely. The Government simply doesn't want to pay the cost of a large scale deployment however...

 

[Stryker001]

It would be good to use that capacity in Afghanistan, its something they will have to consider in the future as a natural progression to ADF off-shore operations. We may well need a rapid responce capablility and or the ability to provide a low level "policing action" in 12 to 18 months in regards to PNG, which needs to be considered once the OZ Police go back in around 12 months

Good to see NZ have got people in Afghanistan until sep 2006 at a cost of $NZ 36 million its a small contribution but a good one by the NZ Government and good experience for the NZDF.

 

[Cootamundra]

Yeddy or A-D,
Would you propose a full battalion plus some commando's or SASr? If so which battalion would they send and how long would they stay there for? One would think it would be a great way to sharpen the skills for our regular infantry troops. What else would we need to send with them if they had decided to go with an RAR? Blackhawkes, Bushmasters, Chooks perhaps?

Coota

 

[gf0012-aust]

Coota

Welcome to DT matey. There's a growing band of ANZACs in here...

 

[Cootamundra]

Welcome to DT matey. There's a growing band of ANZACs in here...

Thanks gf. Actually I've been watching for a little while now and I quite like the way the whole place is setup. Also the theads seem to be a little more focused here, not to run down our brethren over at SP

I see A-D is here as well.

Looking forward to building on the knowledge base...cheers

Coota

 

[Supe]

The Government simply doesn't want to pay the cost of a large scale deployment however...

There is a balancing act here. A committment to nation building with the ultimate goal of ensuring AStan is stable thus enhancing regional and ipso facto, Australian security is logical and worthy but I'd hate to see defence procurment programmes get cut because the budget was going towards maintaining heavily deployed forces in Afghanistan or Iraq. The Pentagon has been forced to make those sorts of choices.

The U.S can afford to since they still have plenty of depth in resources and equipment, the ADF can't and doesn't. For far too long, the ADF has been subject to 'she'll be right' attitude and it's reflected in terms of quantity of equipment (limited) and lack of firepower. The point could be made that qualitatively, ADF wasn't equipped for the job and I'm thinking the underarmed ANZAC Frigates here... I don't think that attitude made sense even when DoA was the primary focus of defence planning.

A credible deployment OS is fine. Sacrificing much needed and long required capabilities is not. The balance is finding the medium where the two can co-exist.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Supe, other than operationally necessary procurements such as the Desert patterned "Auscams" and cold weather gear etc, I can't see what acquisitions an Australian Army battalion would need at present to deploy to Afganistan.


Our current range of direct fire support weapons would be sufficient, though any such force would probably be equipped with a greater proportion of MAG-58 GPMG's, 0.50cal HMG's, Carl Gustav's and Javelins (and possibly Mk 19 AGL's) than would normally be used by an Australian Battalion due to the long range fire-fights that could be expected in Afghan, but these would be sourced from other units within the Australian Army as is always done.

I'd suggest a light infantry battalion group mounted in Bushmaster IMV's (there are sufficient vehicles sitting around at the ADI facility to equip a battalion reportedly) and supported by an ASLAV squadron, plus a medium artillery battery from 8/12 Medm Regt and the necessary combat support assets could have been easily enough deployed had the Government so decided.

A specwarrie detachment could also have been deployed, though with as many "boots on the ground" that such a deployment would provide, a reduced specwarrie detachment could have been considered. These would have been provided with their own aviation detachment, comprised of Blackhawks and Chinooks to provide recon and QRF duties. They could also have provided the "light fire teams" that worked so well in Timor.

Welcome Coota, does this answer your earlier question?

 

[Cootamundra]

Welcome Coota, does this answer your earlier question?

It does thanks A-D and thank you for the welcome, you've been missed over on SP.

Coota