NATO in Afghanistan

[kato]

I believe you included the RDAF log coy in the UNIFIL count? If so, very up to date info you had there.

UN DPKO official figure, updated monthly.

Of further note DK will stand up a mech btn for NRF-10 per 1. Jan 2010.

NRF-14 is on standby from January on. NRF-10 was quite a bit ago.

For Denmark's case; the battalion in Kosova; No wounded , 0 KIA (though one got killed in a traffic incident). The battalion in Helmand; many badly wounded and 30 killed in action and counting.

Germany has different experiences. In Bosnia: 19 dead, in Kosovo: 27, in Afghanistan 37 (without SOF). There's no official statistics for wounded, but estimates usually are somewhere between 1000 and 5000 for Afghanistan so far, depending on degree.

And there is no comparison. Someone has to do the other jobs too, and if e.g. the UK pulls out of these missions, someone else has to step up. If Germany pulled out of the North, who'd do their job? The USA with their completely screwed up PRT structure that supports the US bases first, the population second? Or would Denmark be willing to send their entire division to the Afghanistan?
Because, remember, we're all there voluntarily. And if we want to, we pull out. Unilaterally. See Canada for example.

 

[Grand Danois]

NRF-14 is on standby from January on. NRF-10 was quite a bit ago.

Fixed.

...Or would Denmark be willing to send their entire division to the Afghanistan?
Because, remember, we're all there voluntarily. And if we want to, we pull out. Unilaterally. See Canada for example.

Meh. The Danish Army is supposed to be able to surge a bde for exp deployments for ½ a year. Note the "supposed".

 

[Palnatoke]

Kato

Kosova is low threath (I don't understand your 19 dead in kosova), Bosnia was at times high threath, but is no longer. En passent, I note that DK contributed to both operations with very large force deployments compared to meager size of country.

I am not saying that the actions in Bosnia and Kosova aren't important, they are and on top they are succesfull. But there is a difference, millitarely politically as well as morally, between deploying peacekeepers and peace "inforcers" and then deploying your soldiers to battle in afghanistan. It not only should be, but is well within cabability reach of any European country to simultaniously make sizeable contributions to a high risc operation like ISAF and low risc operations like Kosova. Denmark, one of the smallest and weakest European countries is the undeniable proof of this.

It's fairly easy to throw around numbers, though those numbers make little sense if they are not put into perspective. And the perspective in the case of Germany is one of the world's largest economies backed by 80-90M skilled and hard working germans.
In this perspective Germany is simply not contributing to Afgh. in the same manner and force as UK, US etc. Of the four european countries I mentioned, Germany is by far the one who puts in most, which concludes my initial claim that Europe had 4 large countries that don't share their fair part of the burden.


Ofcourse, it is acceptable, that these four European countries don't contribute, because they don't want to of various reasons, that's their choise and their right. But then these countries also has to accept that other countries allied with them shape their oppinion of them as allies, exactly based on these choises.
.
Personally, I am sadned by the situation, I have high hopes of a Europe cabable of looking after herself and her own interests. But reality is that for small european countries there is no alternative than the US as a provider of security, because it seems unwise to base one's national security on the flickering mood of France, Spain and others.

 

[Feanor]

If you look at the type attacks they are doing it not well planned attack. NATO/US forces are not facing real planned out attack. I'll give you a example like setting traps knowing how to get NATO/US forces to strike at wrong targets set up decoys. Like I said the insurgent have to adjust to the NATO/US forces. They don't have anti-aircraft weapons without this type of help they have to adjust. You have unmanned planes out there insurgents have to adjust to this as well.

But they were never capable of more then that. And at this point they are stronger then ever before (since the US invasion originally began).

 

[justone]

But they were never capable of more then that. And at this point they are stronger then ever before (since the US invasion originally began).

They are not stronger than they were in the beginning. the Special Forces took alot of them down in early part of the war. Then you had other warlord who fighting the taliban before going
against NATO/US. They know what NATO/US can do to them. They are hitting NATO/US forces but look at it from a tactical point they can not build up alot forces without being detected.

 

[Feanor]

iCasualties: Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom Casualties

Notice that casualty spike? I'll give you a hint. It's not because the Taliban are getting weaker.

 

[justone]

iCasualties: Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom Casualties

Notice that casualty spike? I'll give you a hint. It's not because the Taliban are getting weaker. [/QUO

A guerilla force on the run is dangerous I'm not talking about a retreat like a regular army. In a long querilla war you have your up and down thats just the way it is. Just because you have more death don't mean they any stronger .Iraq and Afghanistan is a different war. Desert warfare and mountain warfare are not same.

 

[kato]

The Taliban nowadays operate in company-sized units and bigger again. And not necessarily always unsuccessful. Both in Afghanistan and Pakistan (in Pakistan even more so in fact, in Swat Valley Taliban units up to battalion-size operated successfully).

These larger formations first regularly occured and fought Allied troops in 2006, and have been getting larger and more regular ever since.

 

[Firn]

The Taliban nowadays operate in company-sized units and bigger again. And not necessarily always unsuccessful. Both in Afghanistan and Pakistan (in Pakistan even more so in fact, in Swat Valley Taliban units up to battalion-size operated successfully).

These larger formations first regularly occured and fought Allied troops in 2006, and have been getting larger and more regular ever since.

They seem to increasingly stick by trial and error to a rather well known strategy to Mao

...they must not attempt to crack the nut, they must only gnaw on the surface and the borders. They should rise in the provinces situated at one of the sides of the theatre of war, and in which the assailant does not appear in force, in order to withdraw these provinces entirely from his influence.

Where no enemy is to be found, there is no want of courage to oppose him, and at the example thus given, the mass of the neighboring population gradually takes fire. Thus the fire spreads as it does in heather, and reaching at last that part of the surface of the soil on which the aggressor is based, it seizes his lines of communication and preys upon the vital thread by which his existence is supported.

...

According to our idea of a people's war, it should, like a kind of nebulous vapoury essence, never condense into a solid body; otherwise the enemy sends an adequate force against this core, crushes it, and makes a great many prisoners; their courage sinks; every one thinks the main question is decided, any further effort useless, and the arms fall from the hands of the people.

Still, however, on the other hand, it is necessary that this mist should collect at some points into denser masses, and form threatening clouds from which now and again a formidable flash of lightning may burst forth.

These points are chiefly on the flanks of the enemy's theatre of war, as already observed. There the armament of the people should be organised into greater and more systematic bodies, supported by a small force of regular troops, so as to give it the appearance of a regular force and fit it to venture upon enterprises on a larger scale.

From these points, the irregular character in the organisation of these bodies should diminish in proportion as they are to be employed more in the direction of the rear of the enemy, where he is exposed to their hardest blows. These better organised masses, are for the purpose of falling upon the larger garrisons which the enemy leaves behind him.

Besides, they serve to create a feeling of uneasiness and dread, and increase the moral impression of the whole, without them the total action would be wanting in force, and the situation of the enemy upon the whole would not be made sufficiently uncomfortable.

... well and brutally executed by the ex-librarian, but not written by him. The text is over 150 years old.


Firn

 

[justone]

I agree with uzodinma.

A state authorised islamic ideology, could be effective. The population can then be "schooled" in the proper faith and "dissidents" can be identified, isolated and throughly prosecuted.

Good point I kinda of agreed will that. Must balance moderates and traditionals muslims and this can only be done by respected muslims Imans not foreigners. NATO/US forces must learn more about muslims some muslim are brainwash with old way and will do anything to protect this. Only muslims can deal with this. NATO need to change strategy and really look into what they have to do to finally give Afghanistan real peace.

 

[Waylander]

After the loss of three soldiers last friday it looks like the Bundeswehr is going to deploy a minimum of 5 PzH 2000s to the Kunduz area.
I defenitely welcome that this gives our troops alot of firepower to reach out and touch the insurgents. But I am sceptical of the political will to actually use them. Maybe a mix of PzH2000 and GMLRS would be more usefull.

After the Marder 1A5 IFVs, which saw alot of action in the last months, this is the second type of heavy tracked vehicles that gets send to Afghanistan.

 

[kato]

... although there's of course nothing official about this yet.

 

[Waylander]

Sure and it may well be a misinformation.

But there also had been several rumours and reports floating around before anything official about the Marders was released.
And I expect our Government to do something just for the sake of looking like they react.

As if all any artillery would have made a difference in this incident...

 

[Firn]

As if all any artillery would have made a difference in this incident...

Difficult to say, as the threat of accurate and devastating firepower should have an impact on the overall decisions of the insurgents not just during firefights,

We will see if they finally send some heavy firesupport to Afghanistan. Btwe when were the 120mm mortars send there?


Firn

 

[kato]

Mortars were deployed with the RC N QRF in mid 2008.

 

[Waylander]

@Forn
The insurgents tried to stay within close contact with our troops and used the civilian buildings as cover. They did this in order to prevent air dropped PGMs from being used.

The same tactic works when it comes to artillery support. With own troops in handgrenade range to the enemy inside a village full of civilians nobody is going to call in a fire mission by an artillery platoon.

There will always be situations like this and we will loose more men.

Nevertheless I agree that some PzH 2000s, if used correctly, are going to be a headache for the insurgents in many situations.

 

[Onkel]

@Forn
The insurgents tried to stay within close contact with our troops and used the civilian buildings as cover. They did this in order to prevent air dropped PGMs from being used.

The same tactic works when it comes to artillery support. With own troops in handgrenade range to the enemy inside a village full of civilians nobody is going to call in a fire mission by an artillery platoon.

There will always be situations like this and we will loose more men.

Nevertheless I agree that some PzH 2000s, if used correctly, are going to be a headache for the insurgents in many situations.

Maybe in combination with a modern artillery radar the Pzh could be used to immediatly respond rocket attacs on the BW Camp within seconds. The only thing is that I don´t know if one Cobra radar can cover 360 Degrees.

 

[kato]

Considering we only have 10 COBRA systems, they better not think of sending one to Afghanistan. Cobra detection arc is 45 degrees in either direction of phased array antenna direction btw, so in theory you'd need 4 to cover a single camp.

Besides, the two main camps will be getting the sensor suite of MANTIS next year (the C-RAM systems), which probably effectively can fill the same function.

 

[Waylander]

Another problem is that one needs another verification that there are no civilians in the target area.

A counterfire radar alone only tells you the location of the firing position not if they may have launched the mortar right next to a wedding party.

 

[Onkel]

Considering we only have 10 COBRA systems, they better not think of sending one to Afghanistan. Cobra detection arc is 45 degrees in either direction of phased array antenna direction btw, so in theory you'd need 4 to cover a single camp.

Besides, the two main camps will be getting the sensor suite of MANTIS next year (the C-RAM systems), which probably effectively can fill the same function.

Thx for the information. But Mantis will "only" offer the ability to shoot down the rocket/projectile, but not the ability to detect the place from where the strike was performed, will it? It would be a great advantage to respond the fire within seconds by howitzers or send some guys to take on the agressor.