Summary: Our organization and doctrine plays into the enemy's hands. We can counter this by creating a force patterned after classical eastern forces, while still retaining many of our greatest advantages.

***First of all, let me give a general disclaimer: while in the infantry, I am still only a newly minted 2LT with no prior service, waiting to go to Ranger School. I make no claims to being anything close to an expert. Now that that's out of the way...

It seems to me that, despite the fact that we routinely come out on top of direct engagements, we're playing into the enemy's game so far as kinetic operations are concerned. Simply put, the experienced insurgent's strategy and tactics put him at an inherent advantage to our classically western forces.

The Afghan's follow the general eastern model that's been around for thousands of years. This assumes you're outnumbered, you strike where it's advantageous, operate mostly at the small level, etc. Their TTP's and "unit" organization are geared towards the small unit fight, especially in regards towards the ambush and the defense. Their "unit" organization and training (almost all command power with TL/SL equivalents, doesn't train rigid battle drills, but most successful TTP's), etc. allow them to adapt the fastest when adaptation is key. In a straight fight, they have an immense advantage in maneuverability due to a lighter load.

Our doctrine creates a large, concentrated force (especially with vehicles) that's easy to spot and hit (though admittedly very difficult to destroy), his heavily dependent on supporting fires and thus severely handicapped in fulfilling the light infantryman's job of closing with destroying the enemy. This creates several problems:

*We spend a massive amount of money to achieve relatively little effect, thus giving an already reluctant nation further incentive to back out
*We are more likely to cause civilian casualties
*It is much harder for us to fully pursue/destroy the enemy and hold the rugged terrain in which he operates.

The solution I propose is to create an eastern style kinetic force. Note that this is not SF. It is a bridge, of sorts. The ultimate goal would be a brigade size element that is capable of successfully conducting sustained ground combat operations in the squad/fire team level. While they could indeed engage in local training operations or SF/Ranger style raids, their primary task would be to act as hunter/killers in order to successfully clear and hold terrain.

How To Raise the Force

1) Appoint an officer with a minimum rank of COL as CO. Should have a track record of thinking outside the box and good coordinator/trainer IE he knows how to teach. Primary task is to get necessary support from chain of command.

2) Recruit enough seasoned NCO's and field grade officers to make a platoon or at least a section. Guys from NTC/JRTC would be very useful here since they are already trained to act as the insurgents.

3) Using studies of current and past insurgent TTP's, wargame and refine the force at home, then deploy it for 4-9months to get the kinks out.

4) Return home. The previous members of the platoon now become trainers. Recruit lower level enlisted (PFC-Sergeant) who have either qualified Ranger or have had some combat experience. The rational for not going only for more experienced men is twofold. First, it would be too great a draw on other units. Second, these men are basically going into a new MOS, like 11B to 11C or 11X. They've proven themselves enough to be relied on, but they still need to be sponges to adapt rapidly. People might argue that they're not mature enough, but the insurgents regularly use very young men with basically no combat experience and turn them into experts. Granted, their life expectancy is horrid and they've most likely grown up in harsh 3rd world conditions. This is countered by the recruit's prior training/experience and by the superior training he will receive through the returned senior NCO's and officers. Recruiting should not be difficult. Just say: it's hard, no one's done it before, and you get to wear civies+grow out your hair in the field SF style. Sold, hook, line and sinker.

Tactics

*Basically the same as the insurgents, except they're not going to be terrorizing or really interacting with the populace any more than a normal infantry platoon. That would require more maturity and experience than we can give and is already being filled by other organizations.
*Conducts continuous, small unit actions and patrols in an AO where they can become very familiar with the terrain.
*Is entirely on foot. Avoids the roads and towns.
*Heavy emphasis on marksmanship
*Civilian clothes and haircuts to help blend in from a distance.

Potential Problems & Solutions

*Supply: traditionally such forces have relied upon the populace. This will be solved through the use of caches, distributed from a central FOB or aerially dropped.

*Not Enough Firepower: I disagree. This force will be trained and mobile in feigned and tactical retreat to not be overwhelmed. Also, the insurgents manage to hold their own against us. Why cannot we do better with our training and technology?

*Maturity of Soldiers: Again, I believe that, if the insurgents can do it, so can we. Initially, success will totally hinge upon careful selection. However, as the training process improves and the unit gains more experience, the implementation should become no more difficult than Ranger Bat or SF.

Well, that's a rough summary of the ideas I've got bouncing around. Anyone got anything to add, critiques, etc. I'd love to hear some thoughts on how this could be done better or why it can't be done at all.