Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
We initially conducted an aggressive offense, and many AQ and Taliban were foolish enough to stand to fight a largely conventional fight against superior U.S. forces. However, once they retreated across the border into Pakistan we both implemented largely defensive strategies.
This brings up a question I've had in mind for a while. I'm not in any an expert on military affairs, but I'd appreciate an opinion from those who are.

We've heard a lot about the clear-hold-build sequence. It seems to me that in the "clear" phase, we clearly have initiative on our side. We decide where we will clear, and when. Because we are initiating, we can prepare our logistics and support and employ our full range of options in that space. Because the enemy doesn't know where we will move next, they're forced into a responsive position.

It seems to me that once we transition to "hold", that's reversed. Unless the enemy has been completely eliminated (in which case there's no problem), they can move quietly back into areas once cleared. They can choose where and when they will challenge our hold. They can watch us and look for weaknesses in our routine. We have to distribute assets and resources across the entire area being held, and because we don't know where our hold will be challenged, we have to be prepared to support forces anywhere in the held area. Now they have the initiative.

So the question: how do you transition from "clear" to "hold" without surrendering the operational initiative to the other side?

Apologies if the question is simplistic; as I said it's not my field of expertise.