Originally Posted by Paul Smyth
- historically, it has been the reverse of dimishing returns that has promoted interdiction as a policy, but that interdiction must be intelligently executed;
- the fact that infiltration can happen somewhere does not preclude our being focused on preventing it in key areas, e.g. the need for timely interdiction is tied to raiding against vulnerable outposts.
Yours
Paul
Some Strategic Thinking Going There
More than Durand Line
the RUSI (Whitehall think tank) held a conference last year on the border issues in the region: http://www.rusi.org/research/studies...4A576275A2777/ and have just published a short report: http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets...sium_FINAL.pdf . This seems the easiest place to drop it.
davidbfpo
Half-baked or lessons learnt?
A curious and open source commentary on the development of surveillance technology: http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.co...ed-scheme.html
The UK website refers to this being a development of the system atop hills along the Irish border, in South Armagh; although I'd speculate that some development has come from the US-Mexico border.
The author suggests that the UK in Helmand considered deployment far from the Durand Line in Helmand.
davidbfpo
Simplistics Durland Line observation
Having been there long ago, traveling from Peshawar to Kabul, and elsewhere along and across the Durland Line, anyone who thinks Pakistan and Afghanistan can ever totally manage that long rugged terrain border is defying the reality of life over there.
No nation, including the US, can manage or seal it's entire borders, ever, just simply impossible to do.
Cold reality of the situation, which will continue to ebb and flow forever.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks