Let's hope the JSAT's get it right...
I would hope that GEN Patraeus doesn't take the Iraq model and expect it to fit nicely over the Afghanistan problem. My fear is a 'cookie cutter' approach will be used for a very unique problem that is Afghanistan. In speaking with Commander's on the ground in Afghanistan, they too hope the powers above them take a good look at Afghanistan and not simply take the Iraq strategy and template it over OEF. We will see...
My only contribution to this is the fact that I used to teach soldiers how to use translators, and what was shown broke every rule in the book, then tore up the book, and denied a book ever existed.
Off the top of my head and thinking back 15 years...
a.) The translators needs to be trained, and exercised, like any other military skill. It is not a "pick up game." Translators should not talk, unless they are saying something you said. They should never initiate a conversation.
b.) Only one soldier speaks. The translator stands behind the soldier who is speaking.
c.) The soldier controls the pace of the conversation.- politely, but forcefully. Learn to say, " Excuse me. I don't understand," to cut short rambling and allow the translator to catch up.
d.) The exchange should be kept as simple and short as possible.
e.) The soldier should make extensive use of "check words" - or have another soldier do the same thing.
...remove dark glasses!!! - and helmets if possible.
...don't take my word for any of this. Check this against your CoC.
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
A lot of that depends on the terps. If the terps are locals then they will have a better understanding of the local culture than I will. It may be better give them a certain amount of leeway. I have had some awesome terps who understood what it was we were after in a given exchange and they could get us there a lot better then simple mechanical translation. I have also had some that were only good for simple mechanical translation (and maybe not even that). As for controling the pace of the conversation, well that depends on who you are talking to. Arabs as a rule seem to be given to rambling. If it is just some random guy I may try to cut him short and keep him on point but if I am talking to a sheik or anyone else who thinks that he is important then it is often better to let him go rather than to offend him.Originally Posted by William F. Owen
That depends entirely on what the exchange is about.d.) The exchange should be kept as simple and short as possible.
SFC W
As I said, the items I outlined were not teaching points. Merely an illustration that the poor Soldier/officer concerned, had clearly been given no guidance as to the correct use of a translator. - previously I assumed all deployed US officers had been given some training.
The guidelines we used were strictly for gathering info at the tactical level, EG: "Seen any Serb Fighters here?" - and assumed a pretty low level of Interpreter skill, so completely inappropriate for meetings of negotiations.
Yep. Context, context and context.That depends entirely on what the exchange is about.
SFC W
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
Just watched it - devastating.
Notwithstanding the translator issues, the fundamental fact that the SFC couldn't empathize with the elder's security delimma worried me. He should know by now and at his rank that the locals often can't cooperate if they are not protected from retaliation. His 'shoot 'em in the face' answer was unrealistic. In that case, the old guy's clan would all be shot in the face.
Ugh... Devastating is kind
The exchange was certainly lacking regardless of adherence to any particular TTP. Just putting yourself in the Afghan's shoes is chilling...
Pragmatic... As for cookie cutter solutions/strategy, I know the proof is in the pudding... However, I have had the opportunity to plan for P4 in two different capacities... Intellectually lazy (my term, but a fair description of those who utilize cookie cutter solutions) is not a term I'd apply to the man or, as importantly, the people with whom he surrounds himself. If anything, I'd characterize P4 as an enormously nuanced thinker, who sometimes lacks patience with those not keeping up intellectually (classic Myers-Briggs NT).
I can say this with great confidence... He will arrive at his decision and implement it with absolute conviction that it is the right approach regardless of the barbs of pundits and wannabes.
Again, I understand time will tell as to whether he/we get it right (or just not wrong), but it will not be intellectually lazy and uninspired.
Live well and row
Hacksaw
Say hello to my 2 x 4
Let's hear it for all the NT's!
(ENTP) Full of enthusiasm good ideas, but follow through is often lacking. You know that though.
Posting Permissions
"A Sherman can give you a very nice... edge."- Oddball,
Bookmarks