The Kill Company

[IntelTrooper]

I said it is not a COIN operation for the simple reasons that: (1) the US is not the government with an Insurgent problem; It may be a COIN effort for the Government of Afghanistan, it is not for the US. That, as they say, is doctrine. We are engaged in FID LINK and SFA LINK (both links .pdf) (2) there are other armed and hostile players aside from the insurgents that are admittedly present thus while there may be insurgents, there are other -- and larger -- problems. If that were not true, we would likely not be there in the first place... (3) Facets of conventional and irregular warfare aside from COIN like efforts are imperative or the coalition casualty rate will climb rapidly.

More important is what's being done to bring it to a reasonably acceptable conclusion. You're doing your part, for which I thank you.

I put these two portions together because I think they are closely linked. The fact that we are engaged in SFA and FID should determine our way forward more than focusing on a COIN strategy, per se. Points number 2 and 3 should be heavily considered (and I believe they will be) with the "reasonably acceptable conclusion" always in mind.

In my experience with the Afghan government, honestly, there were times that I found myself empathizing with the Taliban. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is one of the major roadblocks to establishing lasting security and governance in Afghanistan.

As Shmedlap and others have pointed out, we have two competing insurgencies struggling for control. One of them is savvy, plays on the emotions and sympathies of the masses, has an effective IO campaign, and an extensive support network. The other is clumsy, dishonest, elitist, and insenstive with an ideology that resonates with few people. I'll let you figure out which is which.

[Ken White]

...I found myself empathizing with the Taliban. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is one of the major roadblocks to establishing lasting security and governance in Afghanistan.

"As it was in the beginning, is now ..."

As Shmedlap and others have pointed out, we have two competing insurgencies struggling for control. One of them is savvy, plays on the emotions and sympathies of the masses, has an effective IO campaign, and an extensive support network. The other is clumsy, dishonest, elitist, and insenstive with an ideology that resonates with few people...

We, the US, do have a knack for getting into similar situations again and again. We seem to have done that about once a generation since 1898. One would think there'd be a message in that but apparently not.

In any event, I expect little real change in Afghanistan; our opponents are more patient than we are while temporary and expedient deal making there has been the way to go for 3,000 years. We'll do what we can and it will be better than it was when we arrived...

[IntelTrooper]

"As it was in the beginning, is now ..."
We'll do what we can and it will be better than it was when we arrived...

Indeed. The Soviets provided the airfields for us this round, and the next foreign power to get involved will have some ready-made operating bases and better roads...

[Ken White]

Left 16 big airfields in Viet Nam.

[jmm99]

to JP 3-07.1, Joint Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for Foreign Internal Defense (p.31 pdf):

(3) In all cases, the strategic initiative and responsibility lie with the HN. To preserve its legitimacy and ensure a lasting solution to the problem, the host government must bear this responsibility. A decision for US forces to take the strategic initiative amounts to a transition to war.

From the standpoint of military logic (not looking at the legal aspects), who has taken the strategic initiative (US or Karzai govt) ?

[Ken White]

Seriously, US forces assisted in the toppling of the previous imposed Afghan government and in the establishment of a new, democratically elected government. That was a strategic effort which was completed. That was followed by an operational effort to assist the newly formed government using FID authority under a Congressional Resolution and with continued support by Congress at that level. That supported Afghan government is in no position to launch a strategic initiative at this time so they are unlikely to attack Pakistan. Nor are we likely to do so as it isn't in our interest.

Thus it seems to me that the answer to your question is that no one has taken the strategic initiative; the 'D' in FID is Defense and that is what's occurring. You should be concerned with the legal aspects because that is the intent of the paragraph you quote.

On a practical rather than a legal level, people are making things go 'boom' and people are being killed -- that makes it a war, as I said earlier, a war with COIN like efforts included:

war (wôr)
n.
1.
a. A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties...

A for real war in dictionary and practical terms if not one in US legal terms.

You and others may call it a COIN operation if you wish, you may call it FID if you wish. You may call it frangipani if you wish. You may also play with 50 USC 33 if you wish, I'm not going to do that and I'll call it a war because of the killing and dying. Besides, Joe will want to tell his Grandchildren he was in a war...

[Schmedlap]

Perceptions of "what is a war?" are weird.

I once had a law student tell me that the invasion of Iraq was not a war. This left me scratching my head. I then asked him a few questions, such as, "so the US military fighting against the Iraqi military is not a war?" Finally, he explained that it was not a declared war. Once that was established, I had to ask what significance that had to the original topic that we were discussing. He couldn't think of one. Neither could I. But it was weird that he would suddenly rise up on this point that was so insignificant within the context of the discussion. It is not an uncommon reaction - I've seen and heard it several times in other situations. I've never understood why people insist upon declaring open hostilities involving military forces to not be wars.