Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Unity of Effort...what unity of effort?

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    8

    Default Confusion at the top?

    MikeF provides a quote indicating that Eikenberry resisted McCrystal's clandestine ops efforts due to risk and the possibility of civilian casualties, and JohnT reminds us that SmallWarfare requires unity of civil and military command. I find it incomprehensible that we are still debating the strategy and structure of our efforts in Afghanistan after eight years in-theatre.

    IMHO, the tempo of clandestine ops will need to be increased to better find and fix the Taliban; once we control the location and timing of our contacts, they've lost. Also, such ops would not be riskier than the IED exposure to convoys of troops driving around the country in search and destroy style missions - sure, such efforts look good on the news, but if you really want to drive a wedge between our PRT efforts and the populace you probably couldn't find a better tactic. Versus a broader net of SpecForce eyes on the terrain and populace, the marginal control of towns and roads we currently maintain only serves to canalize our movements, exposing our troops to IEDs and ROE guesswork in built-up areas.
    Last edited by 031-Bacon,RG; 11-12-2009 at 07:42 PM. Reason: Grammar poor and speling bad.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-15-2009, 02:08 AM
  2. Unity of Command in Afghanistan: A Forsaken Principle of War
    By Jedburgh in forum OEF - Afghanistan
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-09-2008, 04:26 AM
  3. Replies: 31
    Last Post: 08-17-2008, 10:31 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •