Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
Albeit we are moving away from the original theme onto the impact of terrain and in particular cover for insurgents.

I recall a clip on the BBC or C4 about fighting in Sangin, where the emphasis was on the local passion for building walls around patches of land, hundreds of metres long and about 12' high. The UK Army were using demolition charges and an adapted bulldozer to reduce lengths of them. Mention was made of snipers using "murder holes".

Earlier a post referred to the bocage of Normandy. From this "armchair" it appeared then, possibly a year ago, that the local tactical solution was very limited - as UK capabilities / resources were - and simply telling the Afghans to stop building walls - by the Afghan government - was not used.
Not off topic at all.

Horizontal vision is most always more difficult than the vertical except when there is total tree cover. So it is all about that basic of basics "selecting lines of advance".

We had three rules on fireforce,

1. Don't sweep (approach the objective) uphill.
2. Don't sweep (approach the objective) into the sun.
3. Don't sweep (approach the objective) across open ground.
The Afgan walls issue is very difficult for dismounted infantry... but a cinch for a helicopter and probably a UAV preferably armed.

And you are correct, over time, certainly in Sangin, the combat engineers should have systematically dealt with the death trap defiles foot patrols were sucked into.