Marines Engage Al-Qaeda & Taliban Militants

The reason they don't have large bases on the high ground in the mountains is real simple. One, the impossibility of putting a heavy howitzer or alot of equipment in the area. And two the ability to defend an encampment without being overrun or getting sections of the base taken. You can't possibly defend or maintain a complete perimeter on a large force of men on a mountainous peak, parts of the base would be at points isolated. They would be strung out along the range and wouldn't have the effect of concentrated rifle fire. Then you have to think about digging into the mountain top if possible. Just because your on ground doesn't mean the ground under you isn't more boulders and large rocks. You would have a hard scrabble, stretched out command that would be open to attack and their positions known for assault and infiltration.

when you lack the ability to fight, just call in air support hahahaha. those vids are nice. but what i saw in the movies were different, they were heroic like rambo lmao.

reply to post by DaddyBare

---

I am familiar with both weapons you listed and to be honest the OICW was the gun that came into my mind first when thinking of a viable replacement. Although they are hugely expensive weapons aren't they?

The G36 is probably one of the wisest choices though, as you said. I haven't personally used it, but a friend of mine in the UK has used one and has said it is their preferred weapon, followed closely by the Famas.

It reminds me of Vietnam quite a bit. My father was a riflemen, and still swears by the reliability of what he calls 'the SLR' or 'Armalite'. A quick google found me the company, and I'm assuming they used AR-15s?

In contrast, however, he hated the M-16 and complained of jams and defects, which was compounded by the conditions the weapons were being used in.

It seems that the faults in weapons are only ever found after they have been bought in bulk and sent into combat.

Thanks for your insights Although our discussion was slightly off topic, but that's my fault.

Don't blame America....blame the Brits. They were the ones that divided up the lands.

You are correct though. We don't belong there. There is nothing there, although the cynic in me says this is all about the poppy fields.

Excellent thread. People used to say that war would never be the same after the media began televising the Vietnam war. They said the public could not stand to look at it and that future wars would not be fought with such haste. They were wrong. We were shocked and appalled to see it the first time, but we grew desensitized and apathetic to its horrors. We stopped counting the dead and, with regard to Iraq, we stopped carrying about an adequate justification for war.

Money is to be made and political points are to be collected by any politician seen strong on "defense." We will eventually accept the idea of perpetual war and we will sacrifice whole generations to fight in them. Young men and women will die for a cause they do not understand at the command of men who have never in their lives faced conflict before. These men will order their youth to do something they would never be brave enough to do on their own. As long as the war carries no personal risk to those who run them, the war will never end.

There will always be another enemy and it's only a matter of time before our ingenuity leads to the creation of new weapon wielded by a man who has no authority and is responsible to no one but his own conscious. Whether it be a virus or some anti-matter bomb 100 years down the line, rest assured that we will one day choose an enemy that doesn't care about destroying itself, giving it a significant advantage over those who do. When it happens, we will certainly not be prepared. If we dodge this bullet, even if only temporarily, it won't be as a result of the good graces of some divine being. Rather, it will only be due to blind luck.

Some video of soviet troops shooting at hills at an un-seen foe.

YouTube Link

Interesting that the soviet russians , at first, easily moved in.. installing a puppet Afghan leader. They also focused on "training" their puppets troops, which failed.

Russian troops have the exact same complaints about not seeing the enemy, being frustrated with ieds / mines etc. ruskie troops were also fed the EXACT SAME propaganda as to why the war was necessary.

Also interesting is that in 10 years the russians basically adopted vp joe bidens idea of taking on the afghans with special forces, and using General McChrystals overwhelming troop numbers doctrine.. both were epic fails.

Bear Trap-Afghanistan-Soviet War part 1 of 3

YouTube Link

It's only a matter of time before, sadly, us forces face the reality of history: a humiliating defeat awaits them.

And nothing earth shattering will result.. after the soviets left, the afghans didn't follow the russians to moscow or start a massive terrorist campaign NEXT DOOR.

Yet we are supposed to believe if the afghans win, again.. even though they didn't measurably retaliate against their nearby russian neighbors, these very same angry afghans will traverse oceans using, uh... their goat navy, to advance on american shores & use iranian nukes in a blood thirsty hunt for soccer moms and children... while feasting on kittens, puppies, and newborn infants from incubators.

It will be 9/11 times 2356.. and if you don't know how horrible that is, nobody does.

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

reply to post by GovtFlu

---

Interesting Perspective.

I believe the similarities are superficial at best.

Unlike the present situation the Soviets fought an enemy who was largely equipped, supplied and supported by a rival Super power the US. If memory serves me they had also by this same amount of time lost something like over 18000 men. Back then the Pakistanis were helping and supporting the mujaheddin with CIA bucks and provided a safe haven across the border from which they could train, rest and resupply in the winter months for the following spring offensives.

The present situation is vastly different. Now their money and resources appear to be cut off and the Pakistanis are clearing out their hiding spots.

The US losses may seem high to some. In the history of warfare it's surprisingly small considering it took the Soviets almost five times as many troops to accomplish what the Americans have done with far smaller numbers of troops. US causalities haven't reached 1000 yet. Also the Soviets were attacking everybody while the US enjoys the support of the majority of the population and many of the regional Chieftains. The Northern alliance for example. None of whom want the Taliban and their twisted version of Islam to return.



I see quite a contrast between the two.

[edit on 18-10-2009 by Mek-Tech]

Sadly, and I mean sadly, you are exactly right. At the worst possible time for our nation, we are fighting a war that will ruin us. An unholy alliance will follow, which gives up all soverign rights since our country was formed. And I don't see anything that can be done. Many eyes will be opened up, but far too late I expect.

Our prayers and best wishes for our troops, as that support is about all we can do for them at this time. good luck guys.......

Why do you show those close ups of triggers, soldiers shouting, shooting... That's not to inform.
Instead, show the real war, the crying children in hospitals with big and dirty wounds, slowly dying. Show videos of moms and dads mourning in front of fresh graves, show girls and womens shovel dirt and heavy stones after one of thousand air strikes, that devastated their land, their home, their goats. The last things that remained in a country, where it is hard enough to survive without hundreds of rockets blowing the children, mothers to pieces. Show the beggars with open wounds from stray bullets shot by one of thousands of us rifles, show the tears of millions of people, show the statistics that say, that us troops killed over 1 million people in iraq alone. Show the crowded hospitals, the crowded graveyards, show the anger in the faces of professors, doctors, teachers, clergys who only want to live in peace, who work all day to support their loved ones...

No, that you won't show. Instead, you show us soldiers in heavy uniforms, that shout # and # and suck, words you dont want to hear and that you censor on this site. Why do you show that? You say you want to inform, get the info out, educate. But you lie. You know damn well that you lie. You have an agenda. You support the killing of civilians, the heavy war machinery that needs to be fed. You support blood money.

You make me sick. Stop your propaganda, you can't win, fool as many fools as you can get, the rest will win, the peaceful people that promote love and peace. Not your dirty money

reply to post by SLAYER69

---

just cycling through the other related videos on that first youtube vid with the marines coming under attack, and ive just seen a very interesting video titled "fantastic mujhadin action" or something similar to that name.

The afghans/pakistanis are using armour piercing parachute stabilised grenades, with a shaped charge.greande is thrown parachute deploys, greanade then explodes through lightly armoured roof killing occupants and destroyng vehicle.the video is quite an eye opener.

But the main question is, from which nations military industrial complex are they acquiring these advanced and manufactured weapons, i was always under the impression afghanistan had no infrastructure, is it really the pakistanis?

reply to post by Mek-Tech

---

Thank you for your well thought reply.

I would have to say yes for the most part. I dont have a regional map handy but when you look at one the next chance you get. Look at Afghanistan. Notice who is their Western and Eastern neighbors...

Could Iran be in the mix supporting the fighters? Could be, it is well known they have stirred the pot in Iraq and why not Afghanistan in their eastern neighbor?



[edit on 18-10-2009 by SLAYER69]

reply to post by Wachstum

---

Well if it didn't violate the ATS's T & C for showing it maybe I will.
I'll have to look into that first.

Hey! Look! It's one of those recently tamed (60 years ago) Germans telling everyone how war is wrong and such a horrible, horrible thing. Apparently he has forgotten WW2 and the Holocaust. Word to the wise chief, the ONLY reason you have all of these ideas of peace and love and this concept that war is so wrong is that Americans and other countries in Europe stopped YOUR war machine and re-engineered your society to be adverse to such thing. We did the same with the Japanese. Guess it's a good thing we were such "War Mongers" then eh?

reply to post by Wachstum

---

Let me just say these vid's only remind me of total madness that comes with a firefight... There are some few who go into one thinking of honor and glory... they change very quickly....

I will always clearly remember this big corn fed boy from Nebraska. he came upon the body of this little girl, scooped her up into his arms a wept like a baby! We didn't kill her, her own people did. He didn't cry out of anger but the heartfelt sorrow of an innocent life lost.... There was no one else to morn that child, no one but a squad of poor scared #less Marines.... That moment was not what any would call a Photo op... that was deeply personal time and not something made into a tittling vid on YouTube...

No sane man wants to be thrown into that, we do it because we have to. it doesn't mean we're just a bunch of heartless killers!... Take your snide comments elsewhere... I and my brothers in arms know all to well the horrors or war... Come back and talk to us after you've knelt over a Brother, pressed your hands desperately to his wound, praying the blood seeping threw your fingers would stop! Come back after you spend a night listening to the screams of men in the dark... Come back after you know what your talking about.. then will have a real talk...right now you just sound like another spoiled brat sucking on his mothers teat... Semper Fi MF...

Al Qaeda is on the wane.

The recent attack by the Pakistanis on a Taliban incursion and resultant suicide bombing creates and important opportunity.

A military "solution" is doomed to failure. If anyone remembers the movie "Red Dawn," as dumb as that picture was, it points up one important thing; no matter who you are, if you are an armed foreign invader, people think you are the bad guy. Al Qaeda has no support in Afghanistan if the US is not there.

We were attacked "allegedly" by people in countries where we had US troops. The Conservative talking points, are exactly opposite of the reality; we are LESS safe if we occupy countries.

But this is about economics, it has never been about going after tyranny, or 9/11 hijackers, or bringing Democracy. Why do we still debate a reason for being there, when all the previous reasons have been a lie. The Bush administration, was caught in lie after lie, but THIS time -- well, in this case, you see it's Afghanistan. And Bin Laden once operated there even though every bad guy "allegedly" trained in the USA. Did we bomb Florida for those training camps?

For the best explanation of the complex issues in the area, there is no better article I've read than this one; An Open Letter to President Obama

This man's brother was assassinated by the CIA -- and when they were tasked with investigating the murder of a journalist -- they investigated themselves and lost the paperwork (surprise!). Polk has been everywhere the US has been engaged in war.

It worries me that McChrystal -- the guy who covered up the friendly fire incident (Very, very convenient accident that rid the military of a war hero who was going to come out publicly against the war) with Pat Tillman. Cheney's pet assassination goon in the area is NOT going to have a clue how to have peace outside of leaving no one left alive.

We've spent more time "winning" this war with two relatively weak militaries than we took winning and reconstructing after WW II. The Bush policy, alienated any potential allies in the area. Catching Blackwater goons importing Russian Machine guns and selling to the other side in Iraq should tell you-- it was never about winning any war. The torture, the total insult and humiliation of the people was to CREATE an insurgency. What people would support a massacre like Fallujah?

Our withdrawal happened only after we got oil concessions for our client Oil companies. Their nation was just held hostage and allowed to kill itself until BushCo got those deals.

Being on the border with Iran on both sides -- that's likely another strategic value here. But we are in Afghanistan for a gas pipeline to India -- so the US can remove the influence of Russia.

The people who "CARE" so much about Afghanistan's Liberty, were the same people who cared so much about Democracy in Iraq, and then thought we should bomb them all when it didn't magically appear. Our war on Drugs is the same farce, because our government cares about our health -- while Coal plants are allowed to pump mercury into the air. Yeah, that THC is a killer, but having mercury in every river in our country is not a problem.

Bad guys never care about the innocent. How can you tell which side you are on?

My dad was in WW II -- you, however, were not. The people who "re-engineered Germany" were doing it by building trains, schools and bridges and HELPING. The Marshall plan was opposed by Conservatives in the US -- a good thing decent people didn't listen to them then -- and even more reason to not listen to Conservatives now.

This ONE Good war, helps support the lie for all the bad ones. Other than WW II, there has been nothing but continuous occupation and misery in any country we've "helped."

We lost the Vietnam war for all intents and purposes. And guess what? The country eventually modified it's behavior with prosperity. We trade with them now.

>> I think a German has a GREAT perspective on war -- and people like yourself sound like the arrogant fundamentalists that led their country to insanity.

Before the World Wars, Germany was one of the most advanced, decent and Democratic countries. WW I was not a "Good war" and the Germans were left poor and humiliated -- the Conservative way. The same way we left Afghanistan.

People look at the old war movies, and think that everybody knew how bad the Nazis were -- but you know, we were almost as callous about torture and massacres then as we are now -- and there was no video. The US has supported huge massacres in Ethiopia and other countries (we look the other way with Darfur because we owe China). If we had been on the side of Germany, we would have movies to day, that showed how backstabbing all their enemies were, and we would be comfortable with that decision. Before WW II, Hitler was on the cover of Time magazine as "Man of the Year."

The fight against German aggression, was NOT an obvious path for the USA. Conservatives, powerful industrialists, and most of Wall Street were on the side of Germany. It was only through a fluke of fate that the Liberals won the intellectual argument, and managed to put up enough propaganda so that today -- everybody things that we were all united against the Germans. It could not be further from the truth. If Bush's grand pappy, and his club of Robber Barons had not asked General Smedly Butler to lead a team of disgruntled military troops against FDR -- and then told the administration about the plot, then FDR would not have been able to extort them into doing the right thing.

Philosophically, there isn't any difference between the Chicken Hawks extorting us to blast Afghanistan and the people who thought Germany should follow its destiny.

The SLR and the AR-15 are two different rifles. Both were however used by ANZACs during the Vietnam War.


L1A1 Self Loading Rifle - used by almost all Commonwealth nations from the 1950s until the late 1980s/early 1990s

The AR-15 is similar looking to the M16 but it's a different gun. It was widely used in jungle warfare by Commonwealth special forces type units (ex. UK/NZ/Australian SAS).

reply to post by Zenagain

---

People really need to hear from troops who have been in combat -- not crusty old generals who never spent a night in a Fox Hole.

Our Air Force has been taken over by Fundamentalist crusaders, and this group of people is less likely to really understand the impact of war -- they fly by and drop bombs, they don't have to police the neighborhood where some father lost his child to that bomb.

We have a nation brought up on Video Games, and who think that America is the "good guys." When you have a gun, and you are busting down a door in a families house and you are not from their country -- you look like the Bad Guy to them.


We are going to have a flood of troops returning one day -- and many of them, will remember some torn up kid they picked up, and then commit suicide. I think it's very likely, that we will lose more people to suicide then to IED's in Iraq.

The bloodless bastards who see that there is an economic benefit to war, don't every have to get their hands dirty, and don't have the conscience to be bothered by the tragedy. So they will put on they TV, the paper-pusher heros, and the people who flew over an area, and wiped out a group of dots on a screen in the middle of the night. They will put on the crusty old generals who make money on the side with appearances at company trade shows.

We don't hear from the living Pat Tillmans -- we hear from the dead ones, and how we need to honor their sacrifice... honor it how?

The Real reason for the "surge" in violence in Afghanistan LINK to post on ATS

And SLAYER, what do you think about that post and it's link. Can anyone refute any of the allegations in that posted link?

[edit on 18-10-2009 by seataka]