reply to post by Zenagain
Your analysis is spot on and I am going to have hard time contributing to it. So why bother, but here goes? I think flooding the country with troops
is the worst alternative, because the Afghans are already uneasy with the contingent we have there at present. If more troops are sent, it will only
invigorate the Afghans even further to join the Taliban and other tribal groups, because they will see it as an occupation. This is the same concept
used by the Soviets and we all know how that went. Please don't pounce, but here me out on this next idea. Personally, I reviewed the "Rumsfeld
Doctrine," and a fast moving nimble force is what is needed. Here is what the doctrine entails.
It seeks to increase force readiness and decrease the amount of supply required to maintain forces, by reducing the number in a theater. This is done
mainly by using LAVs (Light Armoured Vehicles) to scout for enemies who are then destroyed via airstrikes. The basic tenets of this military strategy
are:
* High-technology combat systems;
* Reliance on air forces;
* Small, nimble ground forces.
Afghanistan and the Iraq wars are considered the two closest implementations of this doctrine.
en.wikipedia.org...
This type of force would work wonders with regard to the Afghan's uneasiness with high troop levels as history shows, and an ample solution in
tackling the forbidding terrain that a conventional force could get bogged down in. Now this solution is out of place in Iraq because of the many
areas of real estate that needed to be policed, but given Afghanistan rural nature it would be a decent option. Just my two cents.
Echoing, what you mentioned, the US must win the hearts and minds of the Afghans, improve infrastructure and agriculture, equip and train an
Afghanistan first type army instead of their individual tribal loyalties, go into all the tribal areas were the US and Nato are welcome and foster
relations with the chiefs through public works, medicine, and overtures of protection from hostile tribes or the Taliban. The key to Afghanistan is
through the people, and not by superiority on the battlefield.
The US and its allies have to get a handle on the tribal demographic which makes up Afghanistan. They have to find a way to effectively communicate
and politic in that by-gone arena. It boils down to gaining trust and right now I think the US/Nato are failing on that front.
[edit on 18-10-2009 by Jakes51]