It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thoughts From a Soldier in Training

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Battle in Afghanistan Played out Like Previous



The attack on Combat Outpost Keating in the Kamdesh district of Nuristan province felled eight American soldiers and wounded 24 others before the enemy was finally pushed out of the camp’s perimeter.

The soldiers “were sitting ducks,” said Larry Mace, father of Army Spc. Stephan Mace, who was killed in the Oct. 3 battle.

That attack was eerily similar to another Afghanistan battle 15 months earlier in Wanat, in nearby Kunar province.
VIDEO

Both ground assaults were on remote American outposts. The enemy struck with devastating speed and firepower, each time nearly overwhelming highly trained, battle-hardened defenders. Combined, 17 soldiers were killed, 51 wounded.

How could this happen — twice?


What the hell is happening in Afghanistan that we apparently can't learn from? I was under the impression that the US Army was supposed to be adaptable and able to take the needed adjustments to keep this from happening a second time?

Is this an indicator of things to come? My own platoon sergeant is acknowledging that the Army is weaker than it's been and the Taliban are getting stronger even with the pushes by the Pakistanis and likewise.
I think this indicates some deeper problem within the ranks and the population itself.
Afghanistan could very well become the war that could break the US even more so than Vietnam. We have either ineffective or no leadership I believe at this point.
As I have said to others without leadership then we become undisciplined and unable to fight like we are supposed to.




posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   
It seems very strange that they would set up this outpost the way it was done. Essentially this platoon was a bunch of setting ducks. It makes no sense, except to think that the intention was to make these guys a bunch of sacrificial lambs.

Was there any air support? Didn't these troops have any armored vehicles?

It would seem to me that for any platoon to have any effectiveness, they would have to be located near enough for air support to show up quickly. Were any pursuit troops brought in? I would think that is something like this happens, a battalion or something on that level would have been brought in quickly to pursue the attackers.

The country is less than a thousand miles in diameter, an attack plane traveling at mach two, from the center of the country should be able to get there in less than twenty minutes if located in the center of the country.

How quickly could these enemy forces have gotten away? I would think that with infrared they could have traced these enemy troops back to their sources., then went after them.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   
They know the country and terrain and know how to disappear into it. The US / NATO troops are the foreign occupiers and don't the area, so it stands to reason the Taliban have an advantage. You may have the airpower but that cannot win the battles alone.
There is then also the whole reason for being there in the first place. If the troops are not behind the very reason for being there then they are obviously going to lose morale very quickly. With no clear objectives from the past and present administrations, and the clearly rigged election to keep the US plced leader in power, the troops must be feeling rather let down as far as "bringing freedom and democracy" goes.


They end up just fighting to survive in a hostile environment, achieving nothing of any importance at all. But, the longer this is drawn out, the more the big corporations make off the conflict, and money counts for a lot more than any ideas of freedom, peace and the democratic process. Of course, getting the drug production back up to speed helps too.


At leaat that's one objective the troops can achieve.... protecting the drug crops and export.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by spec_ops_wannabe
Afghanistan could very well become the war that could break the US even more so than Vietnam. We have either ineffective or no leadership I believe at this point.


This is a very good article and holds well with the Vietnam comparison. It seems the weight of responsibility is falling entirely on your President's shoulders. I doubt though, that even if he wanted to, he would be allowed to pull out troops. I wouldn't be in his shoes for all the tea in china right now.

csis.org...



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe
 



Both ground assaults were on remote American outposts. The enemy struck with devastating speed and firepower, each time nearly overwhelming highly trained, battle-hardened defenders. Combined, 17 soldiers were killed, 51 wounded.

How could this happen — twice?


It's war.

The US/West have hundreds of such locations. Not to downplay the loss of life, Quite frankly I'm surprised the amount of attacks such as these are that low. Only two in the past two years?

They state it's an outpost. The Taliban didn't win nor take the position. This war isn't over, it's not winding down like Iraq. So why are people surprised? Outposts are just that Outposts.

A detachment of troops stationed at a distance from a main force to guard against surprise attacks.


Outposts are set at the farthest reaches from the main force and usually situated in prime locations so that if the enemy becomes active in a certain sector they would have to deal with it. The outpost is like a thorn in their side. The Taliban by attacking the outpost has revealed themselves and the outpost has done it's job. Now they know for sure that a sector has become active.

An outpost is like a sentry or tripwire so to speak.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
The Taliban didn't win nor take the position.


Yeah but isn't that the whole point of guerilla warfare?

I was trained to make guerilla warfare, but never to take terrain and hold it - that was for the other guys to do with tanks and the heavy weaponry - we just silently disappeard into the woods after the attacks and ambushes.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe
 


"Thoughts from a soldier in training."........ Here's a thought for you, why is the u.s. military over in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place?

Seems to me that the foreign troops in those sovereign countries ARE the terrorists.....

Are you just going to take orders and blindly kill other beings without a reason why??

Can you say... KARMA...



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe
 

The primary rule of warfare is to always ensure freedom of movement.

You never, EVER put soldiers in stationary positions. A stationary position is a target.

Not only a target, but concentrated target.

These lessons are old as written records, but our dumbass miltary leaders think they know better than time immortal.

We used to move until almost dark, set up two camps, and at dark, retreat to the second.

Our old positions got attacked a couple times, and we were able to turn the surprise on them instead.

What you show, don't do. Do what you don't show.

Where you're supposed to be, never be there. Where expected tomorrow, you are there today.

God, this stuff just infuriates me.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe
 


Been there done that have the souvenir coffee cup tee shirt and matching salt and pepper shakers....

Here's the thing... in any army you have the hard chargers and the doomsayers... the problem is with down time and nothing to do people gossip. worse than a bunch of old biddies at a church socal!

I've been tired cold hungry and frustrated many times.. that goes with the job... are they better?? let me answer it this way... At home where i grew up. I know the surrounding ground so well a platoon would be hard pressed to rout me and my little .22 I bet your the same way... these people are no different...

But they are not professional solders, you are! that's what you've trained for what you chose to become... the real danger is in listening to scuttlebutt and defeatist rumors, go into a fire fight thinking your going to lose and you will fail!
I'm not telling you to go Rambo here. I'm saying you are in the history of warfare the best trained and equipped fighting machine to ever walk the earth!

So who you going to believe? some in the rear with the gear Sgt? if this A-hole is talking like that you need to go tell your top or CO... that's the kind of BS that gets people killed..

PS:
darn right I'm alway "Hoorah"!!!

[edit on 2-11-2009 by DaddyBare]



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by rainfall
 


Hey brainchild, The Taliban and Al Qaida are who we are fighting in Afghanistan, they attacked us first we didn’t attack them. They flew American Planes into American Buildings taking American Lifes. Hell yeah we are going to be there. You "Truthers" don’t have an clear evidence that it was an inside job. You are fringe, now if whether or not the government allowed that attacks to go down is a different story, Bushes Pearl Harbor.


As far as the OP, you are still in Training a mere Private. There are some things that happen that don’t make since, we ground pounders don’t always see the bigger picture just our own small part of the war. Outposts are a norm they’ve been there since Warriors first held spears. Maybe one day you two will be stationed at one. I was never lucky enough to be near the big bases with a PX and hot meals (except in 2006-2007 for a month) You will learn these things as you progress in your training and rank. Dooper and Slayer have pointed out some of the aspects to these outpost.
.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 11:47 AM
link   
hmmmm..shouldn't this be in the Alternative News forum since it from Army Times??? Anyways, a couple of things I noticed..

1). no mention of what unit it was that was taken down. (prolly don't want to mention the unit, dunno)

2). Even though it says Army, Would it be the 'Army' National Guard? If it was, that would be a big factor! (I know I'll get flamed for this, but I feel for the NG's overseas, they should never be there, PERIOD!)

3). No other MSM is reporting this if this s/b 'big' news.. why isn't?

4). The place in the pic on the right in the link to the full article where the chopper that is repelling supplies or taking on supplies, in the pic is very eerily similar to the first episode of the New Stargate series~! That's creepy.

5). With the amount of high tech the army has, I DON'T BELIEVE A SINGLE WORD OF THIS ARTICLE~! UNLESS,

a). The high tech supplies never got to the the outpost as promised because of the harsh terrain, ect; it happens.
b). No high tech every available; but, with HUGE amounts of $$$$ pouring in from the US budget, that TOTALLY seems unlikely~!!
c). Were forced to defend an outpost without any regard to investigating the complaints of the soldiers about not having enough supplies to do a solid job!!

6). Bad Intel or none at all.
7). They had no escape route.


Here's what I don't quite under stand, and it's been a few years since I've been in, but I'm sure the full timers can shed a little more light...

Ok, first off .. Yes I would like to know what this could happen since they state in their own words....-->The enemy struck with devastating speed and firepower, each time nearly overwhelming highly trained, battle-hardened defenders. Combined, 17 soldiers were killed, 51 wounded.

To me this would mean:
~There's ALWAYS a visual/audio lookout, good enough to see or hear what/who is coming; 24/7
~Having enough ammo/supplies/soldiers to defend it for a good while until the CO calls in for more support if the fight looks like it's starting to get worse.
~To me, battle-harded Defenders is quite a statement to me which puts in my mind soldiers that have been on the front lines for no less that a year, but more like 2 years and in constant fighting. So we're NOT talking about fresh recruits who also practice in FPS games to hone their skills!
~Regardless of the terrain, they can get the job done, given the proper equipment/support; and have proven it so time and time again.

YEA...I'd REALLY like to know exactally how this happened cuz' someones head is on a platter or F***** s/b; 68 soldiers.. ~!!!! Which is little more than 1/2 of a company (appox 8 soldiers to a squad w/4 squads minimum)~! And I'm totally assuming that this was a minimum size Company of appox 130 Battle hardened soldiers!!!

In my mind, with battle harded soldiers, it would take a force of 3x that much to do that amount of damage.

To me, the numbers just don't add up .. and it's a ploy' of the MIC making a pitch for more $$$....



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe
 


Seems to be a lot of gaps in the story and I'm sure we will never know the whole story.

My first concern is where were the sentry or guards who were responsible for observing the perimeter? It just strikes me as odd that all of this happened unexpectedly.

I have to question whether complacency had set in within the unit.

Don't know how true this is. But this is a good example of complacency.


The morning began with the siren signaling incoming. I ignored it. I hate putting on my gear and besides the big boy voice had dutifully reminded me that I should remain in hard shelter. I didn’t argue by deed or word. In the meantime the 155’s began to blaze away in support of some action that did not affect me. Later I was called out of my room to help in the aid station. Two of the COB (combat operations base ) were in the midst of a full on assault by the Taliban.


armyhousehold6.com...

How the hell do you ignore a siren during a war?

Next, I have to congratulate these troops for standing their ground. From what I can gather there were about 60 troops at this post going against 300 insurgents. Pretty big odds to overcome, but they did it.



Outposts are and always will be prone to an all out attack. It is up to the unit to take their duties seriously and ensure that everybody is alert and paying attention to detail 24/7.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by spec_ops_wannabe
Battle in Afghanistan Played out Like Previous



The attack on Combat Outpost Keating in the Kamdesh district of Nuristan province felled eight American soldiers and wounded 24 others before the enemy was finally pushed out of the camp’s perimeter.

The soldiers “were sitting ducks,” said Larry Mace, father of Army Spc. Stephan Mace, who was killed in the Oct. 3 battle.

That attack was eerily similar to another Afghanistan battle 15 months earlier in Wanat, in nearby Kunar province.
VIDEO

Both ground assaults were on remote American outposts. The enemy struck with devastating speed and firepower, each time nearly overwhelming highly trained, battle-hardened defenders. Combined, 17 soldiers were killed, 51 wounded.

How could this happen — twice?


What the hell is happening in Afghanistan that we apparently can't learn from? I was under the impression that the US Army was supposed to be adaptable and able to take the needed adjustments to keep this from happening a second time?

Is this an indicator of things to come? My own platoon sergeant is acknowledging that the Army is weaker than it's been and the Taliban are getting stronger even with the pushes by the Pakistanis and likewise.
I think this indicates some deeper problem within the ranks and the population itself.
Afghanistan could very well become the war that could break the US even more so than Vietnam. We have either ineffective or no leadership I believe at this point.
As I have said to others without leadership then we become undisciplined and unable to fight like we are supposed to.















I just LOVE your SN


Anyway ,Considering you are IN TRAINING and surrounded by some of the smarted Men around ,I am shocked it hasn't been explained to you .
Seeing as how your SN in wanna be then I assume you haven't really got that far yet



Go read a book Wrote by Doug Stanton HORSE SOLDIERS
Unless the US goes back to fight like that then its really pointless ... Why send the best at this point when they aren't able to really fight the fight .
Its not black and white ...



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by rainfall
 


Hey brainchild, The Taliban and Al Qaida are who we are fighting in Afghanistan, they attacked us first we didn’t attack them. They flew American Planes into American Buildings taking American Lifes.


That's funny!!


Hey brainchild warrior, if you still really think that Iraq and Afghanistan had something to do with the attacks on 9-11...all I can say is keep drinking your Budweiser's and watching the NFL on your big screen.....there is NO hope for you....

Hopefully one day the Neanderthals will evolve to use their own brain...


Until then....happy hunting



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 



Jam, I myselfed Ignored incoming Sirens, when they were just mortars, when your being mortared not much to do but sit tight and hope you dont get a direct hit, unless I heard the sound of gun fire, did I spring into action, that always meant an assualt was occuring on the base did I move my troops into combat. Mortars are a daily occurance on any american forward base. Gunfire is not.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by rainfall
 



The same could be said about you, Not everything is a conspiracy,

The funny thing is people talk. Even more so in Spec Ops fields, The men would have let in trickle down into the ranks that the government had a hand in it. We are smart enough to know that if the Government could do this it its people they will surely do the same to its warriors. The Military has its hands everywhere from the CIA to the Whitehouse, even in foreign militaries. We know or hear about what goes on, Also its important for you to remember that the Spec Ops people are recruited into the CIA, they maintain that grapevine with the Military, Information trickles. If the government did do 9-11 planned it and such, then the whole Spec Ops family would have known.

Now the word is that the government knew and did nothing, hence "Bushes Pearl Harbor".



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by rainfall
 


Now the word is that the government knew and did nothing, hence "Bushes Pearl Harbor".


So, when did this little tidbit 'trickle' down into the ranks??
How long did you suspect this was, 'bush's pearl harbor??

And IF this is so...(Bush allowing it to happen) wouldn't that mean that the Bush administration, including the military are responsible for the deaths of 3,000 americans?

So you quietly stand by and take orders to kill people in other Countries when you should be going after the administration that 'allowed' this to happen...how does this make sense to you??

When will you big tough warriors learn that you are noting more than cannon fodder to the people who are pulling the strings from behind the government...

If your commander is ordered to sacrifice some of his own men to a 'false flag' to escalate the war, do you think he will disobey orders?? If you answered yes you have a lot of growing up to do...

The soldiers being killed and maimed over there get NO sympathy from me.

Have a great day.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chevalerous

Originally posted by SLAYER69
The Taliban didn't win nor take the position.


Yeah but isn't that the whole point of guerilla warfare?

I was trained to make guerilla warfare, but never to take terrain and hold it - that was for the other guys to do with tanks and the heavy weaponry - we just silently disappeard into the woods after the attacks and ambushes.


FINALLY! Something I can agree with you on. Guerrillas don't take or hold areas in the classical sense. They make it uncomfortable for the OTHER guys to hold that terrain. If they can make it uncomfortable enough, they gain control of it by default, not by occupying it.

Guerrillas understand that holding terrain just makes one stationary, and places a huge crosshair on him. Remaining under the crosshairs is not on the guerrilla agenda.

The Soviets made the same mistake in Afghanistan. They got stationary, buttoned up and pinned down, and a number of their outposts eventually suffered for that.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by rainfall
reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe
 


"Thoughts from a soldier in training."........ Here's a thought for you, why is the u.s. military over in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place?


They're there to kill the enemy. A pretty simple concept, really, and the only reason for war in the first place.



Seems to me that the foreign troops in those sovereign countries ARE the terrorists.....


That's what we call "compromised objectivity".



Are you just going to take orders and blindly kill other beings without a reason why??


Nope. I never blindly kill anything. I keep both eyes open. How else am I supposed to see my sights or target?



Can you say... KARMA...



Can you say "unfocused perspective"?



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by rainfall

The soldiers being killed and maimed over there get NO sympathy from me.



To paraphrase your own question, can YOU say "karma"?


One glorious day, I have no doubt that you will find nothing standing between yourself and "the bad men" but one of these soldiers you so delight in denigrating. When that day comes, I hope he looks you dead in the eye, tells you to "grow a pair", and then steps out for coffee to let you handle the situation.




top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join