Australian troops to replace US forces in Oruzgan

Australian troops to replace US forces in Oruzgan

m.smh.com.au

Australia will replace the United States in leading the transition in Afghanistan's Oruzgan province during the next 12 to 18 months.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith said the national security committee of cabinet had approved the move this week, which will put Australia in the driver's seat as troops are withdrawn from Afghanistan by 2014.

"Australia is taking on the leadership now ... it puts us in a better position to manage the transition process," Mr Smith said.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.abc.net.au
www.dailytelegraph.co m.au

I knew it. I knew the US would use Australia as a scapegoat so they could pull out safely. I can picture it in my head:

"Hey, Australia, you're going to take a leadership role in parts of Afghanistan so we can pull out - you can manage it all"

"What, ah, screw it. Have it your way, as always."

______________________________________________

What strikes me the most is, the US has 90,000 troops over there, yet Australia gets given the leadership role in the pull out phase. We only have around 1550 soldiers over there. Somehow, we are expected to maintain a direct leadership role in numerous provinces while the US pulls out - absurd. We could at least have conducted a shared leadership role with Britain or France...

Furthermore, it is well known that the Taliban may conduct extreme terrorist attacks while the coalition is pulling out, yet we are left to hold the # bag...

This is not the first time Australia has been screwed over!

m.smh.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by daaskapital


What do you expect? None of our politicians bar Bob Katter have a backbone and hes barking mad anyways. We're just the US's doormat as far as I'm concerned.

That's a perfect bully scenario!

Make all the mess and then get someone else to do the clean up job and if things go wrong then you have someone else to blame.

My question is, when they leave in 2013/14 (so they say), where are they going to be deployed next?

Originally posted by BigBruddah
reply to post by daaskapital

 

We're just the US's doormat as far as I'm concerned.

We have been since WW2...

I confess i do not know enough about this particular province in Afghanistan - is it one of quieter ones? Contrary to what the MSM would have us believe, it isn't dangerous everywhere in Afghanistan. If this is one of the quieter regions then it possible 1550 men would be sufficient to manage order and take the leadership role.

Different nations have taken different leadership roles in differing sectors so it is possible (and plausible) that is simply in line with that practice and nothing to be overly worried about.

Obviously though, it is also possible you are being screwed over!

About time you lot stopped being REMF's and did some graft you lazy feckers!

Only kidding..

I know they will do a great job..

I hope they all come home safe..

Canada has been wiping up behind them for long enough........time for you aussies to step up to the plate.
You obviously havent had enough travellers on the highway of heroes yet.....that will change quick enough......
What is your goverment thinking?

Originally posted by stirling
Canada has been wiping up behind them for long enough........time for you aussies to step up to the plate.

Australia has always been wiping up behind the USA...

You obviously havent had enough travellers on the highway of heroes yet.....that will change quick enough......
What is your goverment thinking?

Our Government has always put the interests of the US and the "elite" in front of the public's and service men's needs.

Originally posted by Flavian
I confess i do not know enough about this particular province in Afghanistan - is it one of quieter ones? Contrary to what the MSM would have us believe, it isn't dangerous everywhere in Afghanistan. If this is one of the quieter regions then it possible 1550 men would be sufficient to manage order and take the leadership role.

Different nations have taken different leadership roles in differing sectors so it is possible (and plausible) that is simply in line with that practice and nothing to be overly worried about.

Obviously though, it is also possible you are being screwed over!

Australia is not only in control of this province, but others also. Having control of more than 1 province is not feasible for a country which only has 1550 soldiers serving. Why can't the US cover their own arses while they pull out? After all, they have 90,000 soldiers compared to 1550 soldiers. The news seems to suggest that Australia is in complete control of the province so the US can cut back their deployment and pull out troops...

Also, we have been screwed over in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me one bit if it were the case here.

Great. Now we have a bunch of kangaroo chucking crazies taking over. Are all Aussies so anti US? I'm getting the impression everyone in the land down under (under what would violate those annoying Terms and Conditions) blame the wretchedness of their 'country' on everyone but themselves.

Originally posted by Domo1
Great. Now we have a bunch of kangaroo chucking crazies taking over. Are all Aussies so anti US? I'm getting the impression everyone in the land down under (under what would violate those annoying Terms and Conditions) blame the wretchedness of their 'country' on everyone but themselves.

Um, what?

I am not anti-US. That is one term i dislike on ATS, mostly because it is a word that most of the Americans on the boards use when they don't have anything to say, or have just been intellectually displaced by a non-American.

How is Australia wretched?

How am i, and other Australians on ATS anti-American?

This thread is merely pointing out that Australia should not be covering the USA's arse while they pull out (of Oruzgan, and indeed Afghanistan). As i said, why is a country, with a force of 90,000 strong, making Australia, with a force of 1550 strong take up a leadership role to oversee the whole pull out scenario? Either because Australia is an excellent choice to take up the role, or the USA is scared #less to do it themselves...

reply to post by daaskapital


We all know Aussies like sloppy seconds. Australia is keen on being seen in the World, not just when their loony left wing nutcases pass an absurd ridiculous law, but also their military prowess.. don't blame us for what you want.

The United States is not pulling out of the Province , They are giving command and control to the Australians who have the most troops in the province. Also in this province are Slovakian and Singaporean troops. Pretty much most of the Australian force is located in this province so it makes sense for them to be in charge of it. This province was previously managed by the Dutch and then the Americans after the Dutch left.

Originally posted by DarkStormCrow
The United States is not pulling out of the Province , They are giving command and control to the Australians who have the most troops in the province. Also in this province are Slovakian and Singaporean troops. Pretty much most of the Australian force is located in this province so it makes sense for them to be in charge of it. This province was previously managed by the Dutch and then the Americans after the Dutch left.

The articles state that the US will "not significantly cut it's commitment to the province."

This quote says to me that the US is cutting down on their commitments to the province, just not "significantly."

Originally posted by Domo1
Great. Now we have a bunch of kangaroo chucking crazies taking over. Are all Aussies so anti US? I'm getting the impression everyone in the land down under (under what would violate those annoying Terms and Conditions) blame the wretchedness of their 'country' on everyone but themselves.

Its ok , I can feel your frustration of your countrys constant defeats, but hey its allright the ANZACS are here to take care of things. no more pissing on dead body's or torturing or massacring civillians. we'll do things right now, professional, the way they are suppose to be done.
So degrade Australians and Australian servicemen away all you like Domo1 truth is we will complete this task and clean this cluster# of a mess up your government created while your guys walk away.

Originally posted by daaskapital


I knew it. I knew the US would use Australia as a scapegoat so they could pull out safely. I can picture it in my head:

"Hey, Australia, you're going to take a leadership role in parts of Afghanistan so we can pull out - you can manage it all"

"What, ah, screw it. Have it your way, as always."

______________________________________________

What strikes me the most is, the US has 90,000 troops over there, yet Australia gets given the leadership role in the pull out phase. We only have around 1550 soldiers over there. Somehow, we are expected to maintain a direct leadership role in numerous provinces while the US pulls out - absurd. We could at least have conducted a shared leadership role with Britain or France...

Furthermore, it is well known that the Taliban may conduct extreme terrorist attacks while the coalition is pulling out, yet we are left to hold the # bag...

This is not the first time Australia has been screwed over!

m.smh.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

Daaskapital you and I normally agree on most things, but this time I don't see what the problem is? Most of Australias 1550 soldiers are deployed in Oruzgan province, when the Dutch withdrew a few years ago (I think in 2007?) the US asked Australia to take the leadership role for that province but because there was an election in Australia at the time and they didn't want more Australian casualties they refused.
Now as the war is winding down, America is again having to ask Australia to take leadership in Oruzgan Province and this time they have accepted. I think its better to have a larger role that way when history books are written about the war Australia will be remembered for playing a critical part.

Yes it means they will remove the Command Element since it will no longer be needed with Australians in charge.
Which mean about 20-30 American staff folks will leave, the combat forces will stay. this change allows the Australians to manage their withdrawal from the province, with the Americans taking over again when the Australians leave.

Originally posted by CrimsonKapital

Originally posted by daaskapital


I knew it. I knew the US would use Australia as a scapegoat so they could pull out safely. I can picture it in my head:

"Hey, Australia, you're going to take a leadership role in parts of Afghanistan so we can pull out - you can manage it all"

"What, ah, screw it. Have it your way, as always."

______________________________________________

What strikes me the most is, the US has 90,000 troops over there, yet Australia gets given the leadership role in the pull out phase. We only have around 1550 soldiers over there. Somehow, we are expected to maintain a direct leadership role in numerous provinces while the US pulls out - absurd. We could at least have conducted a shared leadership role with Britain or France...

Furthermore, it is well known that the Taliban may conduct extreme terrorist attacks while the coalition is pulling out, yet we are left to hold the # bag...

This is not the first time Australia has been screwed over!

m.smh.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

Daaskapital you and I normally agree on most things, but this time I don't see what the problem is? Most of Australias 1550 soldiers are deployed in Oruzgan province, when the Dutch withdrew a few years ago (I think in 2007?) the US asked Australia to take the leadership role for that province but because there was an election in Australia at the time and they didn't want more Australian casualties they refused.
Now as the war is winding down, America is again having to ask Australia to take leadership in Oruzgan Province and this time they have accepted. I think its better to have a larger role that way when history books are written about the war Australia will be remembered for playing a critical part.

Yeah, i agree there, but it isn't my point. The US is decreasing their commitment to the province while Australia may have to send more troops there to support ourselves. Taking up the leadership has put our soldiers in further danger of attacks.

It doesn't matter whether we have a large role or not in the war, we will be marginalised, and at times silenced in the history books, just as we were in WW2 and Vietnam...

Originally posted by Flavian
I confess i do not know enough about this particular province in Afghanistan - is it one of quieter ones? Contrary to what the MSM would have us believe, it isn't dangerous everywhere in Afghanistan. If this is one of the quieter regions then it possible 1550 men would be sufficient to manage order and take the leadership role.

Different nations have taken different leadership roles in differing sectors so it is possible (and plausible) that is simply in line with that practice and nothing to be overly worried about.

Obviously though, it is also possible you are being screwed over!

Actually its one of the most dangerous provinces in Afghanistan!! Oruzgan Province is located in the south of the country near the Pakistan border which is where most of the fighting is occurring. The northern parts of the country are fairly quiet which is why the Germans have had relatively few deaths since they control the northern provinces.