Looks like the Brits are having some issues. Notice the 82nd Airborne accomplished...

[Eagle9294]

Eh, it's the same shit as always. I guess why it was brought up in the thread is to point out that it's not just the Brits needing help. I fought along side those bastards a few times, and they are beasts. But politics and dick measuring does influence the battle, and hurts the troops on the ground.

The British are great soldiers. They always have been. I had a good experience with them as well in the 1st Gulf war.

[Old All American]

One would think after Vietnam we had learned our lesson. It appeared during the 80s that we had, even the first Gulf War we shocked, overwhelmed, and destroyed the enemy. But politics got in the way of finishing the job (not wanting to get into an argument here, but in any other war we would have taken Baghdad) - and we should have learned a lesson about Coalition Warfare or war with permission from the UN.

When we first went in to both Afghanistan and Iraq it looked like we were doing things the right way, going in, kicking butt and taking names - actually leaving the name-taking to others. My greatest concern was that the pols would get involved and we would win the war but lose the peace - as we have fallen in the tendency of doing here lately. It's not the troops' fault, they are doing everything demanded of them - and more - and under the most extreme circumstances.

Just goes to show you can have the biggest, baddest, meanest pit bull in the world guarding your junkyard - but he won't do a bit of good if you muzzle him and put him on a short leash.

[Static-Line]

One would think after Vietnam we had learned our lesson. It appeared during the 80s that we had, even the first Gulf War we shocked, overwhelmed, and destroyed the enemy. But politics got in the way of finishing the job (not wanting to get into an argument here, but in any other war we would have taken Baghdad) - and we should have learned a lesson about Coalition Warfare or war with permission from the UN.

When we first went in to both Afghanistan and Iraq it looked like we were doing things the right way, going in, kicking butt and taking names - actually leaving the name-taking to others. My greatest concern was that the pols would get involved and we would win the war but lose the peace - as we have fallen in the tendency of doing here lately. It's not the troops' fault, they are doing everything demanded of them - and more - and under the most extreme circumstances.

Just goes to show you can have the biggest, baddest, meanest pit bull in the world guarding your junkyard - but he won't do a bit of good if you muzzle him and put him on a short leash.

We haven't learned a thing. Take for instance the insider threat that's the theme for this year's fighting season. It's no different than old timer's dealings with the South Vietnamese Army or even better, the state of the Afghan National Army the Soviets stood up during the final years of their occupation. Too many similarities and the political bullshit is the same regardless of the people deployed or era. Right now we can't even do a simple presence patrol along the AF/PAK border without a BG's approval. The restrictions on CAS, limitations on night raids and this policy of "sharing" information and CONOPS to our Afghan and PAKMIL "allies" is just pure insanity. Then there's the IJC/RC-East requirement to only highlight the "most positive" or "cherry-picked" information on ANSF development. They've been downplaying the threat of insiders operating within the ANSF ranks in addition to trying to ram the idea of a central government down the throats of people who are tribal based and have no interest in anything else. This campaign has been nothing short of frustrating...

[Old All American]

Sad, my respect for this generation of warriors - already great - is much increased the more I learn of the handicaps under which you all are forced to operate.

[Eagle9294]

We haven't learned a thing. Take for instance the insider threat that's the theme for this year's fighting season. It's no different than old timer's dealings with the South Vietnamese Army or even better, the state of the Afghan National Army the Soviets stood up during the final years of their occupation. Too many similarities and the political bullshit is the same regardless of the people deployed or era. Right now we can't even do a simple presence patrol along the AF/PAK border without a BG's approval. The restrictions on CAS, limitations on night raids and this policy of "sharing" information and CONOPS to our Afghan and PAKMIL "allies" is just pure insanity. Then there's the IJC/RC-East requirement to only highlight the "most positive" or "cherry-picked" information on ANSF development. They've been downplaying the threat of insiders operating within the ANSF ranks in addition to trying to ram the idea of a central government down the throats of people who are tribal based and have no interest in anything else. This campaign has been nothing short of frustrating...

I guess private contractors do not have to worry about these restrictions?

[Static-Line]

I guess private contractors do not have to worry about these restrictions?

It depends on the contract and who they're supporting. The SOF guys play by a very different set of rules for instance. With that said, however, things are becoming increasingly restrictive for them as well. This is probably going to be one of the last rotations (if not the last) where they're able to go out at night to conduct operations. currently, they're beginning to feel the restrictions of having to maintain specific ANSF-to-coalition ratios for their missions like we do. It's bad enough we're one step away from "warrant-based targeting." Yes, you read that last part right...