Afghanistan and Honor

Posted By Grim • [February 01, 2012]

I asked a question at the end of the last post.  The consensus from you ladies and gentlemen is... let it go.  We've spent almost three thousand American, UK and NATO soldiers' lives there. That's a hard thing to walk away from.

Not that you're wrong. I have never seen the high-percentage shot for Afghanistan since we moved regular forces into play there. The logistics have never worked, except for illegal goods whose value is exaggerated by artificial scarcity.  Moving them into legitimate markets was never an option.  Take a look at the railroad situation.  They have no seaports, so rail roads are the next best thing.  Of their neighboring countries, China is on a different track gauge; Pakistan and nearby India are on another; Iran is on a third; only the former Soviet states share their gauge. But that means a vast distance to the nearest seaport, and connection to global trade; or else, investment in the kind of infrastructure needed to hook up with the several other lines on offer.

Putting that investment in means that you've got a viable expected return on the investment. You won't find it in industry, with an uneducated populace; and others have pointed out that even 'rare earth' minerals are often readily, and more cheaply, found elsewhere.

If we walk away from the dead, though, there is a debt of honor owed.  We must have a reckoning with those who led us to this place.

The ISI And the Taliban: But You Knew That

Posted By Grim • [February 01, 2012]

The BBC has obtained a leaked NATO report on the relationship between the ISI and the Taliban.

The BBC's Quentin Sommerville in Kabul says the report - on the state of the Taliban - fully exposes for the first time the relationship between the ISI and the Taliban.
The report is based on material from 27,000 interrogations with more than 4,000 captured Taliban, al-Qaeda and other foreign fighters and civilians.
It notes: "Pakistan's manipulation of the Taliban senior leadership continues unabatedly".
It says that Pakistan is aware of the locations of senior Taliban leaders.
"Senior Taliban representatives, such as Nasiruddin Haqqani, maintain residences in the immediate vicinity of ISI headquarters in Islamabad," it said.
It quotes a senior al-Qaeda detainee as saying: "Pakistan knows everything. They control everything. I can't [expletive] on a tree in Kunar without them watching."

Right.  So now what?

If you've been watching the 'three-quarters Surge' we've been conducting in Afghanistan, you'll have noticed a few trends.  The Taliban fighters increasingly rarely commit to battle with ISAF forces; that level of violence has dropped quite a bit, and it is that decrease that is driving our claims that the Surge is working.  The Taliban has apparently removed its shadow government efforts from the contested areas, which we are interpreting as a success; but it also serves the function of preserving their administrative structure for a rapid reinsertion when facts on the ground change.  For that matter, this approach preserves Taliban fighters for the period after the departure of ISAF strength.

Intimidation attacks -- assassinations of prominent GoIRA supporters, attacks that take down services like cell phone towers, night letters, etc -- are up.  The Taliban are moving to open a political office in Qatar, and it's clear that our State department intends to try to foster a dialogue.

This suggests to me that the Taliban effort in the south and southwest is geared to a Maoist strategy of waiting until the (known) withdrawal of US forces, when the ANA will have to try to hold gains with increasingly small support.  During the waiting period, now, they are preparing the ground by destroying government supporters and spreading the message that only the Taliban really controls the future.  When they come against the ANA, the ANA will thus find relatively weak support among the population in many areas.  The Taliban will have preserved their shadow government apparatus, so that they can rapidly reinsert and take administrative control of areas won from the ANA.  Early Taliban success in those areas will force the US government to either recommit -- in the middle of a Presidential election season, with a US population that does not think we can win -- or step up the State department's pace in obtaining a settlement with the Taliban negotiators.  That means more concessions from us, faster.

The Taliban's name means "students," so perhaps after ten years they have gotten around to studying Mao.  On the other hand, the ISI is a professional intelligence service whose leadership includes many who have formal military educations.  You can be sure they have read Mao. (It would appear that relatively few of our own leadership may have done so, since they seem to be walking right into this trap.)

So, now the cards are on the table.  What do we do about it?

Air Commando Journal - Special Tactics Past and Present

Posted By Blackfive • [February 01, 2012]

The guys at AFSOC send us the latest issue of Air Commando Journal:

...if you get a chance check out the Special Tactics story in the Air Commando Journal. It was a very good overview of ST Past and present and a touching tribute to those we lost.

Read through it.   It's a great journal, very informative and interesting, and definitely worth your time.

So Simple, Even A Butterbar Can Do It

Posted By Laughing_Wolf • [February 01, 2012]

What, you thought I was going to pick on E-1s? I can't get into politics these days, but thank Ifni there is a lot more to life than politics.  Like, researchers doing neat things, things that might let me continue to reach out and touch at a distance despite age.  Like, this:

 

 

Check out the full story at Wired.

LW

A Milblog You Should Check Out

Posted By Laughing_Wolf • [January 31, 2012]

If you spend any time over at This Ain't Hell (and I do), you have seen comments from Doc Bailey.  They are usually quite good, reasoned, and interesting.  If you didn't already know, he has his own blog, and this post is a good introduction to the Madness of the Combat Medic.  Well considered, well reasoned, and well worth reading. 

LW

FAKE SEAL and Special Operator Busted

Posted By Blackfive • [January 31, 2012]

Over at This Ain't Hell (we are soon to be THEIR farm team), Jonn Lilyea takes a Blackfive reader request and uncovers yet another SEAL poser.  Check it out.  Jonn has made outing phonies a cottage industry.  And this phony should have been proud of his service rather than making claims that are more f#$%ed up than polio.

Thank you, General Peter Chiarelli

Posted By Blackfive • [January 31, 2012]

Today, one of the good guys retires.

Go here to read the last words that General Chiarelli has to say while on duty.  And read the comments - they are a tribute to his hard work, leadership and unwavering support of our troops and their families.  And of course, he continues to push and challenge to make our Army the best:

...If we all continue to do our part – reach out – help connect individuals with the tremendous outpouring of support services and resources available to them we can help heal wounds, enable opportunity, and ultimately achieve a stronger, more capable Army for the future...

 

Thumbs Up! - 2011 Army Photo of the Year Runner Up

Posted By Blackfive • [January 31, 2012]

Private First Class Shawn Williams gives the thumbs-up to members of his unit as he is evacuated after being injured by a roadside bomb

Pfc. Shawn Williams of the 1st Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division, based in Fort Wainwright, Alaska, gives the thumbs-up to members of his unit as he is evacuated after being injured by a roadside bomb in the Kandahar province of Afghanistan, June 17.

June 17, 2011 - Photo by U.S. Navy Lt. j.g. Haraz N. Ghanbari

WWII Ranger Leads the Way

Posted By Blackfive • [January 31, 2012]

Ed Black recalls his time in the Rangers during WWII.  He took part in three invasions and was one of the very few survivors of his unit.  Hit the link to read the story.  Here is his video interview:

 

Somewhere in the Arabian Sea...

Posted By Blackfive • [January 31, 2012]

...U.S. Marines are going to "visit" someone.

U.S. Marines conduct insertion from a CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter in the Arabian Sea, Jan. 19, 2012. The Marines are assigned to the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which is embarked aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Makin Island. The ship is supporting maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility. U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Alan Gragg.

 

Leaking the KBL Details - View of the SEALs

Posted By Blackfive • [January 31, 2012]

Joe Biden's spineless drivel aside, most SEALs that I have spoken to (Active Duty and Reservists) are NOT HAPPY that the details of the raid to capture or kill bin Laden were divulged and now we know what unit rescued the hostages in Somalia.  Identifying the unit after direct action was something that no one has done before to such a level of disregard for the safety of the men of that unit and their families.

Leif Babin, a highly decorated SEAL, in the WSJ expresses the same sentiment that I have heard over and over again...

...A week after the bin Laden raid, then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates expressed dismay about Washington's loose lips, telling a town hall meeting of U.S. Marines at Camp Lejeune: "Frankly, a week ago Sunday, in the Situation Room, we all agreed that we would not release any operational details from the effort to take out bin Laden. That all fell apart on Monday—the next day."

Do the president and his top political advisers understand what's at stake for the special-operations forces who carry out these dangerous operations, or the long-term strategic consequences of divulging information about our most highly classified military assets and intelligence capabilities?...

Sadly, I highly doubt that they understand what's at stake (and worry more about politics than honor) and what these efforts mean to the men and the families who do the hard work while they make the "gutsy calls".

Damn disgusting.

[Thanks to Jimmy for sending the article]

 

A call not to repeat history

Posted By McQ • [January 31, 2012]

One of the things that policy makers seem to inevitably do is repeat history.  And repeating history, when talking national defense, usually isn’t a good thing.  It usually ends up costing us both blood and treasure.

RAdm John Stufflebeem (USN, Ret), a former 6th Fleet commander and a carrier pilot, lays out an argument for not repeating it in the context he knows best, the carrier battle group and its future.   This is transferable to other arms and services as well.  Stufflebeem concentrates on the fact that weapons systems have to evolve with strategy, and, that we have a tendency to be short sighted in both areas.  He discusses the future role of the carrier battle group in general and why the F-35, specifically,  is vital to that future roll.

The bottom line is it’s not enough to keep the 11 carriers we now have.  They also have to be equipped to survive and thrive in the future should they be called upon to do so:

A modern U.S. nuclear powered aircraft carrier (CVN) with a life expectancy of at least fifty years is only as good as the power it projects whether in combat or deterrence through its weapon system—the carrier Airwing and the men, women and aircraft that make it up. However, the Airwing of the future is under attack witness - the current call in some quarters to scrap the F-35C Lightning II Carrier Variant (CV). This type of clarion call is traditional following periods of war such as World War I and II, Korea, Vietnam and again as we are witnessing today. But it also follows a flawed and shortsighted strategy to achieve short-term economic gains or cater to parochial interests that, based on history, will have to be made up later at higher costs and possibly lives while depriving our Navy men and women of the best military technology available.

Why does Stufflebeem so heavily tout the F-35?

But many fail to realize that the F-35C, with its data exchange and interoperability capabilities, will make the entire Carrier Strike Group (CSG) more capable, effective and lethal. Using similar methods in exercises like Red Flag, the F-22 Raptor made both air and ground units more effective by providing enhanced situational awareness of the battlespace; so will the F-35 provide better maritime awareness to the CSG including both Airwing assets as well as surface forces. The F-35C will make the CSG a better, more capable fighting centerpiece of American military power and force for good around the globe.

In fact, instead of being a consumer of intelligence, situational awareness (produced by other means) and communication, it will be a provider and enhancer of each in addition to its kinetic role.  It will create a synergy that really doesn’t exist right now to, as Stufflebeem points out, “make the CSG a better, more capable fighting centerpiece of American military power and force for good around the globe.”

Of course our potential adversaries are building 5th generation fighters as we speak.  And we’re all familiar with China’s reported “carrier killer” missile.  Everyone is upping the ante.  Common sense says, given those facts, we can’t afford yesterday’s technology to be the technology we send forward into the 21st century. 

Stufflebeem provides both a good history lesson - discussing why we must avoid the sort of mistakes of the past we and other countries  have made – as well as looking toward the future and its requirements. It’s a good read.

~McQ

Twitter: @McQandO

Biden advised against bin Laden raid

Posted By Uncle Jimbo • [January 31, 2012]

Crazy Uncle Joe said no to whacking OBL. First of all is anyone surprised by his lack of judgment? Second look at the type of advisers Obama has surrounded himself with.

When the president asked his top advisers for their final opinion on the mission, all of them were hesitant, except for the former CIA director, now Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Biden said.

“Every single person in that room hedged their bet except Leon Panetta. Leon said go. Everyone else said, 49, 51,” Biden said, as he offered the unsolicited details of the decision-making process.

Being the gutsiest guy in a room full of spineless losers, Leon Panetta excepted, is not too tough. John Weisman said in his book Kill bin Laden, and confirmed to me personally, that Obama had a poll taken on the potential fall out if the public found he didn't pull the trigger, and that this delayed the raid while he waited on the answer. Still glad bin Laden took a round to the eye, but spare me all the political grandstanding.

Special Ops Snow Drop

Posted By Blackfive • [January 30, 2012]

A member of the coalition special operations forces begins to recover pallets of supplies in the snow during an airdrop in the Shah Joy district in Afghanistan's Zabul province, Jan. 25, 2012. The coalition is part of the International Security Assistance Force. U.S. Navy Petty Officer Petty Officer 2nd Class Jon Rasmussen

Admiral Obama

Posted By Blackfive • [January 30, 2012]

Over at the WSJ, the editors take issue with President Obama's short-sighted defense cuts:

The Administration's record to date is undeniable. Defense was targeted from day one in office, and Mr. Obama disguised his latest, steepest retrenchment as part of a new "strategic review" earlier this month. The Pentagon on Thursday previewed the cuts, announcing that the 2013 defense budget due next month will decline for the first time since 1998. As spending on entitlements rises, budget cuts disproportionately hit the Pentagon, which accounts for a fifth of federal spending but over half the deficit reduction.

It's a good summation of why gutting the Navy (and the other branches) instead of smartly enhancing their ships, vehicles and systems, is a tragically bad idea...like Admiral Kimmell bad.

Make no mistake, we ARE in an arms race.  And, unless you want to concede a large part of the world and become isolationist with a nice of dose of huge inflation, we need to be able to project force rapidly and effectively.

Update:  For a somewhat of a counter-argument, Michael E. O'Hanlon of Brookings writes a post in the WSJ advocating for smaller cuts but a one-war front mentality in the SecDef's office:

...Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s new strategic guidance, unveiled Thursday, moves in this direction, stating that the future U.S. military “will be capable of defeating a major act of aggression in one theater while denying the objectives of — or imposing unacceptable costs on — an opportunistic aggressor in a second theater.” Panetta and President Obama are right to reduce the requirements for a second possible war, which in this era would probably not be a ground war in any case...