Rethinking COIN. We need something new.

I agree that Afghanistan is a SOF war, but disagree with keeping conventional forces (other then support and a BCT size QRF) on ground or with a leadership influance.

Two comments here. I made a comment in another thread about sending the majority of the conventional forces home. Let me explain that comment here:The Conventional Forces are needed, conventional commanders are not needed and should stay at home. SFODB Commanded by a Major could have a conventional company (or companies) commanded by Captains under his control (OPCON/ADCON, the whole ball of wax). Bn,Bde,Div Staffs could augment the CJSOTF; but the Commanders stay home.

The conventional units act as a force multiplier, FOB security, blocking force etc. Furthermore, the conventional companies would chop 90 days prior so they could learn SOP's etc. FID, only we are training Americans.


Kill them all and go home was tried once, El Salvador, didn't turn out real good. Aid dried up once the war was over, a shatterred economy resulted in runaway crime and assisted MS-13 in ways we never envisioned. The crime, criminals, and gangs emigrated to the US. The costs to the taxpayer are greater then it would have been if we had converted mil aid to economic aid.

COIN is a long term mission, and post conflict ops are a long term mission. Americans think everything should be fixed in four year os less, and that is the problem.
 
Two comments here. I made a comment in another thread about sending the majority of the conventional forces home. Let me explain that comment here:The Conventional Forces are needed, conventional commanders are not needed and should stay at home. SFODB Commanded by a Major could have a conventional company (or companies) commanded by Captains under his control (OPCON/ADCON, the whole ball of wax). Bn,Bde,Div Staffs could augment the CJSOTF; but the Commanders stay home.

The conventional units act as a force multiplier, FOB security, blocking force etc. Furthermore, the conventional companies would chop 90 days prior so they could learn SOP's etc. FID, only we are training Americans.


Kill them all and go home was tried once, El Salvador, didn't turn out real good. Aid dried up once the war was over, a shatterred economy resulted in runaway crime and assisted MS-13 in ways we never envisioned. The crime, criminals, and gangs emigrated to the US. The costs to the taxpayer are greater then it would have been if we had converted mil aid to economic aid.

COIN is a long term mission, and post conflict ops are a long term mission. Americans think everything should be fixed in four year os less, and that is the problem.

Word.
That is what I was trying to say. I am not as eloquent I guess.
 
Two comments here. I made a comment in another thread about sending the majority of the conventional forces home. Let me explain that comment here:The Conventional Forces are needed, conventional commanders are not needed and should stay at home. SFODB Commanded by a Major could have a conventional company (or companies) commanded by Captains under his control (OPCON/ADCON, the whole ball of wax). Bn,Bde,Div Staffs could augment the CJSOTF; but the Commanders stay home.

The conventional units act as a force multiplier, FOB security, blocking force etc. Furthermore, the conventional companies would chop 90 days prior so they could learn SOP's etc. FID, only we are training Americans.

Sounds great for the SOF side, but it is not what conventional force do and it is going to leave your conventional commanders out of the game, and the conventional commander will never allow it…

If I were commanding a unit, I would never allow it to be orphaned out to some other command while I sit at home and play war games. I would never allow my soldiers to be used as a “do what SOF doesn’t want to do” force multiplier. To be really honest I find the fact that anyone would think of using a unit in that fashion repulsive.


Kill them all and go home was tried once, El Salvador, didn't turn out real good. Aid dried up once the war was over, a shatterred economy resulted in runaway crime and assisted MS-13 in ways we never envisioned. The crime, criminals, and gangs emigrated to the US. The costs to the taxpayer are greater then it would have been if we had converted mil aid to economic aid.

COIN is a long term mission, and post conflict ops are a long term mission. Americans think everything should be fixed in four year os less, and that is the problem.

Maybe so, but WW1, WW2 and Desert Storm were not COIN missions and were victories. Viet Nam was a COIN mission and ultimately became a loss.

The only COIN mission successfully fought by the United States that I can see was the Civil War and that was done through brutality and kill them all tactics used by the conventional “Union” The same tactics used by some of the British troops to slow down some of the UW/ insurgency tactics used by the American Revolutionary Army primarily the militias.

My point is that everyone is saying it works and conventional doesn’t, however the proof is in the pudding. Thinking outside the box is great, but I think a lot of what being said here is unrealistic on all sides. Americans are going broke; Americans are worried and tired of seeing Joe Snuffy die, Americans want results and have yet to get them OIF or OEF…:2c:
 
COIN is a long term mission, and post conflict ops are a long term mission. Americans think everything should be fixed in four year os less, and that is the problem.


My point exactly.

Look, I know COIN can work. I've seen it work. But merely working doesn't cut it if it's not given time to succeed. And that's the crux.

Policy is made by politicians. Politicians live and die by the vote. The amount of precious time you are alotted to conduct successful COIN operations is determined, not by the Pentagon, but by public opinion.

I left my counterparts standing on a rice paddy dike with their dicks in their hands because public opinion made me and my bros climb on a 46 one day and fly off, leaving the job half finished.

If anything, the public has become even more impatient since then and the national tolerance for casualties is a fraction of what it once was...combine all that with the fact that you have a CINC who was elected in part by Peace Democrats who are going to demand quick results...and I'd say if you're in Afghanistan you better expedite COIN while the gettins good because if it's dragged out too long the mission's going to get pulled out from under you.
 
The El Salvador example doesn't work with Afghanistan. El Salvador was and is a viable country. Afghanistan is a gigantic dirt pile with one export: Opium. The fact that the Taliban (and apparently half the population) want it to go back to the 8th century only compounds the issue.

I made the original post that evolved into KOE/GTFO, but that was not the intention. My point there was that we either need to be FULLY committed (i.e. no limitation on use of forces in any part of the battlespace - incl. Pakistan, no limitation on types of weapons used - incl. carpet bombing, FAEs, etc.), or we need to leave. That country will NOT embrace American-style democracy. It will NEVER be a republic. Many of us have served there - you guys know those people understand two things: tribe and violence. That's it.

The really distressing factor on top of all of this is that we now have a "leader" who has NO military experience, NO management experience, and a complete need for positive world opinion. :doh:
 
...As for keep me there to pull security and be used hard and put up wet, that is truly absurd! :uhh: What about using the Afghans? I thought that was your guys other specialty FID? I think that’s what gets the American’s in a bind when supporting UW operations. They don’t want young 18 year olds dieing for the Afghan’s security. Let the Afghans die for their security and our kids will die for ours…

What is absurd is you, a conventionally minded soldier by your own admission, attempting to tell the unconventionally minded soldier(s) what our job is or what it is that we do. FID and UW are two sides of the same coin (no pun intended) at different times in the continuum of war.

Now that that is out of the way. Since conventional commanders saw the writing on the wall (when a couple handfuls of SF soldiers conquered an entire country without their heavy handed approach to warfare) it has been SF supporting a conventional commanders intent in this war. A war quite frankly they havent a clue how to fight so instead they take a "kill them all" mentality which has filtered down to Joe. It is the exact opposite of the way it should be in Afghanistan.

Furthermore, the security of the Afghan people is directly linked to the security of America. As long as AQ and the Taliban have a safe haven to spread their vile hatred, recruit the weak minded, and train them Americans will continue to die where they do so is of little importance.

WW1, WW2 and Desert Storm were not COIN missions and were victories...

Apples and Oranges...

Those were conventional wars, fought against an enemy who wore uniforms, who fought with conventional methods... Vietnam was lost before we got started good. It was lost on the streets here in America, not in the jungles of Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. It was lost because America didnt have the stomach for war, the same is true today...

My point is that everyone is saying it works and conventional doesn’t, however the proof is in the pudding. Thinking outside the box is great, but I think a lot of what being said here is unrealistic on all sides. Americans are going broke; Americans are worried and tired of seeing Joe Snuffy die, Americans want results and have yet to get them OIF or OEF

Noone said conventional doesnt work. It has its place. The trouble is the conventional commanders dont seem to know what they dont know. And regardless of how many times they are told so they dont seem to want to accept the fact that tanks and infantry divisions cant do it all...

JAB: I see where you are trying to go, but you are woefully out of your depth in this discussion. Your heavy-handed approach to this is what has gotten us to where we are today in OEF... In all honesty you need to do a little more reading on COIN and a lot less posting

Crip
 
All...

Great discussions about 'Shock and Awe / Conventional' VS COIN....let's keep it that way.

I'm enjoying reading the different opines.

;)
 
Thinking outside the box is great, but I think a lot of what being said here is unrealistic on all sides. Americans are going broke; Americans are worried and tired of seeing Joe Snuffy die, Americans want results and have yet to get them OIF or OEF…
But, a lotta truth in THAT statement. :2c: cuz the news tells me we're "losing" now.
Is this war being "squared away" now, or NOT?
 
...Americans are going broke; Americans are worried and tired of seeing Joe Snuffy die, Americans want results...

"People get sick and tired of a moment of silence at the ballgame. They just want to be told it's over." Russell Crowe, Body of Lies


And there you have it, my friends. The problem with warmaking, unconventional or otherwise: the fucking civilian public. The fickle masses. If it were up to me, SF and SOF would have all the support/money they need to run the show, all the backing they want and 20 years to do it. But it'll never happen.
 
What is absurd is you, a conventionally minded soldier by your own admission, attempting to tell the unconventionally minded soldier(s) what our job is or what it is that we do. FID and UW are two sides of the same coin (no pun intended) at different times in the continuum of war.

I agree and I was not telling anyone what his or her job is, I was saying that I thought that FID was a mission of SF. At least it listed as one, I have not the smallest clue as to how you guys operate or think. However I know that a few ODA’s and a few other SOF personal fought A-stan in the beginning, and the masses coming from Afghani’s. Was it not? So why is it that now you need a bunch of conventional to pull security for you and hold blocking positions?

Maybe b/c you could not trust the Afghani’s then and you can’t trust them now? That seem’ s to be whatever SF written book has said since OEF kicked off.


Now that that is out of the way. Since conventional commanders saw the writing on the wall (when a couple handfuls of SF soldiers conquered an entire country without their heavy handed approach to warfare) it has been SF supporting a conventional commanders intent in this war. A war quite frankly they havent a clue how to fight so instead they take a "kill them all" mentality which has filtered down to Joe. It is the exact opposite of the way it should be in Afghanistan.

The kill them all mentality is bread into you from day one; it had nothing to do with Afghanistan. When you lose a guy, you want to punish those who did. The problem is there are no (one person) so we turning the fucking heat up on everyone. Is it wrong? Hell yeah it is, but to think I am going to let my PSG/ TL’s death go unanswered is a big fucking no-go! The big picture is that conventional has no business in COIN operation b/c we are too big and we are not going to allow our people to die unanswered! And that is where you Public support falls b/c when there is a small force out of the news and out of the lime light, less of you die and less is publicized to in rage the public.

Furthermore, the security of the Afghan people is directly linked to the security of America. As long as AQ and the Taliban have a safe haven to spread their vile hatred, recruit the weak minded, and train them Americans will continue to die where they do so is of little importance.

I disagree, the stability of the afghan people is essential to the American peoples security. But it needs to come from with in; the afghan people need to step up, with the help of a small unconventional force conducting FID operations to assist them in doing so. Not a massive conventional force policing them and enforcing conventional rules, also being the primary target for the insurgents. Thus causing a lower support by the American public, due to a growing death toll of young American soldiers.

Apples and Oranges...

Those were conventional wars, fought against an enemy who wore uniforms, who fought with conventional methods... Vietnam was lost before we got started good. It was lost on the streets here in America, not in the jungles of Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. It was lost because America didnt have the stomach for war, the same is true today...

Again you are proving my point; the conventional force has no business in an unconventional war where FID/ COIN is the primary mission. Of course that is in order for it to work, something that has yet to happen b/c conventional has been involved in some level.

Noone said conventional doesnt work. It has its place. The trouble is the conventional commanders dont seem to know what they dont know. And regardless of how many times they are told so they dont seem to want to accept the fact that tanks and infantry divisions cant do it all...

I fully agree however if you are going to put conventional in the game, it has to fall with in the conventional game plan. Meaning something for tanks and infantry divisions to shoot at, b/c again we are not just going to sit around and die. I fully agree that in order for the modern version of COIN to work, conventional needs to stay out of the game plan.

JAB: I see where you are trying to go, but you are woefully out of your depth in this discussion. Your heavy-handed approach to this is what has gotten us to where we are today in OEF... In all honesty you need to do a little more reading on COIN and a lot less posting

Crip

I don't need an SF tab to understand how COIN works, I have read on the subject for many years, as well as spending a portion of my college party years conducting COIN/ FID operations and simply disagree that conventional forces play a role in COIN and or FID. I am going to post my opinions on it b/c it does matter to me and I have seen its effects, regardless how you view my opinions. I have no problem being the peanut gallery! }:-)

Keep your eye on the prize Crip ;)
 
Not what conventional forces do?

As an infantryman in the Marine Corps I participated in all of the roles that SOWT outlined in his post in support of Army and Navy SOF. To say that we were there "because SOF didn't want to do it" is disingenuous.

Well it was not in my job description, just b/c we both have been used in that role doesn’t make it right. If my mission is to pull security or be a water boy, I will do it b/c that’s what I am told to do. However that is not what my purpose in warfare is and not what I am training to do.
 
Oh hell no you didnt........

I know you are not preaching to me, or any other .mil guy here, about losing friends and fellow soldiers and the anger that runs thru ones veins wanting revenge... Please tell me you are not up on a soapbox as if the Infantry as a whole, or you specifically, has the market cornered on losses. I for one will not put up with your self-righteous BS.

As for not trusting the Afghani's, there are quite a few of them who have laid their lives on the line and died, for their countries freedom from terrorists, along side us, many times saving American's lives. Dont begin to marginalize their commitment to make a blanket statement in hopes that it will help substantiate your opinion on the place of the infantry on COIN operations. Talk about disingenuous.....

There is a place for the infantry in COIN, doing the same job they were trained to do, destroying things and killing people. Its who makes the decisions about who and where that needs to change...

I never stated you needed an SF tab to understand COIN. It isn't requisite; but an open mind is.

Crip
 
I am not attacking you, so why do you want to attack me?

I know you are not preaching to me, or any other .mil guy here, about losing friends and fellow soldiers and the anger that runs thru ones veins wanting revenge... Please tell me you are not up on a soapbox as if the Infantry as a whole, or you specifically, has the market cornered on losses. I for one will not put up with your self-righteous BS.

Reread what I wrote!

“self-righteous BS” b/c I am tired of people using soldier in the wrong way for the wrong things? Hardly! If you want to have a pissing match that’s fine I have got nothing better to do today. So I have clearly stated I cannot see where a COIN has been successful with conventional forces involved, other then the “Civil War”.

So prove me wrong, start naming of COIN conflicts that conventional forces were involved and they lead to a truly successful out come…


As for not trusting the Afghani's, there are quite a few of them who have laid their lives on the line and died, for their countries freedom from terrorists, along side us, many times saving American's lives. Dont begin to marginalize their commitment to make a blanket statement in hopes that it will help substantiate your opinion on the place of the infantry on COIN operations. Talk about disingenuous.....

LMAO dude you must have some pretty big blinders on bro. So what was the mission of SF in Afghanistan when it started in 2001 and what aspects of that mission have been accomplished?

OBL?
Destroying AQ?
Ousting the TB?
Creating a new government? (Corrupt?)
A free Afghanistan?

I am sure there has been great Afghanis who have sacrificed their lives for a better Afghanistan. But was it for our goals or theirs? When we leave in 20-50 years and billions of dollars later will it have been worth it? Are you willing to allow 3 or 4,000 more soldiers die, in order for the a timely pull out like seen in Iraq? What’s the Americans track record with long drawn out wars?



There is a place for the infantry in COIN, doing the same job they were trained to do, destroying things and killing people. Its who makes the decisions about who and where that needs to change...

I agree with you here, but it’s with a hit them hard and moves out doctrine, not with keeping them boots on ground, getting killed with IED’s and made out to be propaganda for the enemy. The Infantry needs better-trained leaders; I have said that for years. However I disagree that we should fall under and ODA’s or SF Companies leadership and I strongly disagree with the use of US forces to provide security for the Afghan people.

I never stated you needed an SF tab to understand COIN. It isn't requisite; but an open mind is.

Crip

I am open minded, just not to the use of failed tactics at the cost of more US service members lives.
 
"People get sick and tired of a moment of silence at the ballgame. They just want to be told it's over." Russell Crowe, Body of Lies


And there you have it, my friends. The problem with warmaking, unconventional or otherwise: the fucking civilian public. The fickle masses. If it were up to me, SF and SOF would have all the support/money they need to run the show, all the backing they want and 20 years to do it. But it'll never happen.

I'm afraid you are correct! :doh:

The same people who continue to support this administration will pressure this administration to pull the 'Troops' out of A 'Stan before the mission is accomplished just like we did in Vietnam!

Unlike Vietnam, this will be a larger disaster leaving, support as well as a base and mission training area for every Muslim terrorist group in the world, just like it was before we went there! :eek:
 
I'm afraid you are correct! :doh:

The same people who continue to support this administration will pressure this administration to pull the 'Troops' out of A 'Stan before the mission is accomplished just like we did in Vietnam!

Unlike Vietnam, this will be a larger disaster leaving, support as well as a base and mission training area for every Muslim terrorist group in the world, just like it was before we went there! :eek:

The difference will be that they will have a much larger pool of people to recruit from since we left them hanging.
 
... I am tired of people using soldier in the wrong way for the wrong things?...

You mean like conventionally minded leaders attempting to fight an unconventional war with conventional methods? That instead of allowing the SME's on UW/COIN to control the tempo and objectives to meet the demands of the battlefield, a bi-product of which would be maximizing the conventional soldiers capabilities in inflicting casualties upon the enemy as deemed appropriate.

...I disagree that we should fall under and ODA’s or SF Companies leadership...

And why is that, just curious?

I strongly disagree with the use of US forces to provide security for the Afghan people.

I never said you should be providing them security. That is what the ANP/ANA is for.
 
You mean like conventionally minded leaders attempting to fight an unconventional war with conventional methods? That instead of allowing the SME's on UW/COIN to control the tempo and objectives to meet the demands of the battlefield, a bi-product of which would be maximizing the conventional soldiers capabilities in inflicting casualties upon the enemy as deemed appropriate.

If it worked that way it would be a good thing and I would see it as a effective tool. However it’s still not likely to happen…

And why is that, just curious?

I do not think any unit company level or above should have their command level replaced/ or chomped down by another command. Removing a units leadership to replaced by HSLD SF’ers sounds cool, but actually destroys the unit as a whole in the long run. After that unit leaves and becomes a unit under their leadership again, they have to go through a total rebuild and that just sucks. Now having a platoon or a section, is not as big of a deal, but a company, battalion or brigade is a totally different issue.

Maybe a good solution would be to expand SF’s support units to include a few companies of combat arms types? But to just use a unit and chump the command is just not good for that unit.

I never said you should be providing them security. That is what the ANP/ANA is for.

I guess I missunderstood. What security would coventional forces be conducting in Afghanistan then? FOB security?
 
If it worked that way it would be a good thing and I would see it as a effective tool. However it’s still not likely to happen…

So then again, the problem isnt COIN.

I do not think any unit company level or above should have their command level replaced/ or chomped down by another command. Removing a units leadership to replaced by HSLD SF’ers sounds cool, but actually destroys the unit as a whole in the long run. After that unit leaves and becomes a unit under their leadership again, they have to go through a total rebuild and that just sucks. Now having a platoon or a section, is not as big of a deal, but a company, battalion or brigade is a totally different issue.

If its the removal of a unit from its parent unit then your argument against it happening should stand regardless of the level: BN, BDE, company, platoon, etc... However I am specifically talking about a platoon with the ODA or BN/BDE within the JSOTF to be OPCON where needed. Some teams may need them while others may not; its mission driven. As a matter-of-fact I know of several instances where infantry platoons were OPCON/ADCON to an ODA here and there... It didnt seem to affect them when they returned CONUS (Yes I am still in contact with a couple of them), with the exception of losing a couple company commanders (PL's then) and enlisted to SFAS. The soldiers the command got back had a better understanding of COIN/UW than before, got more training across a wide range of disciplines, and enjoyed their rotations more believing they were doing something more than walking up and down ridge lines on a mvmt-to-ambush.

Maybe a good solution would be to expand SF’s support units to include a few companies of combat arms types? But to just use a unit and chump the command is just not good for that unit.

We dont regularly find ourselves needing a platoon's worth of infantry guys sitting around when we are busy doing one of our other missions. It just so happens that we could utilize them in Afghanistan from time to time...

What security would conventional forces be conducting in Afghanistan then? FOB security?

Personally I wouldnt be on a FOB if I had my choice in the matter. I would be out in a safe house doing what it is that SF soldiers are suppose to do. And I would have the 11B/C's with me pulling security / comms watch on the house just like my guys do, training and going out on missions with us.

Then again if I had my way I wouldnt ride around in a damn RG31/33 either...

Crip
 
Okay so we are talking about small platoon level units attached with an ODA pulling security and assisting in operations? Then yes I agree with you.

If we are talking about BCT’s being sent out to help patrol areas and perform with in the COIN doctrine I do not see it as a good thing.

My personal thoughts is that unless you can cut the US forces on ground down to very small numbers and do it fast, the public will push for a with draw. If all you guys need is a platoon per an ODA, why is there so many damn conventional forces on the ground? Why are they planning to plus up 20-40K more?
 
...If all you guys need is a platoon per an ODA, why is there so many damn conventional forces on the ground? Why are they planning to plus up 20-40K more?

I never said all that is needed across the country is a BN/BDE. I was simply stating that in the context given earlier a platoon/+ of infantry guys could be beneficial in some instances, not all.

There is still alot of breaking shit that needs to be done. We are too busy teaching and mentoring to do everything... I dont have all the answers, in fact I have more questions than answers. But I am getting ever closer to knowing what I dont know... ;)

Crip
 
Back
Top