Taliban summer assault begins in Afghanistan by killing 18 ANA with large assaulting force

2015-04-14T01:46:14-04:00

"Taliban fighters swarmed over Afghan army posts in the country's northeast, killing at least 18 soldiers and beheading some in a major attack to mark the start of the country's summer fighting season, authorities said Monday. The assault marks a grim first summer battle for Afghan forces, now fighting largely alone after the U.S. and NATO ended their combat mission in the country at the start of this year."

Are we at the tipping point, is it time to cut our loses, is our job done, how do we stay at the larger COPs/FOBs and camps without a combat (supporting) role while this is going on, are the ANA really ready? Are you surprised this attack happened, are the foreign fighters convinced we are "done" and just waiting for the calendar to change?

Have we confused the people of Afghanistan with our labeling? The term Talib is a term of honor (relating to a student of Islam/Islamic religion) and we've continued to call those we are fighting "Taliban", which puts us at a disadvantage in the simplest basic means at the boots on the ground level, especially when trying to conduct FID. Are we giving our kids a hornets nest that they will have to confront and finish?

http://news.yahoo.com/taliban-attack-kills-18-afghan-soldiers-beheaded-093811547.html

Taliban attack kills 18 Afghan soldiers; some beheaded

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — Taliban fighters swarmed over Afghan army posts in the country's northeast, killing at least 18 soldiers and beheading some in a major attack to mark the start of the country's summer fighting season, authorities said Monday.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Apr 14 at 2015 2:14 AM

2015-04-14T02:14:54-04:00

We kept forces in England, France, Germany, Japan, Korea and built strong ties and brought some countries into great prosperity. It wasn't done by blowing a country up and saying here's your chance.....you are on your own." Does that mean that I favor us staying for decades? Not a chance in Hades! We are trying to fix the world with our own national infrastructure crumbling around us. Take these trillions of dollars and fix our transportation systems, tunnels, bridges, aquifers, pipelines, sewers, and updating these massive civil engineering investments that turned our nation into a superpower in the first place. Put our unemployed and under-employed to work rebuilding our own nation, secure the borders, and find/create/develop alternate energy resources outside of the sandbox.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 2:15 AM

2015-04-14T02:15:03-04:00

This is nothing different than what has been going on for the past 15 years. This is how the Taliban announces the start of the fighting season. Yes, there are not as many American combat troops on the ground anymore but that doesn't mean there are none.

The Afghans are as trained as they are going to get, just like the Iraqis were trained. We can only do so much to help them. Yes, it is horrible that we spent all that time and blood training the Iraqis and are now back to do it again. The Afghans are a little better than the Iraqis, the majority will stand and fight and the command is fairly capable and able to push reinforcements to locations throughout Afghanistan pretty quickly.

Is it time to leave, I say yes! My opinion does not matter because the Afghan President doesn't want us to leave. I think we will continue to drawdown but it will be a good while before we completely pull out of Afghanistan.

We will see how this fighting season goes and how well the Afghan forces defend the country. I am currently advising a Kandak fairly close to where this happened, looks like it's time to kick ass and chew bubble gum...the PX is all out of bubble gum.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 2:20 AM

2015-04-14T02:20:37-04:00

It is a poor way to start the fighting season. I am not quite sure if the ANA knew it was the opening day but they found out. They really need to start stepping it up. We can't be there for every battle. While we are there they really need to put forth their best effort. If they fail we can still help retrain them. I would see that keeping a small force there of trainer would greatly benefit them. If we pull out all together it wouldn't help them stabilize their country.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 2:41 AM

2015-04-14T02:41:02-04:00

Why is there a sense of hurry? Others have said it, we should learned from what happened in Iraq. Leave a force behind, in case, and strategic foreseeing Iran's stance. On both sides, Iraq and Afghanistan. We could cut potus lavish vacations overseas and *save* enough money for our troops.

** edited

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 3:05 AM

2015-04-14T03:05:14-04:00

What we should be doing is committing ourselves to however long it takes... I don't believe we are capable of doing that though... so the best thing we can do is cut our losses (and those of our allies) and leave.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 5:32 AM

2015-04-14T05:32:00-04:00

I think it's going to take the ANA some one on one with them to learn to adapt to their own ways of combating against the Taliban force. I beleieve we have (As a fighting force) against them have had all these years of constructing our own ways to overcoming their spineless attempts at victory. I think one day they'll get it, although I'm not saying it's ever going to end, I'm just saying they'll eventually get in their groove as we have....it's just going to take time. Especially with their lack of resources and man power.

Response by SSG Donald Mceuen made Apr 14 at 2015 7:23 AM

2015-04-14T07:23:46-04:00

I was told back in 1990 when all this started it would last many years.
And it would be are generations veitnam .
so lets bring our troops home and take better care of our own.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Apr 14 at 2015 7:41 AM

2015-04-14T07:41:08-04:00

@CSM Michael J. Uhlig. It is a mess. There is no doubt. We have broadcast our intentions to the enemy and he is doing exactly what you would expect him to do. Wait for a better time and then attack.

I am afraid we will have to confront radical islam either there or here. Who can argue that we are seeing more and more of this at home. Both radicals from overseas coming here and the "home grown" radicals. We are also dealing with a population that freedom and liberty are foreign concepts. There is little to work with in that regard.

Do we cut our losses and leave? Stay and take it to the radical islamists? Do we keep a smaller foot print and support thus ensuring we are there for decades? All good questions, no great answers. We need a strategy from the White House (for the global war on terror that they don't call the GWOT anymore) and we have none.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Apr 14 at 2015 8:22 AM

2015-04-14T08:22:21-04:00

Afghanistan isn't a nation. It's hard for a national army to exist when a Nation does not.

Response by CW3 Guy Snodgrass made Apr 14 at 2015 8:25 AM

2015-04-14T08:25:51-04:00

In my opinion we need to either be committed to "win" or not start. During Desert Shield/Storm I remember congress and those "in charge" starting to waffle after we were already in country. I wrote a letter to the editor of my hometown newspaper saying we are here now, let us do our job so we could get this ("war/conflict") over with so we could come home. I still believe that today. If we are not going to do our best then let's not do anything. We are not (or should not be) the "little dutch boy" with our finger in the dam.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 8:30 AM

2015-04-14T08:30:02-04:00

In my opinion, we cannot stay there forever. We go through 8 to 13 weeks of training and are sent to war zones. If the Afghans can't be self sufficient in ten years, it's time for our troops to come home or be sent to Europe or anywhere but a war zone.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Apr 14 at 2015 8:54 AM

2015-04-14T08:54:43-04:00

The one thing you can learn from history is that there is no finish in Afghanistan. The US, the Russians, the British...even Alexander the Great...was sucked into this quagmire. In truth, we were able to break up the terror nests that were able to grow there and make the rats scurry off to other places. We can support our tribes there...if we continue to arm and support our bad guys, they will continue to win over the other guys bad guys.

Also, the President already said we won.

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Apr 14 at 2015 8:55 AM

2015-04-14T08:55:01-04:00

We will most likely return. Advancement is by education. The American public does not want to hear this, but I feel that there are only 2 VIABLE options available:

1. Pull out, and never look back...letting them figure it out.
2. 75 year plan. We need to be fully engaged. Maybe not in the war fighting, but certainly in the education of the children. We would need to be there for at least 2 generations, allowing the old habits/thoughts to die off while teaching the kids and future leaders everything we can. THIS option would not be accepted by the population, but I feel that this would be the only other viable option.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 9:19 AM

2015-04-14T09:19:04-04:00

I also wonder how many went through the training in order to get an understanding of how the forces would work against the extremists & then go to the extremists to inform them of tactics to be used?

Response by COL Charles Williams made Apr 14 at 2015 9:27 AM

2015-04-14T09:27:36-04:00

As others have said.... CSM Michael J. Uhlig SFC Mark Merino CSM Private RallyPoint Member

Look at past wars, and our recent combat operations...

You have to be able to separate tactical, operational, and strategic aims/goals. We are very good (unbeatable) at the tactical level, and even the operational level. We falter at the strategic level, because we never have a defined "war aim" that we, the American People, and the Administration (the trinity), can agree upon. Then, that aim is often not what the supported nation wants...

I think the last time we did that (had everyone on the same page, to include the American public) was WWII. There are reasons we still have forces in Europe, Korea, Japan, etc.

Nation change requires our aim (assuming the 3 parts of trinity are in sync) to be in sync with the those we are supporting; many times what we want is not what they want... "They have to want it!" Change also takes time and requires a war aim and vision focused on the long haul, not the calendar. The calendar is normally our worst enemy when in comes to determining our exit strategy.

Exit strategy should be tied to one thing, and one thing only... Achieving our war aim(s), which should be decided before set foot on the ground.

Time should not be a screening criteria.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 9:47 AM

2015-04-14T09:47:22-04:00

The liberals have this skewed sense of reality. They will use the military for votes but when it comes to actually supporting us, they show their true colors. Just ask how many appreciate the large raises pushed by President Reagan and you either get deafening silence or vitriol.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 9:54 AM

2015-04-14T09:54:45-04:00

The Afghan people are a conquered people and always have been. Once someone seizes control of the country the people follow that person, and the process repeats itself all through out history. How are we suppose to change a peoples way of thinking in a decade or so? The people who come up with the goals set forth are looking at history as a whole, and think that by throwing money and troops at the problem it will be fixed. All the money we have thrown at that country to sure up its government and society as a whole has done nothing other than pad the pockets of those corrupt people in charge. I worked to train the Afghan Police and with their limited education it is like teaching tactics to my 11 year old, they just aren't going to grasp the idea. Unless a society as a whole stands up as a whole and bands together to rid their country of its problem, it will never happen.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 10:16 AM

2015-04-14T10:16:24-04:00

I don't think any of these answers really fit the exact situation.

The ANA needs to take ownership of the security within their Country and be prepared to react to violence and attacks. That said, they are not fully/adequately trained because of the recruits that are accepted and the lack of dedication.

I don't know what the best solution is, but they need further mentorship. Each unit, like our military, varies in capability, though obviously more radically.

Response by SGT Richard H. made Apr 14 at 2015 10:43 AM

2015-04-14T10:43:32-04:00

There are a number of great comments on here as to what we should do and why...I'll go ahead and add one about what we AREN'T doing and why. What we aren't doing is something we will probably never be able to do....get the culture to value life....as an overwhelming majority, anyway.
It really seems to me that's the root of the problem. They don't seem to value their own lives. I'm not versed enough in the Muslim culture to say why...maybe it's the 72 virgins in paradise, maybe its just that life sucks so bad living the way they do that they're just looking to move to the other side....those are questions that I doubt any of us can answer to any meaningful degree.
The point of this really just comes down to more questions. How do you overcome that? I don't know if you do. Certainly not in less than a generation. Maybe not even in two. As someone mentioned, we haven't been able to accomplish in 10 years with the ANA what we accomplish in 13 weeks with a raw basic trainee here. I think that's because we build on an existing culture here, and don't have the mindset of dozens of generations to undo.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 12:15 PM

2015-04-14T12:15:08-04:00

Ugh! I hate this. No it's not a surprise. It's literally like groundhog day, the movie. We are going to continue to go thru this over and over and over again until we finally do the right thing. (No I don't know what that is...) This is not surprising just happening 19 days after President Ghani addressed Congress and told the world that the American Troops were not engaging in Combat anymore.

I just can't get over the Dec 31st deadline. We are leaving them wide open. Afghans Pres. Ghani stated that the security transition was happening at the worst time. On the backdrop of the rise of Religious Extremism. But Obama is going to do what he said no matter the consequence.

YES, I believe that it is time for these countries to fight for their own, but when President Ghani states that they won't have a self sustaining Gov until the end of this decade, well, maybe we shouldn't have brought back our troops just yet. I HATE SAYING That because I know 2,350 soldiers killed over there is ENOUGH!! This is such a lose lose situation. Very Disappointing indeed.

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Apr 14 at 2015 12:26 PM

2015-04-14T12:26:30-04:00

Better to fight now than to have the nation fall, be reclaimed, then have to start over again. What if we pull out, Afghanistan falls again, and it leads to another major terrorist attack. Yes it is a what if, but the flip side is by supporting the Afghanis now we can provide them with a more stable platform and mitigate the risk of those what ifs. There is no perfect solution. You are talking about a region of the world that would not know what to do with an extended period of peace. They just have never had it. From the conquest of Rome to the rise of ISIL, that region has always had militarized forces fighting in that region to "pacify" it according to their beliefs.
I won't pretend that I have the solution to the problem, but I believe deeply that we cannot abandon these people. That would lead to more radicalism that the world does not need at this time.

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Apr 14 at 2015 12:28 PM

2015-04-14T12:28:53-04:00

Give the country "self-determination", 14 years of American occupation and what the people there want is for us to go home. Our continued presence is not a win for us. Leave and we can parlay with the guys who come out on top as the true leaders of the nation.

Response by 1SG Joe Messier made Apr 14 at 2015 12:53 PM

2015-04-14T12:53:22-04:00

I personally think we've handled these wars wrong. I wish our leaders would study history, and broaden their thinking. The path to success in my opinion is from a "All in or All out" perspective. History has proven success takes generations. Germany "surrendered" in May 1945, then the work of rebuilding a nation started. The Berlin wall didn't go up until 1961 then it came down in 1989. The one constant? A huge U.S./NATO presence to provide stability and deter a Russian/Communist influence. We're trying to provide minimal supporting security to a 10 year old government, that doesn't work. If we want to provide real assistance and establish economic prosperity to someone other than the warlords and Poppy pushers we need a long term "Marshall Plan" for Afghanistan. Not a surge, a long term increase in security forces that will stay for 30-50 years. Why do I believe we should stick around? Afghanistan has 30 TRILLION dollars of untapped natural resources spread out over 1400 mining facilities. There's a lot at stake in Afghanistan folks, a lot. They don't want us there? So what, we're in it for the long haul. We're going to drag you out of the stone age and bring you back to your former splendor. We're going to breed out ignorance and breed in progressive behaviors.

Guess what! The usual players are still involved. Due to proximity China and the Soviets are providing "assistance" strip mining while we provide security. This is a failure in government policy. We are trying to give Afghanistan it's freedom and resources to do as they please and get out!? . A good analogy is we're trying to hand an infant a set of utensils and telling him to eat the great big steak in front of them. They can't do it. Seems like a great economic opportunity for us. Then again it might just be a caffeine infused morning rant from a retired 1SG that wants to see his country succeed. Aloha from Hawaii.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 3:43 PM

2015-04-14T15:43:31-04:00

Mixed news but the new government seems more willing to accept US guidance yet, there is still wide spread corruption. The jury is still out on this one but this summer will be a key test of the ANA.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 5:43 PM

2015-04-14T17:43:26-04:00

My dad worked overseas in Iraq a long time ago. He said they have public hangings every day and the Infidels were made to watch them. Also, I have a friend that worked overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan. He told me when someone is killed or died other than being killed, women wailers are paid to wail at a funeral. My belief is they ( the Middle East in general) are so third world they don't understand what they are protesting or yelling about. They are like a bunch of magpies. When one starts squawking, they all join in. Being over there trying to make them understand anything is a waste of our KIA's and WIA's, time and our energy. IMHO

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Apr 14 at 2015 6:20 PM

2015-04-14T18:20:13-04:00

If we are not capable of defeating the Taliban, the ANA without a doubt will be ineffective against the Taliban. We have spent so much money in Afghanistan that we are running out of funds to continue the mission as we know it.

To fight a counterinsurgency the ANA has to find and kill the Taliban, to fight like the Taliban. The passion of the regular Afghans must be bright and strong to keep them on the offensive, but I doubt this will happen.

George Washington was an insurgent and he grew the Army to the point he could fight the British. If the Taliban reaches a critical mass, there is a great likelihood they will over run the country because the Afghans will be preoccupied societal benefits.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 8:56 PM

2015-04-14T20:56:17-04:00

I think it's important to note that the Taliban have been an Army longer than the ANA. Also, that Taliban are pretty good at this whole insurgency thing...so I don't think it's completely fair to jump all over the ANA constantly. During the height of OEF there were areas that the U.S. Military couldn't wrestle away from the Taliban and many areas where they gave us absolute fits. I'm not making the case that the ANA are squared, but I also don't think it's appropriate to jump all over a 12 year old army fighting a 25 year old army running an insurgency from an adjacent country...tall order.

Why should we finish the job? How about because we said we would. At some point we lose all credibility when we don't finish what we start.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 20 at 2015 11:56 AM

2015-10-20T11:56:27-04:00

They will always be dangerous if we give them the space and time to maneuver, culminating in attacking the ANA or the people.