This is directed more towards the officers, not the grunts. Why is it that every time I read about a military post in Afghanistan being overrun or attacked it seems as though whoever chose to build the base in that location was drunk? These forward positions always seem to be at the base of some hill or mountain where just about anyone can easily attack them. For example this weekend 8 soldiers died at this base


Wouldn't you want to be at the highest position so you can fire downward? Also I feel like there are no fronts, just random bases in the middle of nowhere. Isn't the idea to start at one corner of the country and sweep across to the other side while eliminating as many enemies as possible? I'm not trying to be offense I'm just curious.

yes, but to do that we need waaay more soldiers. 68k US troops plus the brits/canadians/and contractors only add up to 100k.

__________________
Gaw Dam Mongorians!

Well the commander and chief is dumb as a sack of hammers. And our soldiers are not allowed the fight this fight like they should be able to.

Damn Obama done took er jerrrbs

__________________
Gaw Dam Mongorians!

i think the problem with Afghanistan is the extremely rough terrain. that type of terrain is very difficult to live in, let alone fight in. no amount of training will make the soldiers as proficient in moving through those hills like the thousands of years of experience the afghans have. the U.S. is making their best effort just to make it in this generation's Vietnam. it's a waste of time, money and lives.

the U.S. declared war on terror, and think that by terrorizing the people of another country we will win. that war cannot be won militarily, with guns, tanks, helicopters, and torture. it takes a different strategy not based in military might, but based on education, cultural awareness, and letting the people know the west is not full of infidels that deserve to be killed, but full of human beings, just like them, who have a lot to offer if given a chance.

p.s. the most conservative muslim nation on earth is saudi arabia, most, if not ALL terrorist are born, raised, and taught all that nonesense and ignorance in SAUDI ARABIA. not afghanistan or Iraq or Iran... just throwing it out there.

Your take on the terrain is correct. The Russians got their ass handed to them in those mountains.

Your take on trying to win the hearts of the Muslims is way off. I have studied a great deal about Islam and I can tell you that a good percentage want you to convert or die and they don't care what a good guy you are. Ask how many want Sharia law to rule the world and its pretty much all devout Muslims because this belief defines what it means to be devout.

See www.jihadwatch.org

If you really want your mind blown check out www.memritv.org

As far as Muslim countries, you are correct. In general the more pro US their Government is the more anti US the people and vis versa. That is too complicated to explain here.

Anyway, it is hard to win against these guys by conventional means because they hide behind women and children. In their view, nothing matters but the spread of Islam so hiding weapons in a day care center is permissible.

However, we can and would win if all of our citizens were behind our military. In fact, we would have won long ago. Our enemies greatest weapon is our own dissent.

They said the same thing about Vietnam, Korea, Desert Storm, Somalia .........

You can't just blame the people that don't want war for the failures that are evident. That region is only "Winnable" by eradicating every living soul in every village and city. If some other country came to the USA and started killing all your friends and family would it be different?

__________________
It is far easier to ignorantly control others than it is to wisely control yourself.

To the original poster:

You set up an out post supported by 2 or 3 fire bases with a range of between 5-10 miles (special ammunition for the 175mm can go 40KM). Locations of your OP are picked based on locations of heavy troop movements or because they are the only routs to bring up heavy guns and equipment. Also because they offer best vantage point, etc. MOB supports FSB supports FOB supports OP.

This tactic requires less troops but is obviously more dangerous (Google "Battle of Khe Sanh")

__________________
SI MINOR PLUS EST ERGO NIHIL SUNT OMNIA

Maybe our military didn't see the 100's of Afghan soldiers that were hiding in a mosque, because the rules of engagement - created by the liberal hand-wringers - have tied our hands?

Or could it be that Obama refuses to send the 40,000 additional troops the experts on the ground know we need?

Either give our soldiers what they need to win this war, or get them out of there.

__________________
"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." - Thomas Jefferson my grow

^^
IDK about the rules of engagement argument. The Russians did whatever they wanted without regard for Afghan life, they did not succeed either. We would have saved a crap ton of lives/money if either we were never involved in helping that country with the soviets OR after the soviets left we should have helped the country rebuild. Regardless were cleaning up a mess we made a long time ago.