Land combat questions

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

that really depends on what country in being invaded and how the invading army behaves.  the rules seems to be different for Europe then some 3rd world shithole.  I think part of that is the idea that 1st world nations have more to lose with a post occupation insurgency.  another issue is the size of todays military forces.  without fielding something on the scale of a WW2 army you just cant occupy a country effectivly and that makes guerrilla forces much more effective.  this is especially true because a modern miltary cant take the actions they could have 100 years ago to fight irregular forces.

Is a determined insurgency bound to win by avoiding regular land warfare? Could the French resistance have eventually driven the Germans out if they had not settled France?

[GDS_Starfury]

no, because the Germans had no problem hanging a village for the acts of a a few to keep the rest in line.  we cant do that.
forget the Germans.  we killed more people fire bombing Tokyo then we did at Hiroshima.  both methods got the point across and conventional wisom and history agrees they were the right thing to do.  any bets on how well either method would go over today?  once upon a time we flattened Monte Casino thinking it would help punch a hole in the German line.  today if a stray bullet hits a friking mosque its headline news and bitches are up in arms because our soldiers arent sensitive to other religions.... 

[Longdan]

Civilisation sucks but not so much if you are willing to give up the moral high ground...

[LongBlade]

no, because the Germans had no problem hanging a village for the acts of a a few to keep the rest in line.  we cant do that.

One could argue that the Russians have tried that tactic in Chechnya. It doesn't appear as though it exactly works.

[Airborne Rifles]

I may be stepping into a minefield here, but who's to say that counterinsurgency doesn't work today?  Look at Iraq; compared to other countries in the region, say Egypt and Syria, it's almost a model of stability today.  We also don't know what Afghanistan is going to look like in five or ten years either.  The success of the Taliban is in no way assured once ISAF pulls out.

I am speaking with a bias in both of these cases since I'm a veteran of both conflicts and hope my time there wasn't for naught.  If nothing else, I think we've proved to would-be trouble-makers in the world that we Americans are crazy enough to invade your country and sit there for a decade if you piss us off bad enough.

Mr. B, from a practical standpoint you have to put troops on the ground to patrol and find the enemy, especially in counter-insurgency.  My sector here in Afghanistan is a perfect example.  We have tethered Zeppelins that observe every inch of our relatively small AO with high-powered cameras and thermals not to mention rotary and fixed wing assets overhead almost constantly but our most effective way of making contact with the enemy is still for a rifle squad to walk out on a patrol and look for a fight.  Airpower is awesome but it's a sledgehammer not a scalpel.

[GDS_Starfury]

you keep your ass safe!

[LongBlade]

I may be stepping into a minefield here, but who's to say that counterinsurgency doesn't work today? 

I agree. If you haven't, I'd highly recommend reading Max Boot's Savage Wars of Peace.

IMHO (from the cheap seats) we got lucky in Iraq when al-Anbar province flipped and their leaders decided to get in bed with us. We convinced them we'd stay as long as necessary and they believed us.

Our biggest problem in Iraq and Afghanistan is that we have a first class strike force, but lack the numbers to truly occupy a sizable chunk of land. After WWII there was a platoon on every block in Germany. They couldn't fart without us knowing it.

We have nowhere near those numbers today and struggle to keep whatever land we take. Counter insurgency can work, but if you're going to occupy some real estate, make sure you bring enough boots to keep it. That is the lesson from the last decade.

[Longdan]

It is been said before by wiser men than me: In Afghanistan, If we bought their opium crop for US dollar$ and sold them squashies and Lula Lemon burkas
and guns and ammo and gay porn the Taliban would disappear.  Exploding those guys don't work too good...I mean left alone they just kill each other for fun anyway
as there is nothing better to do.  The place is boring and poor and they have no hot chics, subsistence agriculture with one cash crop that we destroy and the bad guys buy. (WTF!?!)
Which side would you be on?  Ask a few of those East Tennessee guys I met long ago.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

I may be stepping into a minefield here, but who's to say that counterinsurgency doesn't work today?  Look at Iraq; compared to other countries in the region, say Egypt and Syria, it's almost a model of stability today. 

I would love to believe that. Let history prove it so.

We also don't know what Afghanistan is going to look like in five or ten years either.  The success of the Taliban is in no way assured once ISAF pulls out.

I am speaking with a bias in both of these cases since I'm a veteran of both conflicts and hope my time there wasn't for naught.  If nothing else, I think we've proved to would-be trouble-makers in the world that we Americans are crazy enough to invade your country and sit there for a decade if you piss us off bad enough.

Mr. B, from a practical standpoint you have to put troops on the ground to patrol and find the enemy, especially in counter-insurgency.  My sector here in Afghanistan is a perfect example.  We have tethered Zeppelins that observe every inch of our relatively small AO with high-powered cameras and thermals

Well shite, who can argue with that? They must be in awe of your awesomeness!"

not to mention rotary and fixed wing assets overhead almost constantly but our most effective way of making contact with the enemy is still for a rifle squad to walk out on a patrol and look for a fight.  Airpower is awesome but it's a sledgehammer not a scalpel.

Nothing wrong with a sledge, especially when it the handle is long enough to be safe. Let them rail about their impotence.

[LongBlade]

I may be stepping into a minefield here, but who's to say that counterinsurgency doesn't work today?  Look at Iraq; compared to other countries in the region, say Egypt and Syria, it's almost a model of stability today. 

I would love to believe that. Let history prove it so.

Read this. It's edifying and will answer your question: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/046500721X/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=046500721X&linkCode=as2&tag=grogheads-20

[Longdan]

When one looks at this history it kind of explains why the French and the British could not understand why
the US would not fully back their post WW2 colonial affrays and pulled the rug out of the Suez adventure
among other things.  When the reason for going into another country is "We felt like it." It looks just a little
like imperialism.  It makes me think of bananas.

[Staggerwing]

The Dutch were also left out in the cold as far as the Dutch East Indies went when the USA decided it had no interest in Southeast Asia after WW2. IIRC the postwar chaos was so bad that large groups of Japanese prisoners were actually rearmed by British and Dutch forces so they could assist in the attempts to quell the widespread rioting and massacres that erupted due to the power vacuum in the region.

[LongBlade]

The Dutch were also left out in the cold as far as the Dutch East Indies went when the USA decided it had no interest in Southeast Asia after WW2. IIRC the postwar chaos was so bad that large groups of Japanese prisoners were actually rearmed by British and Dutch forces so they could assist in the attempts to quell the widespread rioting and massacres that erupted due to the power vacuum in the region.

I learn something new every day.

[GDS_Starfury]

I almost picked up a book today about US and German forces teaming up during the immediate aftermath of WW2 to capture a SS help prison holding French officers.  its supposedly a true story. 

and thats why I love history.  you just cant make up the stuff thats actually happened.

[Staggerwing]

It's my understanding that German soldiers were used extensively as MPs and traffic cops after the armistice by the Allies.