Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
Author Message
WoodlandsOwl Offline
Up in the Woods
*

Posts: 11,813
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #1
Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
What's wrong with this picture? Once the Marines show up in his neighborhood Mr. Taliban just has to ditch his AK-47 and claim to be a "civilian." When we cleaned out Fallujah we detained everyone and sorted out who was an insurgent amd who wasn't.

MARJAH, Afghanistan — Outnumbered and outgunned, Taliban fighters are mounting a tougher fight than expected in Marjah, Afghan officials said Sunday, as U.S.-led forces converged on a pocket of militants in a western section of the town.

With fighter jets, drones and attack helicopters roaring overhead, Marine and Afghan companies advanced on a 2-square-mile (5.2-sq. kilometer) area where more than 40 insurgents were believed holed up.

“They are squeezed,” said Lt. Col. Brian Christmas, commander of 3rd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment. “It looks like they want to stay and fight but they can always drop their weapons and slip away. That’s the nature of this war.”

U.S. officials signaled their intention to attack Marjah, a major Taliban supply and opium-smuggling center, months ago, apparently in hopes the insurgents would flee and allow the U.S.-led force to take over quickly and restore an Afghan government presence.

Instead, the insurgents rigged Marjah with bombs and booby traps to slow the allied attack, which began Feb. 13. Teams of Taliban gunmen stayed in the town, delivering sometimes intense volleys of gunfire on Marine and Afghan units slogging through the rutted streets and poppy fields.


Afghan Defense Ministry spokesman Gen. Mohammad Zahir Azimi said the U.S. and its allies had expected the Taliban to leave behind thousands of hidden explosives, which they did. But they were surprised to find that so many militants stayed to fight.

“We predicted it would take many days. But our prediction was that the insurgency would not resist that way,” Azimi told The Associated Press in Kabul.

In a statement Sunday, NATO acknowledged that insurgents were putting up a “determined resistance” in various parts of Marjah, although the overall offensive is “on track.”

Marine spokesman Lt. Josh Diddams said Sunday that Marines and Afghan troops were continuing to run into “pockets of stiff resistance” though they were making progress. Diddams said no area is completely calm yet although three markets in town — which covers about 80 square miles — are at least partially open.

“Everywhere we’ve got Marines, we’re running into insurgents,” Diddams said. In many cases, the militants are fighting out of bunkers fortified with sandbags and other materials.

Before the assault, U.S. officers said they believed 400 to 1,000 insurgents were in Marjah, 360 miles (610 kilometers) southwest of Kabul. About 7,500 U.S. and Afghan troops attacked the town, while thousands more NATO soldiers moved into other Taliban strongholds in surrounding Helmand province.

It was the largest joint NATO-Afghan operation since the Taliban regime was ousted from power in 2001.

The Marjah operation is a major test of a new NATO strategy that stresses protecting civilians over routing insurgents quickly. It’s also the first major ground operation since President Barack Obama ordered 30,000 reinforcements to Afghanistan.

During Sunday’s fighting, Marines found several abandoned Kalashnikov rifles along with ammunition hidden in homes, suggesting that insurgents intended to blend into the local population and fight back later.


Sporadic volleys of insurgent machine-gun fire rang out through the day.

“They shoot from right here in front of a house, they don’t care that there are children around,” said Abdel Rahim.

Abdul Rahman Saber, chief of the local council for Marjah, said the situation in much of the town was improving — that some residents had been able to return to their homes.

Life in Marjah, however, remains far from normal. The price of food had soared, with the price of sugar and other staples doubling as the fighting continues.

“The Taliban are fleeing the area, but there is sporadic shooting,” Saber said. “Two or three days ago, 12 civilians were wounded by bullets when they were escaping.”

On Saturday, President Hamid Karzai urged NATO to do more to protect civilians during combat operations to secure Marjah, although he noted the military alliance had made progress in doing that — mainly by reducing airstrikes and adopting more restrictive combat rules.

NATO forces have repeatedly said they want to prevent civilian casualties, but acknowledged that it is not always possible. On Saturday, the alliance said its troops killed another civilian in the Marjah area, bringing the civilian death toll from the operation to at least 16.

Karzai also reached out to Taliban fighters, urging them to renounce al-Qaida and join with the government.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/6877910.html
02-21-2010 02:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


RobertN Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 35,485
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 95
I Root For: THE NIU Huskies
Location: Wayne's World
Post: #2
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
Obviously it didn't work like they hoped. I am going to guess they won't make that mistake again. It isn't like this is the first mistake ever made in a war(or battle). You learn from them and move on to more successful plans. Having said that, I do agree that we try to minimize civilian casualties rather than the rights plan of going in and killing everyone(hey, they are just Muslims not Christians so who really cares?).
02-21-2010 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SumOfAllFears Offline
Grim Reaper of Misguided Liberal Souls
*

Posts: 18,213
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 58
I Root For: America
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 03:12 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Obviously it didn't work like they hoped. I am going to guess they won't make that mistake again. It isn't like this is the first mistake ever made in a war(or battle). You learn from them and move on to more successful plans. Having said that, I do agree that we try to minimize civilian casualties rather than the rights plan of going in and killing everyone(hey, they are just Muslims not Christians so who really cares?).

You live a fantasy.
02-21-2010 03:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RobertN Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 35,485
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 95
I Root For: THE NIU Huskies
Location: Wayne's World
Post: #4
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 03:19 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 03:12 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Obviously it didn't work like they hoped. I am going to guess they won't make that mistake again. It isn't like this is the first mistake ever made in a war(or battle). You learn from them and move on to more successful plans. Having said that, I do agree that we try to minimize civilian casualties rather than the rights plan of going in and killing everyone(hey, they are just Muslims not Christians so who really cares?).

You live a fantasy.
How?
02-21-2010 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SumOfAllFears Offline
Grim Reaper of Misguided Liberal Souls
*

Posts: 18,213
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 58
I Root For: America
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 03:32 PM)RobertN Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 03:19 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 03:12 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Obviously it didn't work like they hoped. I am going to guess they won't make that mistake again. It isn't like this is the first mistake ever made in a war(or battle). You learn from them and move on to more successful plans. Having said that, I do agree that we try to minimize civilian casualties rather than the rights plan of going in and killing everyone(hey, they are just Muslims not Christians so who really cares?).

You live a fantasy.
How?

Your assine remark about the rights plan of killing everyone, for one. If they wanted them all dead, they would be dead. but hey every thing you say and every thought you have is assine. There is no hope for you.
02-21-2010 04:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RobertN Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 35,485
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 95
I Root For: THE NIU Huskies
Location: Wayne's World
Post: #6
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 04:53 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 03:32 PM)RobertN Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 03:19 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 03:12 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Obviously it didn't work like they hoped. I am going to guess they won't make that mistake again. It isn't like this is the first mistake ever made in a war(or battle). You learn from them and move on to more successful plans. Having said that, I do agree that we try to minimize civilian casualties rather than the rights plan of going in and killing everyone(hey, they are just Muslims not Christians so who really cares?).

You live a fantasy.
How?

Your assine remark about the rights plan of killing everyone, for one. If they wanted them all dead, they would be dead. but hey every thing you say and every thought you have is assine. There is no hope for you.
Well, all I read on here is how killing is the rights answer to all our problems. Many/most Republicans think all Muslims are terrorists and not a big deal if they are killed. So if you combine the two Republican ideas, you have exactly what I said. THere is nothing assinine about what I said.
02-21-2010 07:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Rebel
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #7
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 07:17 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Well, all I read on here is how killing is the rights answer to all our problems. Many/most Republicans think all Muslims are terrorists and not a big deal if they are killed. So if you combine the two Republican ideas, you have exactly what I said. THere is nothing assinine about what I said.

You need to learn how to f'n read. I've never seen any Republican on here say they wanted to kill innocent civilians or that all Muslims were terrorists.
02-21-2010 07:19 PM
Quote this message in a reply
RobertN Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 35,485
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 95
I Root For: THE NIU Huskies
Location: Wayne's World
Post: #8
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 07:19 PM)Rebel Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 07:17 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Well, all I read on here is how killing is the rights answer to all our problems. Many/most Republicans think all Muslims are terrorists and not a big deal if they are killed. So if you combine the two Republican ideas, you have exactly what I said. THere is nothing assinine about what I said.

You need to learn how to f'n read. I've never seen any Republican on here say they wanted to kill innocent civilians or that all Muslims were terrorists.
I can read. I have seen it posted here.
02-21-2010 08:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rebel
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #9
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 08:16 PM)RobertN Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 07:19 PM)Rebel Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 07:17 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Well, all I read on here is how killing is the rights answer to all our problems. Many/most Republicans think all Muslims are terrorists and not a big deal if they are killed. So if you combine the two Republican ideas, you have exactly what I said. THere is nothing assinine about what I said.

You need to learn how to f'n read. I've never seen any Republican on here say they wanted to kill innocent civilians or that all Muslims were terrorists.
I can read. I have seen it posted here.

Dig it up.

....waiting....
02-21-2010 09:51 PM
Quote this message in a reply
smn1256 Offline
I miss Tripster
*

Posts: 28,878
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 337
I Root For: Lower taxes
Location: North Mexico
Post: #10
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 08:16 PM)RobertN Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 07:19 PM)Rebel Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 07:17 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Well, all I read on here is how killing is the rights answer to all our problems. Many/most Republicans think all Muslims are terrorists and not a big deal if they are killed. So if you combine the two Republican ideas, you have exactly what I said. THere is nothing assinine about what I said.

You need to learn how to f'n read. I've never seen any Republican on here say they wanted to kill innocent civilians or that all Muslims were terrorists.
I can read. I have seen it posted here.

You've never read any where that all Muslims were terrorists. What you may have seen is that most terrorists are Muslims.
02-21-2010 09:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RobertN Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 35,485
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 95
I Root For: THE NIU Huskies
Location: Wayne's World
Post: #11
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 09:58 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 08:16 PM)RobertN Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 07:19 PM)Rebel Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 07:17 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Well, all I read on here is how killing is the rights answer to all our problems. Many/most Republicans think all Muslims are terrorists and not a big deal if they are killed. So if you combine the two Republican ideas, you have exactly what I said. THere is nothing assinine about what I said.

You need to learn how to f'n read. I've never seen any Republican on here say they wanted to kill innocent civilians or that all Muslims were terrorists.
I can read. I have seen it posted here.

You've never read any where that all Muslims were terrorists. What you may have seen is that most terrorists are Muslims.
Well, I have seen it posted here that we should kick out all Muslims from the US for one thing. THat pretty much sums it up. THere have been other comments as well.
02-21-2010 10:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


smn1256 Offline
I miss Tripster
*

Posts: 28,878
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 337
I Root For: Lower taxes
Location: North Mexico
Post: #12
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 10:06 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Well, I have seen it posted here that we should kick out all Muslims from the US for one thing.

You have a problem with that?
02-21-2010 11:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Paul M Offline
American-American
*

Posts: 21,196
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 649
I Root For: OU
Location: Next to Boomer
Post: #13
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
You went from killing all Muslims to kicking them out. If I repeat Rebels challenge, will you change again to "somebody disagreed with a Muslim once over the weather, that pretty much sums it up".

Like Rebel said, prove it.
02-21-2010 11:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,804
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3211
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #14
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
Robert is not into facts.
02-21-2010 11:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I45owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,374
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 184
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Dallas, TX

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #15
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 02:49 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  
Quote:“They are squeezed,” said Lt. Col. Brian Christmas, commander of 3rd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment. “It looks like they want to stay and fight but they can always drop their weapons and slip away. That’s the nature of this war.”

When I first saw this elsewhere, I assumed they meant that they would melt into the surrounding countryside and hide, because I didn't think that they would possibly allow this (below) to happen.

(02-21-2010 02:49 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  
Quote:During Sunday’s fighting, Marines found several abandoned Kalashnikov rifles along with ammunition hidden in homes, suggesting that insurgents intended to blend into the local population and fight back later.

I'm all for minimizing civilian casualties as long as it doesn't come with a heavy price of US soldiers or insurgents escaping.
02-21-2010 11:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,804
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3211
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #16
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
I'm for minimizing US and allied casualties while achieving the objective.

Other considerations--such as minimizing civilian casualties--are secondary.
02-21-2010 11:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,261
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 318
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #17
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-21-2010 11:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'm for minimizing US and allied casualties while achieving the objective.

Other considerations--such as minimizing civilian casualties--are secondary.

To a point. The problem with fighting a guerrilla war in a place like Afghanistan is that sometimes you depend to some extent on help from the populace (or at least not actively aiding the enemy). Too many civilian casualties and you lose the support of the citizenry. Al Qaeda screwed up in Iraq by killing too many civilians, making Iraqis more likely to turn against them and help us. So you might achieve your objective, only to find the next objective harder.

That said, there's no way to fight a war without civilian casualties, all you can do is minimize them. And what good does it do to take a city or town if all the Taliban get away? I would think the point would be to make them fight.
02-22-2010 04:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,804
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3211
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #18
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-22-2010 04:43 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 11:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'm for minimizing US and allied casualties while achieving the objective.

Other considerations--such as minimizing civilian casualties--are secondary.

To a point. The problem with fighting a guerrilla war in a place like Afghanistan is that sometimes you depend to some extent on help from the populace (or at least not actively aiding the enemy). Too many civilian casualties and you lose the support of the citizenry. Al Qaeda screwed up in Iraq by killing too many civilians, making Iraqis more likely to turn against them and help us. So you might achieve your objective, only to find the next objective harder.

That said, there's no way to fight a war without civilian casualties, all you can do is minimize them. And what good does it do to take a city or town if all the Taliban get away? I would think the point would be to make them fight.

Don't disagree. But the fact situation you cite is one where not killing too many civilians is ultimately part of minimizing damage to your own people.
02-22-2010 04:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WoodlandsOwl Offline
Up in the Woods
*

Posts: 11,813
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #19
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
(02-22-2010 04:51 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-22-2010 04:43 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  
(02-21-2010 11:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'm for minimizing US and allied casualties while achieving the objective.

Other considerations--such as minimizing civilian casualties--are secondary.

To a point. The problem with fighting a guerrilla war in a place like Afghanistan is that sometimes you depend to some extent on help from the populace (or at least not actively aiding the enemy). Too many civilian casualties and you lose the support of the citizenry. Al Qaeda screwed up in Iraq by killing too many civilians, making Iraqis more likely to turn against them and help us. So you might achieve your objective, only to find the next objective harder.

That said, there's no way to fight a war without civilian casualties, all you can do is minimize them. And what good does it do to take a city or town if all the Taliban get away? I would think the point would be to make them fight.

Don't disagree. But the fact situation you cite is one where not killing too many civilians is ultimately part of minimizing damage to your own people.

I'm all for the effort of "rounding up" all the 'civilian refugees' from Marjah and instead of 'letting them go', put some in "refugee camps" for "their own safety" and in the meantime seeing if these people are 'locals' or if they are Mr. Taliban. And they can first start on all male detainees aged 15-50.
02-22-2010 05:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
T-Monay820 Offline
Get Rotor-vated!
*

Posts: 5,397
Joined: Apr 2002
Reputation: 49
I Root For: Duke, VPI
Location: Norfolk, VA
Post: #20
RE: Outgunned Taliban mounting tough fight against U.S.-led forces
Good article about how flawed the current "Hearts and Minds" campaign is and how it has limited (and violated) the proper waging of war.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/opinio...ef=opinion

Quote:There is also little to indicate that the “hearts and minds” campaign has resulted in the population’s cooperation, especially in the all-important area of human intelligence. Afghans can be expected to cooperate with American forces only if they feel safe to do so — when we take permanent control of an area. Obviously, this involves defeating the enemy.
02-22-2010 06:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.