Richard Holmes on the lack of coherent strategy in Afghanist

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by msr, Jul 7, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. msr

    msr LE

    We need a real strategy, not a sequence of tactical ploys; winning battles will not necessarily win the war. Confident assertions that the “comprehensive approach”, a key plank of our doctrine (notable for its absence from Iraq), is in place must be matched by visible and accurate application of both money and talent, much of the latter by definition non-military.
  2. Yes, a very good article - to the point and well-written. Thoroughly recommended.
  3. I thought that, technically, we had one. ie COIN.

    However without sufficient troops and equipment on the ground, then we are on a hiding to nothing and will remain so.

    ...and good article BTW.
  4. Afghanistan is very important for the USA from geopolitical point of view. And it is not about Afghanistan itself. Its position near Iran, post-Soviet central Asian states matters. It is important for Washington to keep troops here as long as possible. Let's agree that voice of Washington would be heard much better in central Asian capitals if American forces would be quite near. And it would be much easier to stage colour revolutions.

    So the absence of clear strategy in Afghanistan is logical. Clear goal would be reached later or sooner and it could lead to the withdrawal. But it would contradict to the strategic objective.

    So the British die in Afghanistan to give the Americans an excuse to continue to keep their troops in the country.
  5. When someone with the background of Holmes says these things, someone should listen. Additionally, are we now timewise far enough away from loss of CO 1WG to discuss the effects of his death?
  6. Holmes, as always, clear and incisive. Such a shame that the political lessons of all Afghan wars - going back over centuries - have never been understood by the politicians. However, the military lessons are known and mostly understood.
  7. Very interesting article .

    Hmmm extend tours for soldiers ? It's going to be very difficult for goverments to spin but the question should be asked if NATO genuinely feels up to commiting to Afghanistan
  8. Holmes - top man! Will broony toons listen NO!
  9. Politicians never seem to listen to the old adage,

    ' Learn the lessons from history '

    I have such anger towards these people that i feel my head about to explode.

    Richard Holmes is my vote for Prime Minister,and that would be more votes than the current incumbent!
  10. Top bloke Prof Holmes (Retired TA Brigadier-General) using the Septics rank terminology.

    Yes, I have read a number of books on Military History by Prof Holmes, the most recent one being called 'Rifles', all about British Infantry Regiments etc.

    I would rather listen to, and read stuff by Prof Holmes than to tbe arrant bullshite spewed forth by Cyclops and his minions.

    Cyclops McRuin, Meddlesome-Pete and Pals from the time of Teflon B'Liar have spun themselves so much garbage, they are believing their own crap. They have their collective heads jamned so far up their collective politcal jacksies, its harldy wonder they are 'Not Listening!'.

    I really do love it when Cyclops and Friends burbble in Public about 'Learning Lessons'.. and 'We Will Listen..'. What utter fackwits they are. They must take people for fools....!! :) :lol:
  11. That is the problem Uncle V.

    They do take us all for fools.

    See how they get re-elected,when they bother to have elections at all!
  12. All Brown sees is Pound signs.

  13. mercurydancer

    mercurydancer LE Book Reviewer

    Prof Holmes is as usual very insightful. I couldnt agree with him more, but its taken him to write in a newspaper what the plan should be.
  14. I can't find this on Amazon - presumably it is very recent - is there an ISBN, please?
  15. Counterinsurgency is not a strategy. COIN doctrines recommend tactics and there's more than one strategic approach.

    Cordesman has described Bush's second term war in Afghanistan as an exercise in armed nation building, something more than a simple COIN campaign.

    The current US Army/USMC COIN manual recommends an constantly evolving design along multiple logical lines of operation. It recommends protecting the people over killing the enemy.

    President Barry's mission seems rather confused. It's driven by the imperative of preventing another 9-11 by killing the bad guys. Those particular bad guys are in FATA at the moment. It is somewhat at odds with protecting Afghans the stated mission of the big Helmand op of today.