US unhappy with UK Tactics

#2
I think that we could say the same about their tatics with the blue on blues they have had with us?

Waiting for incoming.... from our cousins over the water!
 
#4
Maybe we should pull out all troops now, seeing as we're not up to scratch. See how they manage on their own. Anyway, you can guarantee that wherever this rumour started, it probably wasn't started by American troops.

Pinch of salt.
 
#5
So what exactly are the aspects they're allegedly unimpressed by? The report says nothing about that.

MsG
 
#7
Sounds made up, based on some second hand waffle. No sources, just mentions 'reports', what might they be then? No specifics at all really.

I'm sure our cousins across the pond would be communicating any and all issues at a much higher level than the press.
 
#8
It has been suggested US military commanders were unimpressed by aspects of the British effort in the country.
More sterling reporting from Sky News. :roll: No sources (quotable or otherwise), quotes or context for these "suggestions."

The phrase "sh!t-stirring" leaps to mind.
 
#9
Bugsy said:
So what exactly are the aspects they're allegedly unimpressed by? The report says nothing about that.

MsG
Probably the fact that we don't just shoot indiscriminately in a 360 degree arc whenever we're attacked! :wink:

However, I still remember from the early days in Afghanistan the US being unhappy with the way the Royal Marine's were engaging the enemy. The Taliban were using their usual tactics of attack and retreat, and the Marines were doggedly following and engaging them for weeks on end. 8)

The US then put in their 'specialist' Mountain Rangers to 'sort' Terry out once and for all. I believe they gave up after about 4 days, because the terrain was too rough for them! 8O
 
#10
this is typical reporting for domestic American consumption.
its so the US public (the warmonger type) can point the finger at the forigners and say "Its YOUR fault we are losing"

you would honestly think they were allready covering thier butts with an excuse in case of defeat.
but i'm not that cynical........................... am I?
 
#11
too many good reports from america thanks to Obama.

time to sh!t stir
 
#12
Reporter asks HUtton "so what about the yanks not liking the way we are fighting this war then".

Hutton replies "loadsa bollox - We will not change our tactics in Afghanistan on the basis of uncorroborated and unsourced gossip from people who don't have the courage to put their names to their remarks"

Looks like he knows what journos are like.
 
#13
Possibly some spin by their DoD to cause a reaction by our forces.

Luckily for them we're quite restrained (Notwithstanding Dannet. Jackson Et al) otherwise we would let rip regarding all their failed, meaningless foreign polices and inept military doctrine

So sh1t stir away septics, but stand-by . . . . . . . .
 
#14
Whatever tactical failings the UK has, nothing is as bad as joining a war 2 years late! :D

Upholding the centuries-long tradition of US/UK bickering...
 
#15
Sven said:
Reporter asks HUtton "so what about the yanks not liking the way we are fighting this war then".

Hutton replies "loadsa bollox - We will not change our tactics in Afghanistan on the basis of uncorroborated and unsourced gossip from people who don't have the courage to put their names to their remarks"

Looks like he knows what journos are like.
And special advisors, and ministers briefing journalists in the lobby....
 
#16
DrStealth said:
this is typical reporting for domestic American consumption.
its so the US public (the warmonger type) can point the finger at the forigners and say "Its YOUR fault we are losing"

you would honestly think they were allready covering thier butts with an excuse in case of defeat.
but i'm not that cynical........................... am I?
Americans losing a war! Unthinkable - I mean it's never happened! And...er... well that time it did, we'll...er... just pretend it was a draw and ...er...act like it never happened. We can also blame the Commie's, the pinko peace-niks, the Aussies (who were there - so somehow it's their fault) and the Brits (who weren't there, because back then we had more sense :wink: )!

The truth is that Americans try to win wars using technology and sheer weight of numbers. But technology doesn't work very well in Afghanistan. Plus the terrain isn't great for vehicles to get around. Sheer weight of numbers might work, but it'll be a big and bloody body count by the end of it. :cry:
 
#17
I don't think the US can be criticised for tactics - the report of no more than 4 magazines being used per rifleman in one firefight (see thread below) doesn't fit with the received wisdom of grunts spraying rounds everywhere.

http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=116206.html

The main problems are:

1. Nipping off to fight a war elsewhere in 2003. (contrary to the first principle of war)
2. Severe lack of troops.

Civilian and friendly military casualties from air attack are symptomatic of the causes above.
 
#18
Excuse Fingers Guardian...

Hutton: Claims US unhappy with UK over Afghanistan are tittle-tattle

British defence secretary says he will press EU Nato allies to provide more military resources in Afghanistan

* Deborah Summers and agencies


Corporal Lachlan MacNeil at a British observation post on the edge of Garmsir, Afghanistan

A British observation post on the edge of Garmsir, Afghanistan. Photograph: Declan Walsh

John Hutton today rejected claims that US military commanders were unhappy with the performance of the British armed forces in Afghanistan as "tittle-tattle", as he called on Nato to do more to share the burden among its members.

The defence secretary acknowledged that a shortage of troops might have hampered progress in Afghanistan and said he would press the UK's European Nato allies to provide extra military resources. 1*

But he said that Britain had not received a direct request from the US to provide additional soldiers and added that the UK was "playing above our weight" compared with other Nato members.

Hutton told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "There has been a very lively debate in Europe over the last few years about this. Our view has always been very clear that Nato needs to do more, the European members of Nato need to do more. There needs to be a fairer burden-sharing of responsibilities, particularly in those really hard areas where what we need are combat forces." 2*

In an interview with the Financial Times published this morning, Hutton dismissed reports that senior figures in the US military have been left unimpressed by some aspects of the British effort in the country.

"I do not think that is fair, nor do I think that reflects the real view in the Pentagon and elsewhere," he said.

"There is a very high level of regard for the contribution that UK forces have made in Iraq and Afghanistan."

He said the UK – whose armed forces have suffered 145 fatalities in Afghanistan since 2001 – was open to criticism as long as it was "fair".

He added: "Our reputation is very important to us. We will very strongly defend it. We will defend it by being open to criticism where it is fair. We will not change our tactics in Afghanistan on the basis of uncorroborated and unsourced gossip from people who don't have the courage to put their names to their remarks." 3*

The comments from Hutton – who will discuss the Afghanistan mission at a meeting of Nato defence ministers in Poland today – came as Barack Obama revealed plans to send 17,000 more US troops to Afghanistan. The move was welcomed by David Miliband, the foreign secretary, who said that the extra forces would play an "important and positive role" in the campaign.

Some will be deployed in Helmand province, where UK soldiers have been engaged in fierce fighting with the Taliban.

Around 8,100 British servicemen and women are currently serving in Afghanistan.

Speaking on a visit to Afghanistan last night, Miliband said: "I think that there is a universal recognition that these extra American troops can play, and will play, an important and positive role, when they are aligned and allied with a strategy for economic development and political development."

He also pledged that Britain would keep its troop levels "under review" – although he stressed that the prospect of an increase had not been raised directly.

"In terms of the United Kingdom we represent about 12% of the troops in Afghanistan at the moment," Miliband said.

"We have had no request to increase our number of troops but, of course, we always keep the number under review."

Hutton said he would raise the issue of increased troop contributions from other countries during today's meeting in Poland. The US currently has around 30,000 troops in Afghanistan
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/19/afghanistan-john-hutton

1* "Give us you Helo's , Specialist Mine Vehicles and gucci bits and bobs, you're not using them."

2* "Germany , your fathers and grandfathers would be up for this, mad for this , in fact your current crop of Troops are liking the idea too, let them off the leash or go home for all the good you're doing."

3* "Ram it". I am liking the 'Killing Gentleman' more and more.

I personally think you're on a hiding to nothing trying to persuade NATO allies to 'do more' Sir , but they've no excuse not to hand over specialised kit we could use. Have you asked the Chinese if they fancy a play yet?
 
#20
Wrong thread, sorry :oops:
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top