What is needed for success in Afghanistan?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by roar, Nov 27, 2007.

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. I see alot of debate about NATO getting bogged down in Afghanistan, not reaching its objectives, or when is does quickly giving them back.

    What is really needed to achive a successful resolution to this resolution?
     
  2. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator

    Well I suppose our NATO allies could help a bit more. Some politicians with balls in Europe would go a long way..
     
  3. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    BFG9000......



    Sorry but can't help making inane comments today

    Saying that a lot more firepower is certainly one of my answers...
     
  4. Instant Sunshine?
     
  5. msr

    msr LE

    Withdrawal...

    msr
     
  6. some one quoted this to me once

    turn Sand to Glass
     
  7. Nice idea msr but what happens the day after that? Realistically don't you think we'd be back there again inside five years?
     
  8. As far as I can make out, historically no one has ever won a war in Afghanistan, so pulling out might be the best option.
     
  9. I think the question required realistic answers ;)
     
  10. Shit loads of new kit for the lads wouldnt go amiss!
     
  11. I'm no expert, but when I was in Afghanistan in 2004/2005, everything was relatively quiet. The Taliban had been removed from all the major cities, and were hated by the public, who's opinion was overwhelmingly in our favour. Hearts and minds had been won. Companies were investing in the cities, and the economy was doing well. The Taliban had been forced up into the hills, and we were training the Afghan Army.

    It seems to me that the situation could have been sustained as it was - Holding every major city, with public opinion on our side, and developing a strong army over a few years.

    So what happened?
     
  12. The political will to complete a military solution followed by civil infrastructure - thats the DS answer I think.
     
  13. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator

    Rumsfeld's pet project?
     
  14. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Not giving ground back because of a shortage of equipment and troops would be a start. Held ground receiving sufficient commercial and gobment investment for infrastructure rather than using a limited MOD budget to do little things with REME would be another. Thorough infiltration/hearts and minds of the local leaders to KEEP them onside. Overwhelming force-of-arms assaults with follow-on when attacked by the enemy - ie: follow them, surround them, destroy them, rather than sitting back when they sneek off.

    Just my thoughts of course, and I;m not an expert by any means.