Feral Jundi

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Funny Stuff: ‘Take Off Your Burqas, Come Out and Fight Us Like Men’, by Capt. Peterson

     I love it.  If these miscreants lack the discipline to fall for such a simple thing, then we should be trash talking all over the country.  If these guys are so proud and idiotic as to break their silence and cover to answer to something like this, then we should be implementing Operation Trash Talk on the highest order.  Hell, the DoD could start a blog or wiki called ‘Combat Trash Talk’, and it would be filled with daily insults that guys could use to draw out the enemy for a fight.  We could even implement a rating system for what insult was the most effective, or resulted in the most enemy contacts. Too funny. –Matt

—————————————————————–

In Afghanistan, Apache Troop makes the battle come to them

By Jon R. Anderson, Stars and StripesTuesday, August 3, 2004

FORWARD OPERATING BASE TIGER, Afghanistan — Frustrated that Taliban fighters were making themselves scarce, cavalry commander Capt. Brian Peterson ordered his psychological operations detachment to find a way to get the enemy onto the battlefield.

Their solution: shame. The soldiers drove into the mountainous region of southern Afghanistan near Tarin Kowt, a known Taliban stronghold, and blared through Humvee-mounted loudspeakers a simple message.

“Take off your burqas,” Afghan interpreters shouted, referring to the head-to-toe powder blue shrouds Taliban leaders once forced all women in the country to wear. “Come out and fight us like men.”

Peterson, commander of the 25th Infantry Division’s Hawaii-based 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment’s Apache Troop, had heard of Special Forces units using similar schoolyard tactics to dishonor local insurgents into a fight and figured it couldn’t hurt to try.

He knew Taliban fighters were out there. Local villagers were being threatened to stay away from U.N. voter registration efforts for the country’s Oct. 9 presidential elections.

It didn’t take long to get an answer to Peterson’s cantankerous call to arms. Within hours, an angry ambush was unleashed, a heavy fusillade of automatic weapons fire raining down from two sides as his patrol moved through a steep valley.

“The bullets were zinging within a few inches of my head, I could actually feel their heat,” said .50-caliber machine gunner Spc. Michael Plummer, 25, from Klamath Falls, Ore.

He was astounded. After four months in Afghanistan, this was Apache Troop’s first contact with the enemy.

“I couldn’t believe they were actually shooting at us,” said Plummer.

Pushing his patrol of Humvees through the ambush kill zone, Peterson turned his men around and charged back into the fray.

“We weren’t going to run from those punks,” said Peterson. “We chased them up the mountain.”

After a 45-minute gunfight, four Afghan guerrillas lay dead and another four were captured.

None of Peterson’s men were injured.

“We’re pretty sure we got more, but they carry their dead away,” said Peterson.

It’s hard to tell how many escaped, he said, adding “they can run, but they’ll only die tired.”

Story here.

 

Friday, November 13, 2009

Afghanistan: How the U.S. Army Protects It’s Trucks–By Paying the Taliban

   First off, bravo to the boys at Four Horseman International for at least taking a stand and not playing the ‘pay-off’s’ game, and fighting your way through the roads. As for NCL Holdings? Pffft.

   One suggestion for the DoD is to use these convoys as opportunities to bring out the enemy and kill him. That, and give the convoys some fire power to deal with the threat. It should be costly for the enemy to attack these convoys.

   We should also be using the pay off scheme to track where the money is going, and then kill the source that way.  Where is the return on investment, when we just hand over money to the enemy for so-called protection services? Either way, there is no way in hell we should be paying off the Taliban or warlords in order to pass through those roads.  The only thing we should be giving the Taliban for passage on those roads, is hot lead.  That is my take on it. –Matt

——————————————————————

How the US army protects its trucks – by paying the Taliban

Insurance, security or extortion? The US is spending millions of dollars in Afghanistan to ensure its supply convoys get through – and it’s the Taliban who profit

Aram Rostom

Friday 13 November 2009

On 29 October 2001, while the Taliban’s rule over Afghanistan was under assault, the regime’s ambassador in Islamabad in neighbouring Pakistan gave a chaotic press conference in front of several dozen reporters sitting on the grass. On the Taliban diplomat’s right sat his interpreter, Ahmad Rateb Popal, a man with an imposing presence. Like the ambassador, Popal wore a black turban, and he had a huge bushy beard. He had a black patch over his right eye socket, a prosthetic left arm and a deformed right hand, the result of injuries from an explosives mishap during an old operation against the Soviets in Kabul.

(more…)

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Bounties: Pakistan Offers $5 Million For Information on Taliban Leaders

Filed under: Bounties,Pakistan — Tags: , , , , , — Matt @ 3:19 PM

     Thanks to Doug for sending me this one.  Although I am pretty sure the Pakistanis are only seeking to offer this deal to their own people.  Although you never know.  Bill Roggio of the Long War Journal might actually get a tip from a reader, that Bill could use to inform the Pakistanis with.  I would hope that the Pakistanis would definitely honor the bounty, if in fact they got tips from outside of their country.  We will see, and happy hunting out there. –Matt

——————————————————————

 wanted

By IANS

November 2nd, 2009

ISLAMABAD – The Pakistan government Monday offered a reward of $5 million for information on the country’s Taliban chief Hakimullah Mehsud and 18 of his associates.

The reward is for information on Tehreek-e-Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud and his associates who have vowed deadly attacks across the country in retaliation over US drone strikes.

The rewards were offered in a government advertisement on the front page of The News daily and flashed on Pakistani television channels overnight.

“Anyone who captures these people dead or alive or provides concrete information, the government will award them a cash reward,” The Nation quoted the advertisement as saying.

“The banned Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP) terrorists are daily involved in deadly activities and because of their activities innocent Muslims are going to the valley of death,” it added.

The largest rewards of 50 million Pakistan rupees each were offered for Mehsud, senior leader Wali ur-Rehman Mehsud and Qari Hussain Mehsud, also described as a master trainer of suicide bombers.

Eleven commanders had rewards of 20 million rupees each and rewards of 10 million rupees each were on offer for five others.

Pakistan has been hit by a string of terror strikes since Oct 5 that has left over 200 people dead. The worst terror attack took place in Peshawar Oct 28 when over 105 people were killed in a massive bombing in a crowded market.

The army has stepped up its offensive against the Taliban in South Waziristan and has been able to wrest control over some of the areas.

Story here.

 

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Video: Held By the Taliban, Interview with David Rohdes

Filed under: Afghanistan,Pakistan,Video — Tags: , , — Matt @ 2:16 PM

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Afghanistan: Paying Off the Taliban?

Filed under: Afghanistan,Industry Talk — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 11:06 AM

“Here we have internationals and Afghans turning a blind eye to the fact that we are paying off the very Taliban that we claim to be fighting,” says an adviser to the Afghan Ministry of Interior. “It becomes a self-sustaining war, a self-licking ice cream.” –How Crime Pays For the Taliban, Time

*****

    I am reading this stuff, and I am trying to keep a balanced view on all of it. Actually I am trying not to get mad as I write this, because this is insanity the more I think about it.  Now I realize that money can grease the skids out there, but when we create an entire industry off of pay-offs to the enemy, someone has to say ‘what the hell are we doing’ and ‘what is the return on investment’?

   Let’s take that a step further.  If we are paying off the enemy, or allowing the practice of paying off the enemy by these NGO’s/PSC’s, then what is the signal to the government in Afghanistan? We continuously point out the corruption in this government, but isn’t what we are allowing to go on with these payoffs, the pot calling the kettle black?

   It’s worse than that.  When we pay off the enemy, we reduce the legitimacy of the government and the police, and we reduce the perceived strength of NATO.  Matter of fact, paying off the enemy makes everyone look weak.  If anything, we should be using these checkpoints as an opportunity to kill more Taliban.  My point is if this kind of industry will bring the Taliban out in the open to man check points and interact with convoy leaders, then we should get a return on investment and track these Taliban to their lairs, and catch or kill some big fish.

   We do the same tactic all the time in law enforcement in order to find drug dealers and we could be doing the same thing with these guys. If the Taliban want to come out and man checkpoints, then we should be taking advantage of this. Matter of fact, this could be a golden opportunity to do some damage. These convoy operations should be used not only for supplies, but as bait in order to kill Taliban.  In my book, that is smart.

   And from what it looks like, wherever we move the routes, the Taliban follow.  So eventually we have to come to grips that the convoys and the contractors that run these things, actually matter in this war.  If I was the Taliban, I would be hitting us equally on every route into and out of Afghanistan. The same goes for Pakistan, and in many ways we are seeing this. It will only get worse, because this is a strategy that pays off in so many ways for the Taliban.

   Now I realize the guys on the ground are in a position in which they have to survive these routes and do all they can to get their convoy from A to B in one piece.  I do not envy them, and convoy work is extremely dangerous.  If they are having to pay off the Taliban to survive, then that is what they feel is the only option they have. I guess NATO and company could care less about protecting these convoys, or backing up these companies when they get in trouble, so these guys are forced to pay off the Taliban.  How pathetic is that? From a strategist point of view, what NATO and company is allowing to happen has far reaching negative effects.

     My question to NATO and company, is when does it stop?  By allowing payoffs and allowing these companies to get massacred out there, you are empowering the Taliban.  They relish these victories, they get paid handsomely, and are able to buy more weapons and kill even more troops.  That is madness, and these payoffs are creating a thriving industry. It reminds of the piracy problems in the GOA, and how insurance companies keep paying them off. pffffft

    Why would the Taliban want to stop, and why would their price for admission go down? They have an awesome deal, and they will just keep going with it, and laughing all the way to the bank. If that is our end goal with the Taliban, then keep it up. If not, then somewhat at the top needs to re-think this problem and find a better solution than this. –Matt

——————————————————————

Taliban Stepping Up Attacks on NATO Supply Convoys

By Tim McGirk

Wednesday, Oct. 07, 2009

To supply nearly 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, the U.S. and its Western allies rely on road convoys with dozens of trucks to carry in everything from jet fuel to frozen pizza. But increasingly these convoys are coming under savage attack by the Taliban. And experts say that if the ambushes get worse, it could impair NATO’s efforts to keep a supply lifeline running to its troops in forts and camps scattered across the mountainous country.

Often, the death of a private security contractor in Afghanistan goes unheralded; after all, they risk their lives for money, not country. Yet the drivers and guards who ride shotgun on the long convoys snaking over the mountains also suffer heavy casualties. Many have died heroically. Figures released to TIME by NATO showed that from June to September, more than 145 truck drivers and guards were killed in attacks on convoys and 123 vehicles were destroyed.

In previous years, the Taliban would scale down their attacks because of winter blizzards, but a NATO logistics officer says the militants now have the capacity to launch ambushes on supply routes year round. The Taliban are also widening the scope of their attacks so that convoys rumbling across two-thirds of the country are now prey to attack, usually by roadside bombs or a well-laid ambush in which rocket-propelled grenades are fired at the lead vehicle, forcing the convoy to a deadly standstill.

(more…)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress