At 19:18 16/09/01, you wrote:
>On 9/16/01 8:18 AM, "Dan Clemmensen" <dgc@cox.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Samantha Atkins wrote:
> >> This is a very good piece. I question one thing though. Why do
> >> we have to move the troops through Pakistan? Can we airdrop
> >> enough troops and supplies for what needs to be done?
> >
> > In a word: No. It is essentially impossible to sustain a ground
> > operation by air-drop (i.e. parachute) or even by airlift (i.e.,
> > building or capturing runways) unless your supply base is very
> > nearby or the operation is tiny. "Amateurs study tactics.
> > Professionals study logistics." Take a look at a map. Notice
> > how far Afghanistan (and specifically Kabul and the Kandahar)
> > are from anywhere except Pakistan. Note that cargo aircraft
> > cannot take off and land from aircraft carriers. Remember the
> > Gulf war? The US spent six months building up the supply base.
>
>
>There are a few people on this list that have some practical knowledge of
>these things. The situation is pretty much this:
>
>We could support a division or two of light infantry and maybe an Air
>Cavalry unit in Afghanistan. Note that for rugged mountainous terrain,
>these units are among the best suited, particularly if backed up by some air
>support. History has shown that heavy mechanized units do not fare well in
>many parts of Afghanistan -- ask the Russians.
Hmmm am not to sure about this you could probably lose ( misplace ) a
decent sized
Army in the Afghan mountains. Your troops would need to cover a lot of ground
simultaneously to deny the Bin Ladden/Taliban the use of shelter such as caves
and small settlements.
As far as air support is concerned helicopters have problems
in the Afghan mountains due to the thinner air at altitude producing less
rotor lift.
The Afghans became very adept during the conflict with Russia at suckering
Russian SU25's into making attack runs that exposed them to stinger SAM
missile
attacks, taking a pretty heavy toll. It's also worth knowing that the
SU25's flight
performance is considerably better than the US equivalent the A10 Warthog.
>However, there is a wildcard in the Russians. I'm reading this morning that
>they have mobilized units near the Afghan border. It is quite possible that
>we could get logistical support and a heavy mechanized hammer for the flat
>areas from the Russians.
Thats great but Bin Laden, and the Taliban if they are attacked, are not
very likely
to stay in the lowlands. As you pointed out the Afghans fought a very
successful
campaign from the mountains against Russia. They also did the same to us Brits
in around 1920. In fact they have pretty much done the same thing every
time they
have been invaded.
>Note that the Russian force structure has difficulty working in extremely
>mountainous terrain; the Afghans learned this years ago and used it against
>them quite effectively. If the US provided security in the heavily
>mountainous regions, something we are capable of doing effectively, it would
>give the Russians a chance to move heavy equipment where needed.
>
>If the Russians can control the plains, and leave the mountainous regions to
>the kinds of units that the Americans will be able to support logistically,
>any groups of militant or military Afghans will find themselves severely
>squeezed. The targets are not numerically numerous, but they did learn how
>to use the terrain to their advantage against the Russians.
>The ability of
>the US to control the mountainous terrain, something we are well-structured
>for, will determine whether or not this play is successful.
In what way is the US force structure capable in this kind of roll. Trying
to cover hundreds
of kilometers of saw backed mountains. Units forced to operate for days (
at least at a time )
isolated form support, seems to me exactly what US forces are not tailored for.
This whole scenario involving ground troops imho could become extremely
protracted and costly
for the US.
Zeb
"FURIOUS GREEN DREAMS, LAY SLEEPING IN STATE,
BUT SOON THE GREAT JELLY SHALL RISE FROM THE
DEPTHS,
AND ALL THOSE WHO MOCKED SHALL KNOW THEIR FATE
IS SEALED"
Guru Zeb,
Hacienda,
Manchester, 1989
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:49 MDT