My old Battalion is gonna be there till March by most estimates.... a CAB is already slated to come in and replace them.

What advisory role does an Apache have?... Bueller?

Advising the Taliban to leave our guys alone one 30mm round at a time?

They sending you with super-cool "Resolute Support" patches so you can rip off the ISAF patch at midnight on 31 Dec and put on the RS (or whatever we wind up officially calling it) patch?

Haha, nope. I am sure some chief is having a wet dream thinking of all of the possible 1 Jan infractions though. Your email signature still says RC-E?! It's been TAAC-E for 30 minutes now!!

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

We can just use some of these advisors in Afghanistan as well.

https://www.duffelblog.com/2014/09/pentagon-advisers-iraq-syria/

"F-16 Fighting Resolution Advisory Falcon"

They sending you with super-cool "Resolute Support" patches so you can rip off the ISAF patch at midnight on 31 Dec and put on the RS (or whatever we wind up officially calling it) patch?

Perfect! I'll wear it next to my mandatory morale tab!

Edited September 22, 201411 yr by McDonut

BSA is signed: https://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-afghan-bilateral-security-agreement-signed-1412076436

BSA is signed: https://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-afghan-bilateral-security-agreement-signed-1412076436

https://www.nooooooooooooooo.com/

BSA is signed: https://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-afghan-bilateral-security-agreement-signed-1412076436

not subscribed...CN's?

NYT reports policy shift extending combat ops.

WASHINGTON — President Obama decided in recent weeks to authorize a more expansive mission for the military in Afghanistan in 2015 than originally planned, a move that ensures American troops will have a direct role in fighting in the war-ravaged country for at least another year. Mr. Obama’s order allows American forces to carry out missions against the Taliban and other militant groups threatening American troops or the Afghan government, a broader mission than the president described to the public earlier this year, according to several administration, military and congressional officials with knowledge of the decision. The new authorization also allows American jets, bombers and drones to support Afghan troops on combat missions.

Oh FFS! That shithole isn't getting any better a year from now. If another 365 days means we win then go for it. But as is, sounds like just another round of 365s-wait one…is that part of the force management initiative?

365's aren't part of the force management initiative.

365's are the lead force management initiative.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/wMEq1mGpP5A?autoplay=1

Edited November 27, 201411 yr by BFM this

Not too surprising, but the Taliban is claiming 'defeat' of the US in Afghanistan. Whether or not we were defeated is how you argue the position, but that being said, my money is on the Taliban taking over quite a bit of territory within the next few years.

What a waste.

https://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/29/us-afghanistan-war-idUSKBN0K70UC20141229?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter

Not too surprising, but the Taliban is claiming 'defeat' of the US in Afghanistan. Whether or not we were defeated is how you argue the position, but that being said, my money is on the Taliban taking over quite a bit of territory within the next few years.

What a waste.

https://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/29/us-afghanistan-war-idUSKBN0K70UC20141229?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter

Defeat is failing to achieve your political objectives in a conflict. If you never have any clearly defined political objectives, you can never be defeated!

Someone tell the Pentagon my consulting fee is $50K.

They sending you with super-cool "Resolute Support" patches so you can rip off the ISAF patch at midnight on 31 Dec and put on the RS (or whatever we wind up officially calling it) patch?

So, we were instructed to remove our ISAF patches today. RS patches exist, but only the folks in Kabul have them so far. I guess it's really real now...my ISAF patch is gone.

As far as the totality of the mission in Afghanistan, I don't think you can necessarily call it a success or a failure. It's far too complex a topic to have such a black and white answer. There are portions of this campaign that were failures; there were also successes. Each person takes with them a different experience in Afghanistan. Some Soldiers and Marines saw brothers and sisters die to take control of a village, and by the end of their tours, they were openly patrolling and boys and girls in those villages had returned to school. The vast majority of Afghans believe their lives to be better now than prior to OEF. You would have to call those instances, however small, and probably even temporary successes. There were a number of building projects and reconstruction plans that were a complete waste; I'd call those failures. There are still major networks of insurgents in this country; I'd call that the nature of occupation vs. ideology.

Was the loss of life of service members worth it? To their family and friends, probably not. To the Afghan people they died for, absolutely.

I don't want to ever see America involved in another war like OEF, but at the same time, I don't think OEF was a failure.

Hahahaha, holy shit. I don't know why I'm surprised but the idea of not wearing an ISAF patch in Afghanistan is still a little surreal to me.

Also in all seriousness, tactical successes added together don't automatically equal strategic success. The Afghan War was an unmitigated strategic failure, period. We lost, period. I know that's painful to hear but unless we start having an honest accounting of what went wrong (and there was a lot, both politically and militarily) we (as a nation) aren't going to learn our mistakes. Hand-waving equivocating to make ourselves feel better doesn't do anyone any good (other than the generals and politicians, who are let off the hook when we refuse to hold them accountable for the strategic failure.)

I wrote a bachelors and masters paper on the history of Afghanistan. No empire or country has ever had success in the region of Afghanistan as a whole and the list is quite impressive.

For Example:

- Genghis Khan

- The Persians

- Alexander the Great

- The Roman Empire

- Napolean

- The Russians

- The U.S.

Edited December 30, 201410 yr by Tank

I wrote a bachelors and masters paper on the history of Afghanistan. No empire or country has ever had success in the region of Afghanistan as a whole and the list is quite impressive.

For Example:

- Genghis Khan

- The Persians

- Alexander the Great

- The Roman Empire

- Napolean

- The Russians

- The U.S.

A few more unsuccessful war efforts in Afghanistan by former empires to add to your list; The British Empire and the Muslim Mughal Empire.

- Afghanistan/Durrani(Afghan)empire versus the Mughal Empire; That's worth a couple hundred years worth of wars with no

positive results.

- Anglo Afghan Wars and way to many Anglo directed Punitive Expeditions into Afghanistan/Northwest Frontier to list.

Note; You would think the Brits would know better/learned a lesson by now?

-- First Anglo Afghan War;

-- Second Anglo Afghan War;

-- Third Anglo Afghan War;

Edited December 30, 201410 yr by waveshaper

Well in fairness to Alexander, he "won" if you define winning as "have everyone marry a local and leave your favorite tribe in charge while you cut your losses and head to India." Did better than most of the other people on this list, anyway.

Related: https://www.duffelblog.com/2014/12/obama-weds-ahmadzais-daughter/

Kandahar may or may not be named after Alexander the Great, so at least he has that going for him, which is nice.

Think you may want to remove Napoleon and the Romans from that list, Tank . . . in the case of the former,about 3000 miles of Russia separated the French from Afghanistan, and in the case of the latter, there were these folks called the Parthians . . . more than a few Roman consuls and generals met their end trying to budge those guys.

Mismatch between previous words and current actions aside I'm glad he's making changes based on the situation in the country and not just following an arbitrary timeline.

Mismatch between previous words and current actions aside I'm glad he's making changes based on the situation in the country and not just following an arbitrary timeline.

Yes because we all know that more troops, more time, and more money will fix Afghanistan, just not this year.