Taliban repel British Assualt in Afghanistan

[SilentScope001]

This is a horrible...horrible event. Something, that I fear, will change the tide of battle in Afghanistan forever. The Taliban defeated Britian in pitched battle.

 

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-12-05T164443Z_01_L05547059_RTRUKOC_0_UK-AFGHAN-BRITAIN-ASSAULT.xml

 

GARMSER, Afghanistan (Reuters) - British Marines attacked a Taliban-held valley in southern Afghanistan on Tuesday but withdrew after a ferocious counterattack that withstood repeated airstrikes and artillery fire.

 

Scores of soldiers ran across a bridge over the Helmand River under a full moon shortly before daybreak and began sweeping south through wheatfields in the south of the province, the opium centre of the world's major producer.

 

A Reuters cameraman said the Marines initially faced only sporadic resistance but when they advanced, Taliban fighters launched a ferocious, organised riposte with heavy weapons and tried to outflank the British troops.

 

The fierce resistance illustrated the challenges facing the NATO troops in Afghanistan where they are trying to subdue well-armed Taliban and other militants bolstered by profits from a record opium crop, according to Afghan and foreign officials.

 

Major Andy Plewes, who led the Royal Marines of Zulu Company 45 Commando, on the assault, said the soldiers had expected resistance: "What we didn't know was how strong it was."

 

"We don't currently have enough forces in the area to hold ground completely and that has to be done by Afghan security forces," he told a Reuters reporter with the Marines.

 

The 32,000-strong force NATO-led International Security Assistance Force took over command of the war against the Taliban from U.S.-led forces in October and has launched a string of offensives.

 

British casualties have been mounting since ISAF took over command of operations in southern Afghanistan at the end of July. Britain has lost 41 soldiers since the Taliban government was toppled in 2001, the bulk of them this year.

 

The British forces, who make up the bulk of NATO forces in Helmand, opened fire from light armoured vehicles and engaged small groups of guerrillas with mortars and machine guns.

 

Afghan police and soldiers have so far held just the bridgehead and the short road at the north end of the valley, criss-crossed by networks of ancient canals that make Helmand fertile enough to produce a third of the world's opium crop.

 

The Taliban withstood barrages of airstrikes from Apache helicopters, 500 pound bombs dropped by B1 bombers and withering cannon fire from A-10 attack jets before the British finally withdrew after a 10-hour battle.

 

The Taliban fighters, who say they have the expertise to defeat the strongest army, had dug sophisticated networks of trenches often leading from compound to compound.

 

This year has seen the worst fighting since U.S.-led forces ousted the Taliban's strict Islamist government in 2001. About 4,000 people have died, a quarter of them civilians.

 

The alliance troops were deployed to aid reconstruction and to help Afghanistan's government by build stability. But they have been increasingly drawn into battles with the Taliban and other militants in the opium poppy-growing south.

 

Tuesday's assault was the latest in a series of battles by British forces around the bridgehead.

 

Major Plewes said he considered the assault a success as they had cleared out areas near the "D.C.", a tiny strip of road and ruined buildings on the eastern side of the Helmand River.

 

But without more Afghan troops to hold the ground there was little hope of doing much more.

 

"In the mean time we have to try to provide as much as security to the D.C. as possible," said Plewes.

 

They claim victory, but they did flee from the Taliban. Possibly, the fleeing was done because it was not the point of the mission they are serving...but I still fear.

 

Just one battle, just one victory, serves as a rallying point, and may lead to future victories. For the future, prehaps, this may be an omen.

 

Your thoughts? I'm worried of the gains fought in the Afghanistan War be rolled back...

[HerbieZ]

I have honestly heared this for the past 5 years. Loosing one battle doesnt mean the worlds going to end. Sheesh.

[JediMaster12]

Nice that you have it in perspective Herbie

 

You are right though Herbie. One loss or victory doesn't mean the world is going to end. As far as I can see, the wars in the Middle East will never be over. Still I support the ones who go to fight and preserve freedom but remember that though they go because their country ordered them to, they end up fighting for each other.

[HerbieZ]

Nice that you have it in perspective Herbie

 

You are right though Herbie. One loss or victory doesn't mean the world is going to end. As far as I can see, the wars in the Middle East will never be over. Still I support the ones who go to fight and preserve freedom but remember that though they go because their country ordered them to, they end up fighting for each other.

 

I was a tad direct but im sick of the god/politics/war thread increase around here. Sometimes i wish people would start a thread on kittens or things that make people giggle or something. Tbh i think the UK should pull out of all conflicts, give our nukes and weapons to america and concentrate abit of money into the NHS. That way, if anyone ever threatens us brits, uncle sam can slap them into submission and we get our good teeth back.

[Totenkopf]

I was a tad direct but im sick of the god/politics/war thread increase around here. Sometimes i wish people would start a thread on kittens or things that make people giggle or something. Tbh i think the UK should pull out of all conflicts, give our nukes and weapons to america and concentrate abit of money into the NHS. That way, if anyone ever threatens us brits, uncle sam can slap them into submission and we get our good teeth back.

 

 

Gee, and here I thought that bad teeth and the British was just an old wive's tale

[CountVerilucus]

Sounds like a job for Americans!

[Sabretooth]

Sounds like a job for Americans!

 

 

Well spoken, sir!

[Q]

Well, this is what we Americans get for not having a President that knows how to fight a war since, well, Eisenhower.

 

The war was and is in Afganistan. Where is the majority of our troops? In Iraq.

[ChAiNz.2da]

I was a tad direct but im sick of the god/politics/war thread increase around here. Sometimes i wish people would start a thread on kittens or things that make people giggle or something.

I second the kitten thread.. I too am getting tired of seeing all the religous / political threads... especially in AHTO. Plus, it always winds up off-topic, political/religously/racially heated... and doing nothing but pissing people off

[Totenkopf]

Well, I guess that found out what kind of fun the Marines on Iwo Jima had during WW2. Attacking an opponent in the mountains of Afghanistan and winning, especially if they are prepared, would prove not only a daunting operation but probably a prohibitively expensive one as well. Short of ground penetrating nukes (and you know what an outcry that would raise), it probably can't be done in an "affordable" way.

[Emperor Devon]

A pity there weren't any statistics on the exact amount of troops each side had. The Taliban forces definitely have motivation, but there's far from as well-trained or equiped as the NATO ones.

[Darth InSidious]

Tbh i think the UK should pull out of all conflicts, give our nukes and weapons to america and concentrate abit of money into the NHS. That way, if anyone ever threatens us brits, uncle sam can slap them into submission and we get our good teeth back.

 

Great plan. Surrender us completely to the mercy of an ally who is extremely suspicious of us, keeps second-guessing our motives, already treats us like a lapdog, will override our sovereignty even now, has a long-term suspicion of us due to a dispute over paying for protection without representation, and leave us totally unprotected against anything else that might come our way. Sound thinking, that man!

 

Sure, there have been a few serious threads, but frankly, fluffy kittens get old quickly, and general chatter is deemed to be going off-topic and gets the thread locked.

 

@topic: You can't win in Afghanistan.

 

Those who do not heed history...

[Negative Sun]

Sounds like a job for Americans!

Vietnam ring any bells?

Seems like it all over again to me, but instead of commies it's "terrorists"

[mur'phon]

You can't win in Afghanistan

One of the most true statements ever. Afghanistan have a long history of simply refusing to acept any ocupation, just ask the Russians. Afghanistan is not going to become a moderate friend of the west, and it isn't very likely to even become a democracy. If the thread starter thinks it might be the begining of a defeat, he is almost right, its just that its not the begining of a defeat.

 

Jolee Bindo said " A good teacher dont shove a book into the face of a student shouting: Learn this bit here!!" The same can be said about the occupation of Afghanistan, only slighly diferent like this. "A good occupation does not shove the big book of vestern laws and values in the face of the occupied shouting: Learn this bit here!!!

[JediMaster12]

I was a tad direct but im sick of the god/politics/war thread increase around here. Sometimes i wish people would start a thread on kittens or things that make people giggle or something. Tbh i think the UK should pull out of all conflicts, give our nukes and weapons to america and concentrate abit of money into the NHS. That way, if anyone ever threatens us brits, uncle sam can slap them into submission and we get our good teeth back.

You know I am tired of that too but that seems to be on everyone's minds however. Dunny thing is that people are drawn to the blood, the guts and the suffering. Why did I write a research paper on human sacrifice?

 

Still I third the motion to talk about something warm and fuzzy like kittens or puppies. You know that four legged friend who'll never let you down. He's honest and faithful right up to the end. That wonderful 1-2-3 four legged friend.

[SilentScope001]

You can't win in Afghanistan

 

Actually you can, if the threat was only the Taliban, the people fighting the Americans. The Taliban only contorl parts of the southern region of Afghanistan.

 

But there are others. Warlords have their own militas that kill the Americans as well. Opium is a great cash crop, helping Afghanistan grow economically. Powerful thugs roam the streets. Afghanistan is turning into a banana republic. But you do not hear of this.

 

You can defeat the Taliban. You can defeat Islamic fundmentalism. But you cannot defeat corruption. You cannot defeat tyranny. Just look in Africa and all those tinpot dictatorship, with the countryside contorlled by generals and strongmen.

 

And this is why the Allies shall fail.

[mur'phon]

I agre with most of what you said silentscope,especially the coruption bit. The only thing I'm a bit curios about is that you said "you can defeat islamic fundamentalism" I just want to ask you if you think that it should be a goal to defeat islamic fundamentalism? And if you think so, shouldnt it also be a goal to defeat christian fundamentalism? I'm just asking since both islamic and christian fundamentalism are just two religous directions, and in a country with religous freedom, they would both be acepted.

[HerbieZ]

Great plan. Surrender us completely to the mercy of an ally who is extremely suspicious of us, keeps second-guessing our motives, already treats us like a lapdog, will override our sovereignty even now, has a long-term suspicion of us due to a dispute over paying for protection without representation, and leave us totally unprotected against anything else that might come our way. Sound thinking, that man!

 

Sure, there have been a few serious threads, but frankly, fluffy kittens get old quickly, and general chatter is deemed to be going off-topic and gets the thread locked.

 

@topic: You can't win in Afghanistan.

 

Those who do not heed history...

 

 

Well it will coincide with the 2020 moonbase and il be there by then. Don't take my opinion too seriously man. Im 19 and anything but a major world leader.

[SilentScope001]

I agre with most of what you said silentscope,especially the coruption bit. The only thing I'm a bit curios about is that you said "you can defeat islamic fundamentalism" I just want to ask you if you think that it should be a goal to defeat islamic fundamentalism? And if you think so, shouldnt it also be a goal to defeat christian fundamentalism? I'm just asking since both islamic and christian fundamentalism are just two religous directions, and in a country with religous freedom, they would both be acepted.

 

I said you can defeat Islamic Fundamentalism. It is possible to win the war on minds.

 

That does not mean I am in support of that war, or that I am in support of getting rid of it, or killing the idea. I'm on the sidelines, not cheering for either side, just watching. I just said it is possible. Is it likely? I do not know. Wait 50, 100 years, and then we'll find out.

[Commander Obi-Wan]

I second the kitten thread.. I too am getting tired of seeing all the religous / political threads... especially in AHTO. Plus, it always winds up off-topic, political/religously/racially heated... and doing nothing but pissing people off

 

All that political stuff belongs here. There people can talk about politics and serious issues seriously and debate all they want.

[SilentScope001]

I hate political fourms because of the fact that over there, it can easily degenerate into flame wars.

 

In this forum, there are few people here, and people usually believe in the same thing, or don't exactly care about the issue so much to flame each other. So, no flame war. Which is good.

[Commander Obi-Wan]

I hate political fourms because of the fact that over there, it can easily degenerate into flame wars.

 

That's what moderators are for.

 

Plus, they pollute this off-topic discussion sections of the forum, when there is already one.

[Darth InSidious]

Actually you can, if the threat was only the Taliban, the people fighting the Americans. The Taliban only contorl parts of the southern region of Afghanistan.

 

But there are others. Warlords have their own militas that kill the Americans as well. Opium is a great cash crop, helping Afghanistan grow economically. Powerful thugs roam the streets. Afghanistan is turning into a banana republic. But you do not hear of this.

 

You can defeat the Taliban. You can defeat Islamic fundmentalism. But you cannot defeat corruption. You cannot defeat tyranny. Just look in Africa and all those tinpot dictatorship, with the countryside contorlled by generals and strongmen.

 

And this is why the Allies shall fail.

 

You're answering the wrong question. You are right that the Taliban can be defeated, but can you ultimately win in Afghanistan? No.

 

@Herbie: Sorry, I do tend to take things at face value

[Mace MacLeod]

@ Cmdr Obi-Wan: Have you been to the Senate Chambers recently? Just mention the word "Iraq" or "Afganistan" and whoa...break out the asbestos underwear. I would trust the Ahto crowd to have a civilized discussion on the subject a lot more than the 6-odd regulars in the Senate to do so...and I do include myself in that.

 

*edit* Gotcha.

[Totenkopf]

That's probably b/c this is a much more laid back forum. A lot of smart asses , but generally much less cutthroat.