Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#1 UAV's have their place, but wars throughout history have been won by seizing terrain and vanquishing an enemy. Over relieance on armed UAV's as a strategy is misguided. Assasination just hardens people's resolve whilst the next fellow moves up to replace the last. Nothing much is really gained except headlines.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-05-31 07:22||
#2 Only higher ground perch is space and 400+ days of X37-B on station says "Watch out, suckers..."
Posted by M. Murcek 2012-05-31 08:12||
#3 I believe Adolf Hitler survived over 40 assassination attempts.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-05-31 08:19||
#4 The rep is, piss us off and we'll kill you and we won't even break a sweat. What's the problem?
#5 So mebbe this only ends when enough of the right kind of conflict tourists show up to strangle / stab these types up close and personal. The horror...
Posted by M. Murcek 2012-05-31 08:24||
#6 Yes, one can use a Browning High-Power to take out a hill of fire ants. Just remember to bring plenty of ammo and plan on spending the day.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-05-31 08:28||
#7 Well the west's problem is its unwillingless to declare war on enemy pakistan, or pakistan to agree that land within its borders is out of the states control.
Until this is clarified we have a vietnam/cambodia situation.
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2012-05-31 08:36||
#8 Agreed, B, I was snarking. Blow 'em to Hell, overkill is cheap...
Posted by M. Murcek 2012-05-31 08:36||
#9 Correct BP. I cannot recall anyone successfully defeating a counterinsurgency when a border sancuary was permitted to operate.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-05-31 08:38||
#10 Still think we should have been quiet about the drones and let them wonder how bombs occasionally blew up people. Was it inside men? Targeted bombs? What? As it is, this is a militarily weak culture complaining that its unfair. The same culture I might add that lives by hit-and-run and terrorist attacks on the undefended instead of a stand-up fight so who cares.
Posted by rjschwarz 2012-05-31 08:57||
#11 We must be doing the right thing if we are upsetting the Pakis.
If the Paki army did its job in the Waziristans we would not have to use drones.
Posted by Fester Clunter7205 2012-05-31 08:57||
#12 Besoeker #1 is totally correct. Aerial warfare also settles nothing on its own, unless you are ready to go nuclear. Clinton used the same no-boots-on-the-ground method with the Serbs and that situation was never really resolved and is getting ready to boil over again.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2012-05-31 09:05||
#13 So, the notion that "some killing" is OK, but enough killing to get the job done is not. Mmmmmmm K....
Posted by M. Murcek 2012-05-31 09:08||
#14 "If you're taking flak, it means you're over the target."
Posted by mojo 2012-05-31 11:34||
#15 Fester, the Paki army is doing its job in the Waziristans. That's why we use the drones. But I think arclights would be better.
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-05-31 12:20||
#16 I cannot recall anyone successfully defeating a counterinsurgency when a border sancuary was permitted to operate.
The Greeks defeated the Communist insurgency that had bases in Albania and Yugoslavia. The Philippines defeated the Huks who were being resupplied from China via the usual junks. South Vietnam defeated the Vietcong - with a lot of help from Uncle Sam - although that became moot when the North Vietnamese military invaded with conventional forces in 1975.
The difficulty for the Pashtuns is that they are a 40% minority that is hated by the other ethnic groups because of the Taliban. Our difficulty is that we could resolve the problem once and for all without getting directly involved by simply funding the Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks to crush the Pashtuns with maximum force, but can't really operate that way because of Carter bright idea to use human rights as a stick against the Soviets, something that never worked because the liberal media had and has this laser-like focus on human rights violations among our allies.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2012-05-31 14:43||
#17 Or you could just redraw the border line and put all the Pashtuns on the Pak side. The 1893 Durand Line Agreement was supposed to be an agreement about spheres of influence, not a holy writ.
Posted by Steve White 2012-05-31 16:14||
#18 Put all the Pastuns on the Pak side? That means the next time they violate our human rights with another terrorist attack we declare war on the Paks. Works for me if we can do it without nation building. Just nuke 'em.
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-05-31 17:30||
#19 America: We will kill you in your sleep, on Christmas.