| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| Pentagon: US can't seal Af-Pak border |
| 2010-12-30 |
| You don't need to seal the whole thing. Just take out the rat line routes and watch it dry up. If the jihadis can find the routes, then so can we. Besides, if we can build a secure fence to keep out illegals coming across the US-Mexican border, then surely the same system will work here. (Yes, that's sarcasm.) [PTI] - Acknowledging that terrorists have a safe haven inside the tribal areas of Pakistan from where they operate and cross over to Afghanistan, a top Pentagon official on Wednesday said that it would be a tough job to seal the Af-Pak border. "As far as the border itself, I think it's naive to say that we can stop, you know, forces coming through the border," said Col Viet Luong Commander, Task Force Rakkasan and 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division. "In order to secure the border, as well - as you know, it takes a lot. It takes effort on the other side, by the Pakistanis," said Luong, who is responsible for eastern Afghanistan which includes the volatile Khost province and 261 km of Af-Pak border. In a special video conferencing with Pentagon reporters from Kabul, he said, "as our footprint is expanded along the security line of effort, it's harder and harder for these guys to come and bed down in these villages." "To secure the border in the traditional sense, if you're talking about, you know, like what we would do along our own border with Mexico down in the southwestern United States, that's not what we're doing. It takes an inordinate amount of resources and force to be able to do that," he said in response to a question. "You can look at this as a defence in depth, whereby you have your front line defenders, which are - which really starts on the Pakistani side of the house, by the way. They have hundreds of border checkpoints across backed up by dozens of checkpoints on our side that's manned by Afghan border police, and then we back those guys up with US and ANA forces, really to hand over the border piece to the Afghan border police," he observed. "You can get more effects by defending in depth than you are in line. So we pick and choose where - the best places that we can defend the border, and then be able to target those guys where they feel safe in. I think that's been the key to our success," he said. |
| Posted by:gorb |
| #18 We cant shoot everyone on that border. Do those living along the border have legitimate businessin Afghanistan? If so, maybe we could take care of their cross-border needs so they don't have to cross the border, and we shoot anything that moves. |
| Posted by: gorb 2010-12-30 23:35 |
| #17 Glad you made it back Boss. |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2010-12-30 23:26 |
| #16 Cobalt 60 in a 5km wide band. Border closed. |
| Posted by: rammer 2010-12-30 23:15 |
| #15 The predators are good if you have the HUMIT to set it up. We cant shoot everyone on that border. Terrain is the issue. A month ago I flew the border. Villages everywhere, the mountains are like the Rockies. I am constantly amazed at our ability to find any of the bad guys. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2010-12-30 21:45 |
| #14 The year 2011 is shaping up as the year of the assassin. On the one side you've got the drones and on the other the suicide bomber. The success of the drone depends on intelligence from the various tribal leaders. The problem is that AQ&T soon work out which areas are collaborating and they send suicide bombers against the tribal leadership as punishment. They seem to be disguised as policemen or in burkas, to make up for the fact that they are non-locals. Countering this, is an area that needs to be urgently addressed. |
| Posted by: tipper 2010-12-30 19:42 |
| #13 I remember reading a paper on aerial cluster mines. Similar to parachuting cluster bombs they fall and roll/maneuver into 'level' walking spaces. With proper sensor augmentation they can be remote or motion detonated. Falling rocks or moving animals will set off the motion active units of course and that marks the controlled zones to any observers. Somebody throwing rocks or driving a heard of goats can clear a path. The problem was 'mines' are a bad thing now. A secondary offering which proposed a propellant and non-lethal marker dye was also rejected. too much cost to 'badge' the bad guys, too little skin exposed. |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2010-12-30 15:07 |
| #12 Doc I think you missed the point. Its not that they can't hide - its that they can't run (supplies and troops). Hiding in those caves and crags is one thing. Actually conducting movement of troops and supplies in effective quantities altogether a different question -- and that happens to be the issue here (movement). There is no triple canopy to hide the large or repeated movements. The "long stare", better detection and different types of detection from remote sensors, overhead assets (air breathing and other), combined with far superior (faster, larger) processing capabilities to pull patterns and anomalies out, are orders of magnitude better than anything available in Laos. The terrain and climate actually work in our favor in that there is no overhead cover and its frequently cold regardless of season, especially in the high mountains. If they move during the day we see them optically, if they move during the night we see them on IR. And we can always see them on radar if they are in large enough numbers or carrying large amounts of equipment/supplies. Also, the terrain itself dictates heavy or large movements due to obstructions, truly impassable terrain, altitude, and the subsequent funneling effects due to the need for logistics movements to use passes through the terrain. Movements (and patterns of movement) are the key. This is not to say its easy, but that its not Laos, not even close. The obstacles are more political in nature, and quite a bit more diffuse. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2010-12-30 14:43 |
| #11 There are 355 passes into Afghanistan. Handle on The guardians of the passes". Sandeman system, Khost, Nuristani, Orakaz, Wakham corridor, Parrots beak, and Hazara. |
| Posted by: newc 2010-12-30 13:29 |
| #10 The main problem remains geography It just doesn't seem to me that given today's tech that it should be all that hard. Maybe it's time to get the government out of it and sneak in a few private individuals who are motivated to find their routes by getting paid $1M. |
| Posted by: gorb 2010-12-30 13:21 |
| #9 A few ten-thousand square miles of triple canopy jungle versus a ten-thousand square miles of caves, crags, ravines and mountains. Okay. I'll agree the sensors are better. The main problem remains geography. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2010-12-30 13:11 |
| #8 Doc Steve, there is a bit of difference in the terrain in terms of visibility, and the ability of the sensors in use now. Laos isn't a proper analogy. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2010-12-30 12:53 |
| #7 If the jihadis can find the routes, then so can we. As I recall, we tried that in Laos ... |
| Posted by: Steve White 2010-12-30 10:43 |
| #6 I believe there was a similar problem in Iraq 5-6 years ago with foreign fighters traveling in from Syria. A few well placed sniper teams raised the 'toll' for crossing the border and the flow began to stop. |
| Posted by: airandee 2010-12-30 10:24 |
| #5 We've spiced cider in the Club, Water Modem. Drop on by for a mug. |
| Posted by: lotp 2010-12-30 09:01 |
| #4 TW, is it too early in the morning to have drinks on the house? Since, your training camps might require an ARCLIGHT raid. |
| Posted by: Water Modem 2010-12-30 08:28 |
| #3 The safe havens aren't as safe as all that, given how freely our UAVs seem to roam in the air above Pakistan. On the other hand, we haven't yet destroyed the training camps run by the various intertwined jihadi groups, and we must know where at least some of them are. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-12-30 08:13 |
| #2 Target Gul and his ISI cronies for a good first pass. |
| Posted by: Water Modem 2010-12-30 03:03 |
| #1 "You can get more effects by defending in depth than you are in line. So we pick and choose where - the best places that we can defend the border, and then be able to target those guys where they feel safe in. I think that's been the key to our success," he said. Col Luong is correct. Defense in depth and specific targeting appear to be the keys to success. After 10 years, the bad guys and their pattern of life are pretty well known. Along with taking the fight into Pakistan and the sancuaries, the 'persistent stare' of rat lines (travel routes) and good HUMINT are key. The influx of foreign fighters and trainers also remains a challenge. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-12-30 02:54 |