Article

2006-10-30 Afghanistan

One NATO soldier, 55 Taliban killed in fresh fighting

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.

Posted by Fred 2006-10-30 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11138 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 It seems to me that NATO has gone in for a body count approach, whereas the military commanders in Iraq have chosen not to disclose them. My feeling is that it would generally be better if we disclosed to the public how many enemy were killed in every engagement. That way, the public would stop thinking that this is an endless litany of one-sided battles in which GI's are killed and the terrorists get away clean. It would also be nice if we could present to the terrorist rank and file big picture statistics about how their leaders are leading them like lambs to the slaughter. Instead, we guard our numbers on enemy dead jealously and make it seem like the enemy are magicians who kill our boys and get away without a scratch time and time again. This simultaneously weakens home front support and encourages potential terrorist recruits to believe that theirs is an omnipotent and irresistible force.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2006-10-30 01:24|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2006-10-30 01:24|| Front Page Top

#2 Fine but are Iraqi numbers as good as the ones from Afghanistan?

Posted by NWFP Assembly 2006-10-30 01:32|| 2006-10-30 01:32|| Front Page Top

#3 Generally as good, sometimes a little worse, sometimes a little better. The Iraqi Army and Police are certainly releasing their enemy KIA numbers, usually 2-3 days after the end of the operation.

Posted by Shieldwolf 2006-10-30 04:08|| 2006-10-30 04:08|| Front Page Top

#4 We disclosed enemy dead in Vietnam and it didn't do much good there AFAIK. Body counting for PR is a bad idea.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-10-30 06:49|| 2006-10-30 06:49|| Front Page Top

#5 first, it would be good if the numbers were published on a monthly basis instead of a PR effort.
Second, the taliban tactic of fighting in platoon or company size units is a total mistake. They are getting their clocks cleaned. It may be necessary because of the lack of properly trained fighters. This is precisely the desired situation in the WOT. Great work, Bush, Rumsfeld, etc.

Posted by wxjames 2006-10-30 08:16|| 2006-10-30 08:16|| Front Page Top

#6 I agree that body counting is problematic back home.

Civilians as a rule don't have a grasp of war, which is why they fall prey to things like war photography and body counts and think that things are terrible.

In turn, this represents an even bigger breakdown in communications between the military and the civilian world as a whole, that has existed for decades.

Though the military has made some furtive and futile gestures to connect to the public, there remains a chasm of misunderstanding between them.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-10-30 08:22|| 2006-10-30 08:22|| Front Page Top

#7 It was the Dutch and Aussies, I believe.

Posted by Chuck Simmins">Chuck Simmins 2006-10-30 08:47|| http://northshorejournal.org]">[http://northshorejournal.org] 2006-10-30 08:47|| Front Page Top

#8 Purely from a personal perspective, I would like to see the body counts published but certainly not inflated. I would like confirmed kills. I guess it's a primal instinct for retribution, but I lost alot on 9/11 and most of us in the fire service (at least in my area) are looking for hard data that we are kicking ass. The only thing we hear from MSM and even Fox News is the the fatalities of US GI's, the civilian casualties in Iraq and the occasion blurb about the resurgent Taliban who have lost some 2,500 fighters this year. I agree with Zhang r/e release the numbers let the enemy know we are hammering them, provided most of them can read.

Brian

Posted by Rightwing 2006-10-30 09:28|| 2006-10-30 09:28|| Front Page Top

#9 A: Civilians as a rule don't have a grasp of war, which is why they fall prey to things like war photography and body counts and think that things are terrible.

I don't see that the body counts from Afghanistan are making the US public squeamish. My feeling is that conservatives are getting antsy about Iraq because they see a war with only US casualties.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2006-10-30 11:56|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2006-10-30 11:56|| Front Page Top

#10 Faith is a wonderful thing, but conservatives typically reserve faith for the realm of the divine. If we can't see results in the form of a peaceful Iraq quite yet, it would be nice to see how many terrorists our guys are taking down along the road to that objective. The body counts that are killing us in the polls are the ones about American casualties. If this indifference to public opinion keeps up much longer, the Democrats are going to hand Iraq over to the enemy, as they did with South Vietnam three decades ago.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2006-10-30 12:02|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2006-10-30 12:02|| Front Page Top

#11 Regardles...55 toe-tags...and the vaunted winter offensive fetivities haven't even started!!

Posted by anymouse">anymouse 2006-10-30 13:09|| 2006-10-30 13:09|| Front Page Top

#12 I don't think the body counts are hurting us in elections. I think it's the sense of a lack of progress. At the end of the day most people won't remember if there were 3,000 US dead or 15,000. But they will remember if we won or lost.

Posted by Iblis">Iblis 2006-10-30 13:12|| 2006-10-30 13:12|| Front Page Top

#13 I don't think the body counts are hurting us in elections.

Well, the lack of some kind of metric is hurting us. Body counts come to mind. But westerners have to realize that like the Vietnamese, terrorists are willing to expend millions to make their point.

Posted by gorb 2006-10-30 16:07|| 2006-10-30 16:07|| Front Page Top

#14 I prefer to know what kind of losses we are inflicting. Just for morale purposes. I think the pluses outweigh the minuses.

Everyone on this board knows we give much worse than we get -- but I'm not so sure that's true about the general public.

Posted by Moon6">Moon6 2006-10-30 23:57|| 2006-10-30 23:57|| Front Page Top

21:53 Enlightenment
23:59 gorb
23:57 Moon6
23:54 NWFP Assembly
23:48 Hedniskhjartad
23:48 gorb
23:45 Zenster
23:37 KBK
23:32 Zenster
23:30 tu3031
23:27 Pappy
23:11 ed
23:10 macofromoc
23:09 djohn66
23:05 twobyfour
23:04 ed
23:01 mrp
22:59 ed
22:58 Pappy
22:54 phil_b
22:49 gorb
22:30 Angeger Glins1956
22:13 OldSpook
22:12 Pappy