Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Thu 10/13/2011 View Wed 10/12/2011 View Tue 10/11/2011 View Mon 10/10/2011 View Sun 10/09/2011 View Sat 10/08/2011 View Fri 10/07/2011
1
2011-10-13 Afghanistan
Michael Yon: "Red Air: America's Medevac Failure:
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 mom 2011-10-13 09:51|| || Front Page|| [4 views ]  Top

#1 For years..strike that, forever, there has been a shortage of choppers in Afghanistan. How aggravating. It must be fixed pronto.
Posted by newc 2011-10-13 10:40||   2011-10-13 10:40|| Front Page Top

#2 "Fallen Angel" is the term for a downed helo, which is a huge, huge Information Operations plus for the Taliban. Helo's are prime targets and the Taliban (with a little help from it's friends) have developed rather ingenious techniques to shoot them down. The recent loss of the SEAL bird was obviusly a major disaster and has put the leadership on edge. We're SUPPOSED to be winning and getting outta here right? As a result, most major ground operations such as this one are NOT conducted unless MEDIVAC support is dedicated, available, and on stand-by. If they were close enough to a FOB to see an Aerostat, they were very close. In this case tragically close. Aviation is needed yes, B-52's, and lots of them. Your village gets mined with IED's or non-metalic Chinese or Russian anti-pers, and you don't inform ISAF.... the village and everybody in it is destroyed. End of story. Unfortunately, this will never happen. This is a fools errand, wrong on so many, many levels. Getting out should be priority number one. If you're not ready and willing to put them all to the sword, you're going to lose. End of rant.
Posted by Besoeker 2011-10-13 12:01||   2011-10-13 12:01|| Front Page Top

#3 Your village gets mined with IED's or non-metalic Chinese or Russian anti-pers, and you don't inform ISAF.... the village and everybody in it is destroyed.

I don't think there's actually a need to kill everyone in the village - a Shermanesque approach would actually work better. Give everyone an hour to leave, taking everything they can carry, and then blow up their homes. These refugees are now too busy rebuilding their lives to give any assistance to the Taliban. It's harsh, but that's war for you.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2011-10-13 13:45||   2011-10-13 13:45|| Front Page Top

#4 Think you missed the point Zhang.
Besoeker's RULE: transgression=total annialation
Posted by Skidmark 2011-10-13 13:51||   2011-10-13 13:51|| Front Page Top

#5 Besoeker is secretly Deadpool. True story.
Posted by Charles 2011-10-13 14:08||   2011-10-13 14:08|| Front Page Top

#6 Another aspect of Yon's story not told relates to "partnered patrols" ie, ISAF patrol with Afghan Army tag-alongs. Bad, bad juju. OPSEC be gone. The Taliban has an amazing network of informants both in and out of uniform.
Posted by Besoeker 2011-10-13 14:09||   2011-10-13 14:09|| Front Page Top

#7 Think you missed the point Zhang.
Besoeker's RULE: transgression=total annialation

My point is that this is the 21st century. The total annihilation of civilians in an area infested with insurgents wasn't permissible in Vietnam. It's definitely not permissible today. It's not a moral objection - it's a practical one. Western leaders don't allow their militaries to do these kinds of things. The Pashtun militia called the Taliban was effective precisely because it did these things to enemy villages. Our hands are tied. The Chinese would have laid siege to the village, starved everyone out and then worked them to death by deliberately giving them insufficient food and clothing in China's plentiful wastelands. We cannot.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2011-10-13 14:19||   2011-10-13 14:19|| Front Page Top

#8 From what I've read about Vietnam, early in the war it was the same deal. Red Cross marked birds were unarmed. Of course, the VC/NVA had no qualms about shooting them down. Finally somebody smartened up, took the red crosses off of them and put guns on them. From Yon's story, it appears whomever is in charge of the dust off choppers doesn't want to do that as they'll lose control of them. So guys end up dead because some brass asshole is on a power trip.
Posted by tu3031 2011-10-13 16:04||   2011-10-13 16:04|| Front Page Top

#9 Zhang Fei:

Ploiesti oil fields, Dresdon, Hiroshima, Nagasaki to name af few (terrible fires, lots of death), and by the way.... the Allies won the war. Over 60 years now, no problems with Japan or Germany. "Not permissable"... ok, no problem, then YOU LOSE THE CONFLICT.
Posted by Besoeker 2011-10-13 16:12||   2011-10-13 16:12|| Front Page Top

#10 
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
Posted by OldSpook 2011-10-13 22:09||   2011-10-13 22:09|| Front Page Top

#11 Lose the GC non-combat stickers on the choppers and arm them all. Arm the choppers highly and kill anyone that shoots at one. That is one answer. No need to play geneva games with this bunch.

If all ambulatory service is fired upon, it is no longer a peaceful mission to get the wounded out.It is a combat mission in all ways.

This is stupid.
Posted by newc 2011-10-13 22:13||   2011-10-13 22:13|| Front Page Top

#12 I understand playing by the rules - it makes US better.

Thing is, you must have an enemy that respects bravery and rules to play that way.

It is not a wipe em all out situation, it is a situation where they want only to kill. What is the use PR or otherwise of having a red cross on choppers?
Posted by newc 2011-10-13 22:22||   2011-10-13 22:22|| Front Page Top

#13 Ploiesti oil fields, Dresdon, Hiroshima, Nagasaki to name af few (terrible fires, lots of death), and by the way.... the Allies won the war.

Rape of Nanking, Manila, Singapore, Java, Korea, to name a few.

If one was to follow your logic, the Japanese should have won.
Posted by Pappy 2011-10-13 23:02||   2011-10-13 23:02|| Front Page Top

#14 Rape of Nanking, Manila, Singapore, Java, Korea, to name a few.

If one was to follow your logic, the Japanese should have won.

The reason the Japanese lost wasn't due to local guerrillas. They lost because Uncle Sam had something like 9x Japan's industrial output. Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's prime minister, stated that the territories under Japanese occupation were quiescent - they were harsh, but the harshness wasn't random. Those who fought them were killed, and those who did not were spared.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2011-10-13 23:55||   2011-10-13 23:55|| Front Page Top

#15 Most non-Western conquerors have operated on the basis that non-cooperation will result in the death of whatever leader is managing the district. What happens is that the leaders stomp the sub-leaders all the way down to the individual. This was how the Chinese empire was held together over thousands of years. It ain't pretty, but it's effective.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2011-10-13 23:59||   2011-10-13 23:59|| Front Page Top

23:59 Zhang Fei
23:55 Zhang Fei
23:48 CrazyFool
23:02 Pappy
22:45 Grunter
22:23 Procopius2k
22:22 newc
22:16 Procopius2k
22:13 newc
22:09 OldSpook
22:09 Old Patriot
21:59 Free Radical
21:47 Dale
21:47 Frank G
21:42 Frank G
21:35 Dale
21:28 Anonymoose
21:10 Bright Pebbles
21:05 tu3031
20:40 Frank G
20:35 Whiskey Mike
20:12 Procopius2k
20:00 OldSpook
19:57 OldSpook









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com