Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UAE firm opens biggest armoured vehicles plant in the world!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    -Burning villages can't be helped.It's what the strongest tribes do.Burn enough and the number of mujahedins dwindles.Allah's will.It's a recipe that worked well before.You also need to put a statue of yourself there,before thinking of improving sewers.
    -Everybody speaks English, French and Spanish.I have yet to hear of a 3d world nation that did not employed foreign experts in some field or another.
    -Replace ISAF with BW and our sepoys in the NA,plus BW will kill 100 of them for 1 of ''ours''.You don't have to fight their entire civil war for them,just the relevant bit and take the spoils.Pak Army is (supposedly) a great army.Of the 1970's.Drones and artillery can pick every single truck on the road in the first 150km.Can't fight without trucks.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

    Comment


    • #62
      -Burning villages can't be helped.It's what the strongest tribes do.Burn enough and the number of mujahedins dwindles.Allah's will.It's a recipe that worked well before.You also need to put a statue of yourself there,before thinking of improving sewers.
      Yawn... Arab money would flood in an sweep pmcs out of there...

      -Replace ISAF with BW and our sepoys in the NA,plus BW will kill 100 of them for 1 of ''ours''.You don't have to fight their entire civil war for them,just the relevant bit and take the spoils.Pak Army is (supposedly) a great army.Of the 1970's.Drones and artillery can pick every single truck on the road in the first 150km.Can't fight without trucks.
      Remove ISAF and Pakistan can be more open with its support for the Taliban and won't be letting in drone strikes. During the late 1990s and early 2000s the PAF was active over Afghanistan - nothing a pmc force has ever put into action in any way comes close to the PAF.
      To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by troung View Post
        Pakistan would shoot back.
        And Washington is simply going to allow Pakistan to interfere with bringing Taliban/AQ to justice without acting. In any case, a case for Pakistani intervention would seriously tax them, considering the amount of force concentrated by their neighbour in the East, and their preoccupation with it, would tie down a significant amount of their forces and equipment.




        No it would be Pakistan fighting mercenaries.
        Who have been hired by the U.S taxpayer. And are working for U.S Govt. interests. Same reason why third world nations don't try nationalizing american companies.



        Close air support, recon, air-mobility - no pmc operation in Africa has come close to what the USAF does. There is nothing on the private market which comes close to a B-1 or F-15E.
        Sure, all the potential in the world is great, but there is no ability or political willpower to utilize it and utterly crush the Taliban/Pak Taliban in balochistan along with their lines of logistics. For all intents and purposes, it might as well not exist against an unconventional force operating within another nations borders. Unless you were to declare war on pakistan, you might as well be holding paper aeroplanes.



        No ISAF forces frees Pakistan's hands and weakens the forces in the field against the Taliban. Of those 30k men, how many would be available for mobile operations - 15k? 10k?
        The 30k estimate was for the amount of fighters the Taliban could bring to bear over a large area, I don't think they have the force concentration in small areas that the PMCs would be able to bring thanks to logistic trains + mechanization.



        Some BMPs and T-55s and a squadron or two of Hips/Hinds won't cut it.
        Against the Taliban who have access to small arms and IEDs

        Stupid idea. Furthermore the US would be held responsible politically for anything stupid they do.
        Not your armed forces, plausible deniability.

        The moment the media has no interest in turning a blind eye and starts reporting the "incidents" the political heat will be on those who ordered the services of the mercs.
        Would the same level of protection afforded to reporters by ISAF exist wrt to PMCs? Highly doubt it. No potential gain or benefit. Dangerous job for reporters, much moreso than normal.

        Originally posted by troung View Post
        Replace ISAF with BW, and the Pakistanis and Taliban would control most of the country.
        And the current status quo? Whats going to happen when ISAF leaves? A "resounding success", considering that you have been brought to the negotiation table with them.



        They get so much press because they speak the same language as the reporters. And plenty of third world nations can fight without foreign mercenaries doing the lifting for them.
        They can fight, but can they win against forces that have the assistance of foreign mercs?


        That's without getting into the wonderful recruiting tool of foreign mercenaries burning Muslim villages
        And your current occupation isn't that? The avg. uneducated, easily brainwashed Madrassa inductee isn't going to be educated about the finer points of COIN reconstruction efforts. All they know is that ISAF is occupying their land. Heck, just because the potential for aggrevience exists, doesn't mean you shouldn't exact vengeance for those 4000 or so civilians who died from an unprovoked attack.
        "Who says organization, says oligarchy"

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by troung View Post
          Yawn... Arab money would flood in an sweep pmcs out of there...
          Right.. and again, Washington is going to sit idly by while Saudi Wahhabis and Salafists open their wallets to the Taliban and Pak.Army. I'm willing to bet, if Washington is serious about prosecuting the war to the fullest extent, Arab capital can no way compare to American capital. The last 10 decades has seen ISAF fighting with one hand tied behind its back. Imagine a fraction of that capital without the restriction to act.



          Remove ISAF and Pakistan can be more open with its support for the Taliban and won't be letting in drone strikes. During the late 1990s and early 2000s the PAF was active over Afghanistan - nothing a pmc force has ever put into action in any way comes close to the PAF.
          Before 9/11, when the whole dynamic shifted and US sats paid much more attention to that region.
          "Who says organization, says oligarchy"

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Mihais View Post
            Pak Army is (supposedly) a great army.Of the 1970's.Drones and artillery can pick every single truck on the road in the first 150km.Can't fight without trucks.
            first, regular arty does not reach than long and secondly, the much touted uav can be shot down with even 1940's era rapid fire guns ( not even going into MANPADS of which PAK has plenty)
            J'ai en marre.

            Comment


            • #66
              And Washington is simply going to allow Pakistan to interfere with bringing Taliban/AQ to justice without acting. In any case, a case for Pakistani intervention would seriously tax them, considering the amount of force concentrated by their neighbour in the East, and their preoccupation with it, would tie down a significant amount of their forces and equipment.
              They support the Taliban today, give them shelter, have attacked American ground units, allow the Taliban to launch strikes from near their own FOBs, and hid Bin Laden - we haven't done a thing. India wouldn't do a damn thing. Your logic is amazing.

              Who have been hired by the U.S taxpayer. And are working for U.S Govt. interests. Same reason why third world nations don't try nationalizing american companies.
              +
              Not your armed forces, plausible deniability.
              Bag of hammers. I see why bigfella mocks you.

              The 30k estimate was for the amount of fighters the Taliban could bring to bear over a large area, I don't think they have the force concentration in small areas that the PMCs would be able to bring thanks to logistic trains + mechanization.
              All of this is based on what? You have a poor reading on the current conflict and probably no idea about what happened in the 1990s.

              Sure, all the potential in the world is great, but there is no ability or political willpower to utilize it and utterly crush the Taliban/Pak Taliban in balochistan along with their lines of logistics. For all intents and purposes, it might as well not exist against an unconventional force operating within another nations borders. Unless you were to declare war on pakistan, you might as well be holding paper aeroplanes.
              The all weather strike capability the US has isn't available on the private market. Drones strikes in Pakistan have been hitting logistics sites, large gatherings and individual commanders. And then there is the CAS/BAI activities in Afghanistan itself. A group of mercenaries won't be able to replicate that.

              And your current occupation isn't that? The avg. uneducated, easily brainwashed Madrassa inductee isn't going to be educated about the finer points of COIN reconstruction efforts. All they know is that ISAF is occupying their land. Heck, just because the potential for aggrevience exists, doesn't mean you shouldn't exact vengeance for those 4000 or so civilians who died from an unprovoked attack.
              America isn't burning down Muslim villages and doesn't have a glass jaw like a relative handful of mercs would have. Violence against civilians, negative media coverage and apparent weakness.

              They can fight, but can they win against forces that have the assistance of foreign mercs?
              Cuban and Angolan regulars swept white mercenaries from the field. Barefoot Rwandans crushed French and Serbians fighting for Mobutu. Foreign mercenaries have commonly ranged from cowardly and useless to simply getting far too much credit.

              Would the same level of protection afforded to reporters by ISAF exist wrt to PMCs? Highly doubt it. No potential gain or benefit. Dangerous job for reporters, much moreso than normal.
              Then the reporting becomes controlled by those people embedded with the Taliban.

              Against the Taliban who have access to small arms and IEDs
              And large numbers of men, heavy infantry support weapons and in the absence of the USAF could mass in large numbers and rebuild their old technical fleet. With all of ISAF's firepower the Taliban is still a threat and is able to conduct operations.

              Right.. and again, Washington is going to sit idly by while Saudi Wahhabis and Salafists open their wallets to the Taliban and Pak.Army. I'm willing to bet, if Washington is serious about prosecuting the war to the fullest extent, Arab capital can no way compare to American capital. The last 10 decades has seen ISAF fighting with one hand tied behind its back. Imagine a fraction of that capital without the restriction to act.
              Thank God you live on kangaroo island and not in America. There are restrictions because the US would have hired these people, if they start burning villages and killing civilians not only would money and foreign fighters flow in but the American people would walk away. Had we handed the whole thing off from 9/12, OBL would be alive and the Taliban would be in a far stronger position today. There would be issues even keeping a line of supply open.

              ==========
              Our problems in Afghanistan aren't merely the fact the US won't burn down villages or murder women and children.
              Last edited by troung; 03 May 12,, 17:15.
              To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

              Comment

              Working...
              X