Working With The U.S. Military In Afghanistan

Donate

Working With The U.S. Military In Afghanistan

Illustrative image

Written by Fenrir170; The author served for about ten years in one of the EU armies and did multiple deployments to Afghanistan.

Edited by Mark Ehrman;

Foreword:  It is not the intent of the author to condemn an entire nation, but rather to illustrate the experiences of dealing with the American military from the perspective of a NATO ally.

After the final Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in February, 1989 until the beginning of Operation Enduring Freedom and the American led invasion of the country in October, 2001 there had never been so many troops from so many different countries fulfilling such a variety of different roles across the entirety of this nation.

These troops came to Afghanistan as part of two operations: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), the beginning of the USA’s Global War on Terrorism, and the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), both led by the United States.

For those unfamiliar with the two, Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) focuses on combat operations against the Taliban, while the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) consists mostly of non-US forces tasked with maintaining civil order, and on implementing social projects and reconstruction efforts aimed at stabilizing the Afghan government’s control.

It is important for the reader to understand that the ISAF are assigned to zones for which they and only they are responsible. It is understood that the OEF forces would stay clear of these ISAF assigned zones, unless the ISAF forces are not able to deal with a problem, in which case the OEF forces are allowed in for larger operations.

It is also important to understand that during the NATO Afghan deployments, as well as during joint military exercises in Europe, America’s NATO allies are also unified by their frustrations regarding the conduct of the American military forces.

The most frequently cited area of concern regarding the American forces has been their disproportionate uses of force during engagements. In situations where ground forces can safely deal with a situation, American forces will generally use far greater amounts of ordnance than needed, creating a level of destruction far greater than needed – a level of destruction that would qualify in some cases as war crimes.

As an example of this, when a surgical strike with a helicopter launched Hellfire missile could easily resolve a conflict, the American military will instead opt to annihilate a town or village with a series of strikes by 1000 pound GBU-31 and 2000 pound GBU-32 JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munitions) ordnance.

The appalling destruction created by the use of such powerful weapons leaves little more than rubble and dismembered bodies in its wake, with shocked survivors stumbling amidst the ruins searching for relatives and friends, and being treated by the arriving ISAF medical teams. Generally the Americans are nowhere to be found until several weeks later when they arrive to pay whomever remains for this ‘collateral damage’. On average, families are paid $1,000.00 US for each life taken in the strike, with lower payments offered for child casualties. Considering that the cheapest laser-guided bomb costs the US $15,000.00 per unit, these small payments made for the loss of human life caused by these strikes is a bargain for the American forces.

Beyond this disproportionate use of force and loss of innocent life, what infuriates most ISAF troops is the callous, even indifferent attitude of the US forces when challenged regarding this behavior. Some common replies to such criticism are ‘They’re just Afghanis’, or are merely ‘casualties in the War on Terror’, or perhaps ‘they shouldn’t have let terrorists into their homes’.

American troops will often speak in this same manner when the victims are Iraqis, detachedly referring to them in a way more suitable to cattle than to fellow human beings. Whereas US forces often treat civilians as if they were all hostile forces, the ISAF troops do daily patrols, speaking with the residents of the towns and settlements while  building relationships and even friendships built on mutual trust.

In addition to the American military’s reliance upon the disproportionate use of force in engagements with hostile forces, and its casual indifference to the ‘collateral damage’ inflicted upon the civilian populace, there exists a secondary source of tension between American forces and their NATO allies. This is the American disregard for the foreign national zones of responsibility and the US attempts to exert total dominance in all situations.

Normally, ISAF operations are under the full control of their respective home countries. Unfortunately, the US military does not consider its allies as equal partners and often goes behind their backs and commences operations without their allies’ knowledge or consent. Obviously this behavior has created a loss of trust in the US army among non-US ISAF commanders.

As an example, on a day without any large scale ISAF operations planned by that country’s forces in the region outside of the basic PRT (Provisional Reconstruction Team) patrols, the local command center of that ISAF region received several disturbing calls

Outposts were reporting the sounds of explosions and gunfire, yet no ISAF patrols were in the region or had reported any contact with hostile forces. In order to gain some understanding of the situation on the ground, a drone launch from the ISAF Forward Operating Base (FOB) was ordered – a process which takes 30 minutes to complete.

During this time reports continued to arrive from the outposts of intensifying gunfire and explosions in the area. Certainly something very serious was going on, but it made no sense to those in the command node. The QRF (Quick Reaction Force) of the nearest FOB was then dispatched, and a mechanized infantry platoon went to investigate. Shortly afterwards the FOB reported civilian pick-ups approaching its gates, full of injured people, the drivers having been instructed by the QRF platoon to head to the FOB to seek medical treatment for the wounded. With most of the fifty plus injured showing signs of various injuries, mostly shrapnel, the FOB requested Medevacs for this mass-casualty event.

RC South, which in addition to its other tasks generally approves and controls all air support and medevacs for the region, called the ISAF command node to inform them of the reason why ISAF forces had been launching its stationed AH-64s, and requested Airspace Clearance in order to fire its base-stationed artillery. The ISAF forces commander was then ‘notified’ that the US special forces were in pursuit of a high-value target in the area of operations, and was then ordered to tell the ISAF troops to ‘stay out of the way’.

In pursuit of this high-value target the American forces were attacking a busy local Afghan market in the middle of the day with a US special forces team on the ground, and a MQ-9 Reaper overhead. Working their way through the market in pursuit of this one individual and his bodyguards, this American action resulted in a large loss of civilian life.

This was a huge blow to any trust that existed in their US ally by those ISAF members who were involved and aware of the true nature of this event and of the reckless disregard displayed by the Americans toward the Afghan civilians in the market.

The manner in which the US changes its stance and position to whatever is most expedient for them at the time also holds true for any agreement made between a foreign army and the US military. The Americans may smile at you as if you were a friend, shake your hand as if they mean it, and make you feel like you are their ally in this War on Terror, but beware – it’s all for show. In the eyes of the US, allies are to be used as auxiliary forces, and are definitely not worthy of being considered as equals.

This is behavior is underlined by how they do not brief their allies about US operations in allied zones of operations. On the other hand, if a non-US force happens to intervene in US operations, they withdraw air support as punishment for “insubordination”.

The US army’s mindset is yet another source of frustration to their allies. Broadly speaking, the members of the US military believe in their own sense of invulnerability and of their ability to overpower any adversary they may choose. The belief that the US military is the largest and most modern military on the planet is a deeply ingrained belief among the Americans, as is the belief that they are warriors fighting the forces of evil wherever in the world they may be deployed.

This belief in the doctrine of ‘American Exceptionalism’ runs deeply in the culture and history of the United States, leading American forces to believe that they possess the best weaponry, training and tactics than any other nation they may face as an adversary. This belief has often directly led to disastrous results in many US actions in Afghanistan. Believing themselves to be superior to any threat they might possibly face, they often throw caution to the wind during their operations.

During mutual US-US Ally operation briefings, US Commanders often criticize their allies for being too passive, too cautious, and for not using the element of surprise enough, often preferring to wait for rotary wing support in the form of attack helicopters, or artillery support, or recon by special forces or drones, or by bringing in additional forces to ensure that any enemy resistance is simply overwhelmed by sheer numbers and firepower.

The non-US forces have never understood the US command’s compulsion to dive head first into fights in order to constantly prove that you have balls of brass. There was always this feeling that US officers have to prove themselves and therefore have to take risks and act fast. Being cautious and creating options that would guarantee the tactical advantage remaining on your side even in changing battlefield conditions is not something they prefer.

No matter who you may ask, be they Czech, German, French, British, Dutch, Canadian, or Australian, all share the opinion that Americans are especially prideful and arrogant.

Here’s an example of a US insertion gone wrong. A US mechanized platoon that had an Apache Gunship providing support was trying to advance to a Taliban-held town, which was situated near a mountain ridge.

During their advance, the Taliban’s daisy chained IEDs (chained roadside buried bombs) took out two of the US vehicles, allowing the Taliban to open fire on them with small arms and RPGs. In order to defend the crippled US convoy, both of the Apache helicopters were ordered to engage the enemy at the top of the mountain ridge at some 2000 meters above sea level, where the thin air reduced the lift from their rotors.

Having lured the Apaches into this higher altitude, the Taliban pulled their brown cloths off of the DSHK emplacements (in short, Russian 50. caliber guns), and opened fire at both gunships. One got its cockpit riddled with bullets, rendering its weapons inoperable, while the other lost an engine and was forced to dump its weapons pylon in order to slow it’s rate of descent.

Both helicopters were taken out of combat and had no other choice than to land at the nearest FOB. The ambushed convoy was left to defend itself until reinforcements could arrive. In the end, the total number of dead among the American troops ended up being in excess of 20, with nearly 40% of the US platoon being wiped out. The Taliban suffered almost no losses during the ambush, having retreated from the immobilized convoy before the American support troops arrived on the scene.

The Taliban are often portrayed as a being no more than ignorant farmers with no training and no tactical insight, sporting old AKs and RPGs, but you would be impressed by how efficiently they can wage a war of attrition against military powers and how smart their commanders can be. This, however, is a topic for another day.

Worse still, the US Army has a long tradition of not learning from past mistakes, and of never admitting that they had been in the wrong. Such an institutional culture of covering up mistakes can only lead to the same mistakes being repeated and resulting in yet more needless loss of life. They perceive the admission of mistakes as being potentially damaging to the image of the US as invincible superpower, and not as a valuable learning experience that could prevent similar errors and losses in the future.

To end on a personal note, I have often stood at Ramp Ceremonies. These were the events where deceased soldiers are loaded onto NATO cargo aircraft to return home, while troops are lined up in honor of the fallen.

It always has irritated me how easily Americans write off their fallen comrades that go home in a wooden box draped in an American flag as “heroes” and never consider why they had died. Was it a failure of command? Did intelligence fail? Or was it just a freak accident? Maybe the entire operation sucked and was poorly thought out from the beginning? During the decade I’ve spent in the service, I have never once heard a US soldier question whether a casualty could have been prevented.

If you, dear reader, are new to the military community, or are an experienced veteran then the following may be of interest to you.

I would like to bring your attention to Operation Anaconda, an operation where the US forces vastly underestimated the Taliban and ended up in a military blunder. There are several documentaries dedicated to this ordeal. Watch one of them, and you’ll get a good picture about the state of the US military in 2017.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Promitheas Apollonious

    And i was thinking the only reason they went to Afghanistan was to restart the production of opium, that the Taliban, stopped dead in its tracks.

    Silly me right?

    • Richard Noel Hedditch

      Jew America are in it for the opium.

      • alejoeisabel

        Gratuitous racist nationalism. You lose any credibility.

    • Rodger

      Nah, a small factory on a big cargo ship in international waters marked as a research ship could produce as much synthetic heroin as anyone would ever need and would only cost a few million a year to run.

  • RichardD

    Great article. The Afghan war and 911 terror attack that facilitated it, are both Hegelian fabrications to fuel the Jew world order’s endless, criminally insane hegemony drive. Americans have been incessantly lied to by both their government and the Jew controlled msm. It’s only with the advent of the internet and sites, articles and comments like this. That large numbers of Americans have learned that they’ve been misled by the people that they’ve elected and the media supporting their disinfo.

  • Serious

    Fuck USA.

  • Serious

    And fuck the vets.

  • Pave Way IV

    Afghanistan: How to turn an otherwise normal farm kid from Nebraska into a psychopath in just a few months with the subtle suggestion that he is somehow protecting US citizens’ freedom. He can either be ‘on the team’ and succumb to its psychopathy, or just numb the cognitive dissonance with drugs and alcohol until he rotates out. His morally-empty, conflicted shell will be returned to the US, perhaps after his third or fourth extension/re-deployment if the military can find a replacement. Then he can become one of our psychopathic law enforcement types, struggle with PTSD to be a minimum-wage nobody or (more probably) just kill himself, either quickly or slowly.

    The Pentagon considers combat troops as if they all come from a giant pool of mindless, slobbering, jihadi-like patriotic psychopaths, unable to discern the cesspool reality of a useless war they have been thrown into. But I suppose, why not? That’s exactly how they will be treated by the US government when they return. See? A valuable skill that translates well into civilian life. Hey – the Pentagram is doing these boys a favor. They should be grateful! Plus: ribbons!

    • Lisa

      Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
      On tuesday I got a brand new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It Sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      fd177:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleDailyNewsSocialUpdateWorkFromHome/find/jobs ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::fd177hhhhh

      • Leif Manson

        Stop lying Hazel.

  • Tudor Miron

    Regarding author’s observation about their US ally. He should stop fooling himself. He’s not an ally, he’s a vassal and so is treated as vassal forces that are considered inferior by hegemons forces. Regarding US forces behavior towards people of the land they happen to occupy – nothing new here. They did the same everywhere they go – Japan (bombed civilians with nukes – one and only nation to ever done something like that. They managed occupying it with lots of help from Red army. Japan is still occupied by US and is a vassal state), Vietnam (how many civilians they killed? Russians opposed them there and they run home shitless – Vietnam is relatively free country now. Korea – occupied half of it until Russia opposed them and SK is still a vassal state and NK is an ongoing gp’s experiment of breeding a “homo servanticus.” Regarding operation anaconda – I just watched this documentary https://youtu.be/JJznwTx_FRY Three things come to mind immediately: Gees – they were facing a relatively light resistance. One relatively heavy fortification (one hellfire was enough to suppress it) with a machine gun, and relatively same amount of lightly equipped Al Queda fighters. There was similar losses (according to what they say in this video) in man power and much higher losses in helicopters. US special operation forces were simply ineffective. Also they consider it as a very serious battle with very high resistance… Comparing it to even Donbass war this is very modest fighting – they were not attacked by artillery, there wasn’t even heavy mortar fire. Their air support was simply ineffective and so they had to run and leave the battlefield to enemy. They had to wait till night and I wonder what would they do when enemy has same night vision capabilities as they do? I would say that even Ukro army would be a very serious threat for US special forces (not ordinary army mind you) Seriously – when comparing military potential we should not only look at numbers but look at examples of actual combat. For example if we count aircraft available to US coalition and Hmeymim airbase and compare the actual number of sorties, sorties per plane, actual strikes and their results than we’ll see that pure numbers game is nonsense. Looking at this documentary same goes to ground forces.

  • Brad Isherwood

    Opium/Opiates use globally is skyrocketing. ….. $$$ KA Ching!
    US now 16 years + guard the Opium.

    Predator/Reaper + US special forces opps take out others * attempting to move Uncle Shlomo Opium

    US look the other way as Taliban arm up and play the game.
    Acceptable losses is Political cover for being in Dopeistan.
    Congress never confronts the true true reality of why Boots are in A Stan
    Excerpt :
    Lord Palmerston, the Grand Patriarch or Master of Grand Orient Freemasonry, as well as knight of the Order of the Garter, was Queen Victoria’s Foreign Secretary. Palmerston was also Prime Minister during the Britain’s Opium Wars against China, in 1840 and 1858, beginning a policy of narcotics exploitation that would later characterize the Illuminati’s strategy in the twentieth century. Opium was first exploited by the Portuguese in the sixteenth century, followed by the Dutch, before attracting the British. Starting in 1773, the British East India Company established a monopoly on the production of Indian opium, transporting it to China, and bartering it for silk, tea and porcelain.[8] The drug trade soared, and by 1830, opium was the largest commodity in world trade. In China, local criminal gangs, known as Triads, were selected by the British trading companies to distribute their opium.[9]

    When the Chinese rulers acted to stop the supply of opium, the British used their military and naval might to defeat them. The peace treaty that then followed gave the British a guaranteed right to increase the flow of opium, to be paid as compensation for the opium the Chinese rulers had confiscated, and to exercise sovereignty over strategic ports and offshore islands. This is how Hong Kong came under British rule. http://www.conspiracyschool.com/nineteenth-century

    Enjoy the Mexico. ….Enjoy the A Stan

  • Mountains

    As a Businessman myself. I can easily debunk and safely inform you that the Afghan war is not about Opium and I will explain to you why.

    1. First as a businessman you learn how to locate money movements and what to invest and how to invest in order to always get plus and plan ahead with your income and salary to your workers.
    Thinking from a business point of view. Afghanistan is not about opium and far far far from it. Even saying it is silly. Honestly speaking I don’t know why people even repeat that fallacy without having the evidence to prove themselves just because they heard someone say it.

    2. the Entire opium market is not worth more then 1-2 Billlion USD annually. Now that is very very low considering the money the US is blowing in Afghanistan which is about 300% more in 1 year then the opium market and to give you another example. The US is using money worth 300 years of Opium harvesting in 1 year in afghanistan.
    The Afghan war is worth 300-400 Billion USD annually. (Adding the salary of the Afghan national army and Afghan national police which is entirely covered by the US) Plus all government public positions is also covered by the US. The ammo supply, weapon supply, medic supply, food supply for the military both Afghan army and Coalition. The most costs comes from air-strikes and drones. These are very expensive and specially when you are carrying out daily atleast 120-200 times a day.
    All in All: The Opium market is a myth and also the claims of minerals is a fallacy because afghanistan don’t really have much more then mountains.

    If you ask anyone sane to take this type of deal they would decline right away. But what I believe is that the deep state is running the show. They are always willing to dry America completely and utterly before it’s finished and they don’t really care for it except for their goals and policies being fullfilled

    • Leif Manson

      You say that you are a businessman but your business model is based on fairy tales of economic theory.
      If the CIA can persuade American lawmakers to spend 300-400 billion USD, on the Afghan war, and the CIA takes away 1-2 billion USD a year, then they have made 1-2billion USD that they can now spend with zero accountability as it is all off budget.
      In the meantime, defense contractors have made 300-400 billion USD selling weapons, ammunition, and supplies to the US military at inflated prices. From their profits, they make generous contributions to tax-free “charity foundations” run by America’s elected lawmakers.
      So much winning for everybody concerned.

      • Mountains

        These companies can’t just produce Guns or weaponry material without costs. They need to buy lead, other expensive metals etc etc. Everything has it’s price.

        ALL that 300-400 Billion USD is coming off from tax-payers. They have used 10-trillion USD for no reason( Meaning no economical gain just plain and simple loss and I would even label it ”madness level of wastefulness”)

        More then 40-50mio Americans are on food-stamps already and live below the bread-line. The expensive war on terror have already started settling in. I believe by the time 2030 comes it will be noticed by everyone then but it will be to late.

        The rise of unemployment is higher then reported. This thing is going to crash and the elite know this and they also know that they can’t save it. So they want to burn it as much as possible they can..

        The Elite have already come to terms with the economy collapse and sort of know the exact date or have fairly good guess on it. But one thing is for sure and that is them being 100% confident that the economy will collapse sometime in the 2030s

  • Politolog Externista

    the dates seem pretty off. 2002 anaconda and 2016 anaconda ?

    Czechs also see themselves as exceptional.(along Yanks, supposedly Argentina and some other nation) If you ever saw their media, what they say and how they spin all their failures on weather, bad luck, never their inability.

  • Paulo Romero

    Excellent article.Endless war equates to endless profit for the military industrial complex. The Americans know nothing of counter-insurgency and small unit tactics and couldn’t care less. They are poor soldiers and always have been. Hubris is all blinding.

  • FlorianGeyer

    ” The Americans may smile at you as if you were a friend, shake your hand as if they mean it, and make you feel like you are their ally in this War on Terror, but beware – it’s all for show. ”

    This of course is the Talmudic influence on the USA :)

  • Virgil Cane

    “The non-US forces have never understood the US command’s compulsion to”…

    You speak for all non-US forces a lot in this piece. Guess you have to in order to make your thesis work.

    If you’re not from Canada or the UK, word is US Commanders would prefer you stay out of the way (man a checkpoint). I recognized the long list of ISAF countries, most with miniscule contributions of a few dozen troops, is for show. To present a greater unifying consensus. Remember the “coalition of the willing.”

    • Virgil Cane

      Not to mention how you conflate US policy (politicians) with a skewed view of the boots on the ground (Soldiers).