• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

US marine Jar heads deploying to Afghanistan.

Lemon law

Lemon law

Lifer
Just in from yahoo news. Us Marine units will deploy to Afghanistan for the first time in many years.

I found that the jars heads, despite their supposed reputations, now have the best training and
insight in the US military. Truth be told, it was innovative Marine Corps units who set up the pre conditions to make the surge reduction in violence possible in Iraq.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...Bbd3RTkb.iH1g3nqSs0NUE

Somehow I doubt they will be deployed in sufficient numbers to make patrolling the Afghani Pakistani border possible, but I am hopeful their insights will change the Afghani situation to a
smarter strategy.
 
That's FUCKING Jarhead to you maggot! 😉

I do agree that the USMC is perhaps the best trained military force we have, if not in the world.

Semper Fi!
 
This is even more interesting for another reason. If you recall (the story didn't get much press at the time), several months ago, the Commandant of the USMC suggested that the Marines should take over Afghanistan and abandon Iraq to the Army. His argument was that it would best for both theaters if each branch could focus all its efforts on one problem at a time, and that there was no way the Army or Corps entire could not handle one of these open sores if that's all they had to concentrate on. Iraq required more resources and more troops, and therefore it was only appropriate that the larger branch (Army) take responsibility for it.

I thought it was a great idea, and there's no doubt in my mind that the USMC could quickly get Afghanistan "squared away" if it was their sole and special project. But of course the instant spin was that the Marines just wanted out of Iraq so they wouldn't be tarnished by the eventual defeat, and so the DoD quickly swept the entire question under the rug.

I'm also optimistic that the Army could make some real and lasting headway in Iraq if their power and efforts were concentrated rather than dissipated. Don't they have something like 10 "frontline" combat divisions, including 1st Armored, the 3rd and 4th IDs, 82nd and 101st Airborne, and the 10th Mountain, plus a Ranger regiment, 5 SF groups, and Delta? That's gotta be enough to knock over something big if properly applied, don't you think?

I would love to hear what the current military/vets on AT think about this idea...
 
Originally posted by: BoomerD
That's FUCKING Jarhead to you maggot! 😉

I do agree that the USMC is perhaps the best trained military force we have, if not in the world.

Semper Fi!
Click to expand...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In case you are not clueless in your semper fi, right now the US Marines also have more political smarts than most elements in the US military. That is not to say that the other parts of the US military lack brains as some posters prove, but what, BoomerD, do you find insulting about combining brains with brawn?

Or do you think the role of the US military is to be the biggest maggot possible? In which case, I don't think the current jarheads have any place for you.

Maybe I was wrong in using the slang term jarheads, a formerly insulting term, but take it as a compliment now.
 
Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong
This is even more interesting for another reason. If you recall (the story didn't get much press at the time), several months ago, the Commandant of the USMC suggested that the Marines should take over Afghanistan and abandon Iraq to the Army. His argument was that it would best for both theaters if each branch could focus all its efforts on one problem at a time, and that there was no way the Army or Corps entire could not handle one of these open sores if that's all they had to concentrate on. Iraq required more resources and more troops, and therefore it was only appropriate that the larger branch (Army) take responsibility for it.

I thought it was a great idea, and there's no doubt in my mind that the USMC could quickly get Afghanistan "squared away" if it was their sole and special project. But of course the instant spin was that the Marines just wanted out of Iraq so they wouldn't be tarnished by the eventual defeat, and so the DoD quickly swept the entire question under the rug.

I'm also optimistic that the Army could make some real and lasting headway in Iraq if their power and efforts were concentrated rather than dissipated. Don't they have something like 10 "frontline" combat divisions, including 1st Armored, the 3rd and 4th IDs, 82nd and 101st Airborne, and the 10th Mountain, plus a Ranger regiment, 5 SF groups, and Delta? That's gotta be enough to knock over something big if properly applied, don't you think?

I would love to hear what the current military/vets on AT think about this idea...
Click to expand...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I am not a military vet, I think its a piss poor idea. There is no reason to concentrate now superior Marine corps ideas to a limit of just one front of a two front war. When in fact
innovate Marine corp thinking has helped in Iraq and now can help in Afghanistan.

Since when is the US military at war with itself? Better ideas benefits all branches.
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong
This is even more interesting for another reason. If you recall (the story didn't get much press at the time), several months ago, the Commandant of the USMC suggested that the Marines should take over Afghanistan and abandon Iraq to the Army. His argument was that it would best for both theaters if each branch could focus all its efforts on one problem at a time, and that there was no way the Army or Corps entire could not handle one of these open sores if that's all they had to concentrate on. Iraq required more resources and more troops, and therefore it was only appropriate that the larger branch (Army) take responsibility for it.

I thought it was a great idea, and there's no doubt in my mind that the USMC could quickly get Afghanistan "squared away" if it was their sole and special project. But of course the instant spin was that the Marines just wanted out of Iraq so they wouldn't be tarnished by the eventual defeat, and so the DoD quickly swept the entire question under the rug.

I'm also optimistic that the Army could make some real and lasting headway in Iraq if their power and efforts were concentrated rather than dissipated. Don't they have something like 10 "frontline" combat divisions, including 1st Armored, the 3rd and 4th IDs, 82nd and 101st Airborne, and the 10th Mountain, plus a Ranger regiment, 5 SF groups, and Delta? That's gotta be enough to knock over something big if properly applied, don't you think?

I would love to hear what the current military/vets on AT think about this idea...
Click to expand...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I am not a military vet, I think its a piss poor idea. There is no reason to concentrate now superior Marine corps ideas to a limit of just one front of a two front war. When in fact
innovate Marine corp thinking has helped in Iraq and now can help in Afghanistan.

Since when is the US military at war with itself? Better ideas benefits all branches.
Click to expand...

And it doesn't matter to you that the whole thing was the Marines' idea? If they are smarter, superior, and more innovative as you say, then maybe its a good one. And I think the reason was to finally f@cking win one of the two conflicts!
 
Originally posted by: Buck Armstrong
And I think the reason was to finally f@cking win one of the two conflicts!
Click to expand...

We won't "win" in Afghanistan either, unless we're finally given authorization to pursue and destroy our enemies wherever they run to -- and we all know where that might take us.
 
Buck Armstrong says--And it doesn't matter to you that the whole thing was the Marines' idea? If they are smarter, superior, and more innovative as you say, then maybe its a good one. And I think the reason was to finally f@cking win one of the two conflicts!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not win them both? Its a matter of brains not brawn. Why can't brains be shared?
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Buck Armstrong says--And it doesn't matter to you that the whole thing was the Marines' idea? If they are smarter, superior, and more innovative as you say, then maybe its a good one. And I think the reason was to finally f@cking win one of the two conflicts!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not win them both? Its a matter of brains not brawn. Why can't brains be shared?
Click to expand...

Well I don't know why, all I know is we haven't yet!
 
I'm conflicted on the idea myself. I admit that the Corps could probably do the job in Afghanistan faster and more efficiently than the combined forces of the USMC and the Army, if only because of "jurisdictional conflicts" that always arise when you're dealing with "multi-departmental operations." It CAN be done, but it takes some work.

I agree however, that they'd need to be able to pursue into "places not authorized," with little respect for national borders...and that ain't gonna happen.

(but then again, we were never in Laos or Cambodia either) :roll:

I see too many ranking officers more concerned about their careers than getting the job done, (gee, why does that sound familiar?) and of course, politics plays a tremendous role in limiting the actual progress our troops can accomplish, regardless of which service branch they represent.
 
Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'm conflicted on the idea myself. I admit that the Corps could probably do the job in Afghanistan faster and more efficiently than the combined forces of the USMC and the Army, if only because of "jurisdictional conflicts" that always arise when you're dealing with "multi-departmental operations." It CAN be done, but it takes some work.

I agree however, that they'd need to be able to pursue into "places not authorized," with little respect for national borders...and that ain't gonna happen.

(but then again, we were never in Laos or Cambodia either) :roll:

I see too many ranking officers more concerned about their careers than getting the job done, (gee, why does that sound familiar?) and of course, politics plays a tremendous role in limiting the actual progress our troops can accomplish, regardless of which service branch they represent.
Click to expand...

Actually, the U.S. military, as a whole, is becoming quite adept at what we call "Joint Operations" these days. There are "Joint Units" and "Task Forces" everywhere now. Heck, I served in a Joint Reserve Unit for most of the last two years, with all branches represented very well... (especially the Army! 😀)

But yes, we do still have some "challenged" leadership scattered throughout the ranks. I dont think we'll ever be rid of that factor...
 
Using Marines won't help, yes they are an adept fighting force and they will certainly quash opposition, but this is a guerrilla war. These Taliban forces will just blend into civilian life if they are pushed too hard. After the NATO coalition leaves then they will return to their previous roles.

There needs to be a systematic arrest of clerics, Taliban leadership and a rebuilding effort done in the country.
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Just in from yahoo news. Us Marine units will deploy to Afghanistan for the first time in many years.

I found that the jars heads, despite their supposed reputations, now have the best training and
insight in the US military. Truth be told, it was innovative Marine Corps units who set up the pre conditions to make the surge reduction in violence possible in Iraq.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...Bbd3RTkb.iH1g3nqSs0NUE

Somehow I doubt they will be deployed in sufficient numbers to make patrolling the Afghani Pakistani border possible, but I am hopeful their insights will change the Afghani situation to a
smarter strategy.
Click to expand...

You found that they have the best training and insight? Did you do an inquest or something?

I won't deny that the Marines are well trained and very effective. Some of the best intelligence officers I met were Marines. Nevertheless, I question the assertion that it was USMC innovation which set the "pre conditions to make the surge reduction in violence possible in Iraq".

For years, Al-Anbar was the most restive province in Iraq, and that was the sole province for the Marines who operated almost autonomously there. They occupied the cities and strongpoints and never got a handle on the insurgency until the Awakening movement, which was initiated by the tribal leaders, not the US. From what I can recall, Army forces attempted to engage tribal leaders at various times without success.

If anyone wrote the book on COIN (counterinsurgency) operations in Iraq and set the stage for the surge, it was probably COL H.R. McMaster of the 3 ACR who tamed Tal Afar in 2005. Sure, the Marines blasted the hell out of Fallujah and gave the insurgent forces in Al Anbar one amazing fight over the years, but their strategies were no different from the Army's until the tribes had tired of AQIZ's garbage and basically kicked them out. The surge came in and denied AQIZ ANY safe haven, whether in Baghdad or Diyala or Nineveh.

Afghanistan is not some great mystery -- it's just not easy. It's nearly impossible to defeat an insurgency when they have a safe haven across a border where they can refit and train in relative safety, especially when your Allies don't feel like contributing all that much and the local security forces are still learning how to shoot. The Pakistanis themselves can't go into the FATA without being attacked, and if we were to violate Pakistani sovereignty wholesale with an invasion to clear our the FATA, not only would we be involved in a vicious fight, but we might also just tip the country of Pakistan into a hardline Islamic state, thereby cutting off our supply lines that run through that country. Then, we'd also be handing Islamic hardliners nuclear weapons.

The Marines aren't going to bring the silver bullet to Afghanistan and claim victory. If it were that easy, it would have been done already. The last time a notable Marine unit was sent to Afghanistan, it was the first special ops Marine company that was involved in a highly publicized shooting incident after an IED and ambush that caused them to be withdrawn from the theater. (Yes, I know there are a lot of questions surrounding that incident.)

Nobody's perfect.
 
I certainly disagree with AndrewR on many of the points he makes. And I also owe some US Marines an apology for using what they regard as the derogatory term of jarhead, when I in fact meant it as a compliment. But as a general rules now, the US marines are now showing some of the best political astuteness in the US military. Which is not to say
its a Marine monopoly and some units are not acceptions to the rule.

But I firmly reject the palehorse74 and AndrewR assertion that a victory in Afghanistan is impossible without widening the war into Pakistan. Which in my mind is the swiftest way to totally fail.

In my mind, the key to winning in Afghanistan requires three things. (1) Enough troops to patrol the Afghani Pakistani border to prevent cross border movement of taliban forces. (2) Enough politically astute forces to work with and to protect Afghani villagers. With breaking the power of Afghani war lords a new priority. (3) Large svcale economic aid in terms of modern infrastructure that will end the appeal of the taliban.

Until all three are done, we are just deluding ourselves because we are doing none of the three.
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Just in from yahoo news. Us Marine units will deploy to Afghanistan for the first time in many years.

I found that the jars heads, despite their supposed reputations, now have the best training and
insight in the US military. Truth be told, it was innovative Marine Corps units who set up the pre conditions to make the surge reduction in violence possible in Iraq.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...Bbd3RTkb.iH1g3nqSs0NUE

Somehow I doubt they will be deployed in sufficient numbers to make patrolling the Afghani Pakistani border possible, but I am hopeful their insights will change the Afghani situation to a
smarter strategy.
Click to expand...

We welcome their assistance, this shit isn't solving itself and now... It's going to get worse before it gets better.

There is so much i would like to say but can't so fill this blank space with your thoughts.































Jake
 
Originally posted by: AndrewR
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Just in from yahoo news. Us Marine units will deploy to Afghanistan for the first time in many years.

I found that the jars heads, despite their supposed reputations, now have the best training and
insight in the US military. Truth be told, it was innovative Marine Corps units who set up the pre conditions to make the surge reduction in violence possible in Iraq.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...Bbd3RTkb.iH1g3nqSs0NUE

Somehow I doubt they will be deployed in sufficient numbers to make patrolling the Afghani Pakistani border possible, but I am hopeful their insights will change the Afghani situation to a
smarter strategy.
Click to expand...

You found that they have the best training and insight?
Click to expand...

You have to be taking the piss on this, they are uneducated twats, they learn as they go.

Thiese are NOT anything usable when they arrive.

US Marines is a joke when it comes to platoons, especially the recons, we all have them, i'm the leader of one (not marines but SAS) and they are just plain daft.

If you think they are well educated, well, they are simply kids for fodder as requested.

 
Trying to have an insightful conversation with Lemon Law, about Afghanistan, is like trying to squeeze water from a stone. The kid is absolutely clueless, but thinks he knows everything -- the sum of which was learned reading the interwebz.

so good luck with that.
 
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Trying to have an insightful conversation with Lemon Law, about Afghanistan, is like trying to squeeze water from a stone. The kid is absolutely clueless, but thinks he knows everything -- the sum of which was learned reading the interwebz.

so good luck with that.
Click to expand...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hoping that palehorse74 and his clueless command will make any progress in Afghanistan is like waiting for the third coming of Jesus Christ, in short, its never going to happen.

See the results, run results run, what part of your own failures do you not understand?

You have a lot of damn gall palehorse74 to call me clueless when your own failure is the only apparent result to look at.

I can understand that your commander and chimp is even more clueless than you are and gives you insufficient resources to win, but idiots like you only make the situation worse.

Lets call a spade a spade, we are worse off now than when you started six long years ago and that could only be accomplished by inspired US stupidity. You are alienating the very hearts and minds you must win to make any progress.

In any military occupation, its always a people problem. Expecting you to be open to understanding the people aspects of Afghanistan is like casting pearls before swine. If you can't eat or screw it, kill it seems to be the sum of your understanding of people.

Going back to the original thread, I am hoping smarter and more politically astute soldiers in the US marines will start to make progress in exactly the same place where your stinking thinking has failed.
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Trying to have an insightful conversation with Lemon Law, about Afghanistan, is like trying to squeeze water from a stone. The kid is absolutely clueless, but thinks he knows everything -- the sum of which was learned reading the interwebz.

so good luck with that.
Click to expand...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hoping that palehorse74 and his clueless command will make any progress in Afghanistan is like waiting for the third coming of Jesus Christ, in short, its never going to happen.

See the results, run results run, what part of your own failures do you not understand?

You have a lot of damn gall palehorse74 to call me clueless when your own failure is the only apparent result to look at.

I can understand that your commander and chimp is even more clueless than you are and gives you insufficient resources to win, but idiots like you only make the situation worse.

Lets call a spade a spade, we are worse off now than when you started six long years ago and that could only be accomplished by inspired US stupidity. You are alienating the very hearts and minds you must win to make any progress.

In any military occupation, its always a people problem. Expecting you to be open to understanding the people aspects of Afghanistan is like casting pearls before swine. If you can't eat or screw it, kill it seems to be the sum of your understanding of people.

Going back to the original thread, I am hoping smarter and more politically astute soldiers in the US marines will start to make progress in exactly the same place where your stinking thinking has failed.
Click to expand...
:laugh:
 
Quite an inspired rebuttal Palehorse74. Confronted with some amount of logic, the best response you can come up with is a grinning emoicon?

Maybe you should be conjuring up one of those you should be ashamed of yourself emoicons for accuracy sake.

Or are you simply gloating because you are still stateside, and you have found some companies so stupid that they will pay you big bucks for your very dubious expertise in failure?
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Quite an inspired rebuttal Palehorse74. Confronted with some amount of logic, the best response you can come up with is a grinning emoticon?

Maybe you should be conjuring up one of those you should be ashamed of yourself emoicons for accuracy sake.

Or are you simply gloating because you are still stateside, and you have found some companies so stupid that they will pay you big bucks for your very dubious expertise in failure?
Click to expand...

Listen pal, I'm finished with you. You haven't conjured up any "logic," on the subject of Afghanistan, since you started posting here.

On this subject, you've never been right.
 
All this talk about shifting different parts of the military to different places when the real bottlenecks are political won't solve shit. Besides, this is guerilla warfare and no marine can defeat a band of natives over a prolonged period without other important components such as economic and political improvements.

Hence, we're just pissing away resources in a war we are fighting half-heartedly. When a real war is to be won, then the military will win. Until then, these soldiers are basically engaged in training exercises (in Iraq and Afghanistan) to keep them fit for the real future conflicts.
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Just in from yahoo news. Us Marine units will deploy to Afghanistan for the first time in many years.

I found that the jars heads, despite their supposed reputations, now have the best training and
insight in the US military. Truth be told, it was innovative Marine Corps units who set up the pre conditions to make the surge reduction in violence possible in Iraq.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...Bbd3RTkb.iH1g3nqSs0NUE

Somehow I doubt they will be deployed in sufficient numbers to make patrolling the Afghani Pakistani border possible, but I am hopeful their insights will change the Afghani situation to a
smarter strategy.
Click to expand...

COPs were what made the Surge so successfull. And those, unless I'm mistaken, were the brainchild of Gen. Petraeus (Army). Not that the Marine Corps doesn't have good ideas sometimes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top