World's Best Armies Vs Rag Tag Militia with AK47s

[xenia]

the regular armies are designed to fight conventional wars with state actors..we have seen parties losing n winning on basis of military advancements..besides conventional armies are a deterrent, as in cold war US and USSR had MAD strategy..one party builds weapons, the other one follows..in such a case as long as the equation is balanced both stay risk averse!

now when wars are fought by non-state actors, they usually resort to guerrilla warfare (since they dont have conventional armies) which is difficult to tackle using conventional arms..this strategy worked well in vietnam war n is somehow effective in afghanistan..the reason is the ease of scattering n staying undistinguished from civilians with an added benefit of favorable geographical settings (both in vietnam n afghanistan)..besides when conventional wars are fought, war laws are still followed..the civilians are distinguished from milatary at least theoreticaaly.. but in case of theses suicide attacks, such norms arent followed!
in such a case enhancing intelligence is an effective way to coerce he guerrillas plus a proper focussed strategy that localizes the guerrillas.

so in no way guerrilla warfare undermines the importance of regular militaries as we still have threat of inter-state wars n they are the only way available to counter non state actors

regarding nuclear weapons, my personal stance is that they are used to pursue deterrence..remember kargil remained a limited war because of this deterrence n we can hardly imagine the scale of MAD in case nuclear weapons are used..so better keep them safe where they are!!

 

[Icarus]

There is no actual success story of a full fledged Hit and Run guerilla campaign aginst a regular military . Vietnam war was largely fought by North Vietnamese Army regulars. Same applies to the 1971 Mukti Bahini campaign in East Pakistan ( now Bangladesh) where Indian Army regulars took part right from the beginning under guerilla cover. Afghan Mujahedeen were no different. Regulars from 'some countries' conducted major operations under Mujahedeen cover. The defeat of the LTTE in Sri Lanka establishes my argument once again that if a guerilla group is not supported by a regular army in operations , the chance of success against a regular military is very low.

But it is worth mentioning that it took Srilanka about 26 years to defeat the LTTE.

 

[Old School]

But it is worth mentioning that it took Srilanka about 26 years to defeat the LTTE.

There was no political will to neutralize LTTE on the SL government side for most of the time due to India factor. When Indian UPA government gave green signal to the SL government to finish LTTE , it did not take long. India played a key role in defeating LTTE by shutting down LTTE logistics.

 

[RobbieS]

You correctly said tactics can win war.
If i'm US general i can win this war in maximum two years.
I will exploit the advantage of land locked Afghanistan.
I will isolate them from all world... i'll see how they build IED or get buulets for their guns.
No indian consulate or disguised contractors... and no trust on northern alliance warlords who are more privy to Russians and indinas.
Logic is quite clear.....indian army have direct benift from prolonging this war and keep bleeding US army and using ANA against Pakistan.
I would rather ally with Pak army and together we sarround terrorists and keep hunting them one by one until they are dead or surrender in that limited area.

Hell for 10 bloody years Indian planes had been unloading explosives and arms in Afghanistan, which is than dumped along Pak afghan border.

So far we have recovered wepons made in Russia, India, US, Israel and Germany.
Isn't the supply chain so obvious?
I would immediately order Pakistan to stop indian trucks or send my soldiers ot inspect them at wahga border.
I would expel indian army from border areas of Pakistan which exactly are the hot beds of TTP.

What is happening is when Pak army make push against TTP they got evacuated by helis and loged in luxury camps just across the border, while in surprise move NATO abondon thier posts and never an explanation is given for such mystery moves.

US simply need to sarround Taliban together with Pak army and keep ANA and Indians away, from such operation.

Wonder where you get the inspiration for coming up with such stuff. Watching a lot of bollywood lately?

 

[Cynic Waheed]

PEOPLE,

Thanks for ur valuable inputs its sort of putting things at the right place. So really thanks for that.
One thing I was quoted earlier the example of Pak army in Swat, in comparison with the US/NATO, it appears that it is the tactics that win the war as its evident in the Swat campaign. Even though Pak army is not as equipped as our allies on the other side still we managed to pull it off quite amazingly. So am I correct to understand that US tactics actually are flawed in comparison to the Taliban tactics in Afghanistan. Although I do feel Pak army had the legitimacy to fight this war given it was in our own region along with the backing of the nation! However members here have also argued that 80% of Afghans welcomed US army, so in that context US also has the legitimacy to fight and win. Then why are they not winning against this militia?

 

[Old School]

PEOPLE,

Thanks for ur valuable inputs its sort of putting things at the right place. So really thanks for that.
One thing I was quoted earlier the example of Pak army in Swat, in comparison with the US/NATO, it appears that it is the tactics that win the war as its evident in the Swat campaign. Even though Pak army is not as equipped as our allies on the other side still we managed to pull it off quite amazingly. So am I correct to understand that US tactics actually are flawed in comparison to the Taliban tactics in Afghanistan. Although I do feel Pak army had the legitimacy to fight this war given it was in our own region along with the backing of the nation! However members here have also argued that 80% of Afghans welcomed US army, so in that context US also has the legitimacy to fight and win. Then why are they not winning against this militia?

Every military whether it is regular one or a gurellia group , they have many things in common such as Intelligence, personnel , operations , logstic etc . Logistics is the driving force of any military as without it no military operation can continue.
We won in Swat because the logistics of the rebels out there was shut down by NATO on the other side of the border. These rebels could not carry on any longer.
NATO has difficulties with the Taliban because the logistics of the taliban is still operational. Iran in the West and Tajikistan ( Russia in fact) in the north is providing the logistics. Instead of asking Pakistan , NATO need to talk to those two countries to shut down the Taliban logistics chain.

TTP on the other hand has a very interesting logistics chain which I will discuss in detail at some stage in the future. The key to defeat TTP lies in the hand of Pakistan.

 

[Avatar]

Taliban is the best fighting force in the world. They have no fear of death, a huge supply of recruits and need very little finance to survive. No military in the world can defeat them in a limited conventional war.

 

[Old School]

Taliban is the best fighting force in the world. They have no fear of death, a huge supply of recruits and need very little finance to survive. No military in the world can defeat them in a limited conventional war.

It is wrong to employ conventional military tactic to defeat an asymmetrical enemy at the first place. This requires specific military doctrine. That is also why Indian government is yet to use regular military force against the Maoist rebels. Denying the rebels a victim-hood image is therefore very crucial. It requires very high level of professional military knowledge to identify and treat an insurgency.

 

[Icarus]

Taliban is the best fighting force in the world.

That remains to be proven, hit and run tactics are effective but they are not war winners just a nuisance.

They have no fear of death

Neither did the Japanese, yet they lost WWII.

, a huge supply of recruits and need very little finance to survive.

The huge supply of recruits is because they believe in a system of zero accountability, they can kidnap anyone and release him in a market full of innocents a month later to blow much of them to kingdom cum, but they don't care. When they want another recruit, they will just kidnap another pre-schooler.

No military in the world can defeat them in a limited conventional war.

On the contrary, we defeated them, the NATO defeated them, they are not that difficult to defeat, it's tougher to finish them off.