China military warns of confrontation over seas

[twilyth]

Originally Posted by DrPepper

Taliban $ for $ are probably several thousand times more efficient.

Since when does war and its circumstances have to be fair. Also due to the amount of insurgencies the UK has been involved in we're the world leaders in counter insurgency tactics.

The comparison not the war - duh.

And efficient or not, the taliban are still dead. Ded iz ded.

[DrPepper]

Originally Posted by twilyth

The comparison not the war - duh.

And efficient or not, the taliban are still dead. Ded iz ded.

Really your saying the remnants of the taliban are all dead ? I take it those roads in Afghan are naturally explosive.

Also the comparison was to show that 800bn is not 10x better than 80bn.

[twilyth]

Originally Posted by DrPepper

Really your saying the remnants of the taliban are all dead ? I take it those roads in Afghan are naturally explosive.

Also the comparison was to show that 800bn is not 10x better than 80bn.

I never said it was 10x better. It's probably 100x better in point of fact. It's a concept called force multipliers.

The taliban are no longer a serious organized force. They're no better than poorly organized guerrilla movement. Now to be sure, guerrilla movements can be very effective if they have structure and leadership, but at the moment, the taliban have neither. Will they regroup once we leave? Probably, but that's another issue entirely.

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by twilyth

The comparison not the war - duh.

And efficient or not, the taliban are still dead. Ded iz ded.

Uh, the USA is currently "negoitating with the Taliban." They aren't dead, far from it.


Edit: Scratch that, the negotiations failed. Regardless, Taliban has as much power and influence over Afghanistan as we do. They are still very relevant.

Taliban has always been a leaderless defense force. They use guerilla tactics against any foreigner. They're not, and never have been, a military force--they're armed civilians with common goals.

[twilyth]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

Uh, the USA is currently "negoitating with the Taliban." They aren't dead, far from it.


Edit: Scratch that, the negotiations failed. Regardless, Taliban has as much power and influence over Afghanistan as we do. They are still very relevant.

Taliban has always been a leaderless defense force. They use guerilla tactics against any foreigner. They're not, and never have been, a military force--they're armed civilians with common goals.

Yeah, well, when they're so-called "leaders" try to turn themselves in for the reward money, that's not saying much now is it? LOL!!!

[FordGT90Concept]

I said leaderless didn't I? One idiot doesn't represent the whole.

[entropy13]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

Taliban has always been a leaderless extremist force. They use guerilla (sic) tactics against any infidel (you don't have to be a foreigner to be an infidel). They're not, and never have been, a military force--they're armed civilians with common goals.

ftfy

[DrPepper]

Originally Posted by twilyth

I never said it was 10x better. It's probably 100x better in point of fact. It's a concept called force multipliers.

The taliban are no longer a serious organized force. They're no better than poorly organized guerrilla movement. Now to be sure, guerrilla movements can be very effective if they have structure and leadership, but at the moment, the taliban have neither. Will they regroup once we leave? Probably, but that's another issue entirely.

I very highly doubt even the US is 100x more effective at conducting operations than China. The worst thing you can do is underestimate an enemy. The US military is big and expensive but that means there is a lot of inefficiencies and that are negative force multipliers. They'd be far more effective downscaling the army and employing more marines and specialised units. Although the US navy should expand and the Air Force integrate with the Army.

No longer a serious organized force ?

We're negotiating with them to end the slaughter of our troops.

[twilyth]

Originally Posted by DrPepper

I very highly doubt even the US is 100x more effective at conducting operations than China. The worst thing you can do is underestimate an enemy. The US military is big and expensive but that means there is a lot of inefficiencies and that are negative force multipliers. They'd be far more effective downscaling the army and employing more marines and specialised units. Although the US navy should expand and the Air Force integrate with the Army.

No longer a serious organized force ?

We're negotiating with them to end the slaughter of our troops.

Some guy in Norway slaughtered 77 civilians. I don't consider him an organized force.

[WhiteLotus]

Originally Posted by twilyth

Some guy in Norway slaughtered 77 civilians. I don't consider him an organized force.

$$$$ spent on military does not mean organised.

[DrPepper]

Originally Posted by twilyth

Some guy in Norway slaughtered 77 civilians. I don't consider him an organized force.

That is a weak comparison at best.

First off if anything Breivik seems pretty organised to me. How many psycho's do you know who managed to kill 77 people even if they were unarmed.

Taliban are capable of acquiring explosives, weapons, manpower and funding even though there is a multi-national force in control of the country. Not to mention they have air support, ground support, logistics, manpower, training and experience and yet all of these force multipliers count for nothing except in large conventional engagements which are rare at best.

How many billions of dollars were destroyed by the Taliban who are living off a very limited budget.

Face it the UK/US are being defeated by angry farmers.

[twilyth]

Originally Posted by DrPepper

That is a weak comparison at best.

First off if anything Breivik seems pretty organised to me. How many psycho's do you know who managed to kill 77 people even if they were unarmed.

Taliban are capable of acquiring explosives, weapons, manpower and funding even though there is a multi-national force in control of the country. Not to mention they have air support, ground support, logistics, manpower, training and experience and yet all of these force multipliers count for nothing except in large conventional engagements which are rare at best.

How many billions of dollars were destroyed by the Taliban who are living off a very limited budget.

Face it the UK/US are being defeated by angry farmers.

Hardly. The problem is keeping villagers safe. It was the same problem in vietnam. They don't have the will to defend themselves even against a disorganized gang of thugs like the taliban. Fuck, the taliban isn't even an identifiable entity any more. So much of their original leadership has been turned into hamburger meat, that you only have the morons left and the only thing they're capable of is random acts of terror. That's enough to destablize many areas, but it hardly makes them a formidable force when it comes to armed conflict of any kind.

[DrPepper]

Hope the analysts at the pentagon don't have the same conclusion as you.

[entropy13]

Originally Posted by twilyth

They don't have the will to defend themselves even against a disorganized gang of thugs like the taliban.

Indeed, as the common Afghan said: "We don't hold funerals because a lot of people die everyday." Implying acceptance of what is happening, i.e. they're not doing anything to stop it.