PDA

View Full Version : Ground Truth?


Trickster
4 October 2001, 22:54
Many of you may have already seen the following, but for those who've not, here's a reality check about what's in store for anybody humpin' the Hindu Kush.

What did Kipling say..."here lies a fool who tried to hustle the East."


"Tom Carew, an SAS soldier who helped turn Afghanistan's fighters into
an effective modern guerrilla force, on the daunting task facing allied
troops in the air or on the ground

My life with the Mujaheddin

We were there to assess the Afghan fighting capability and to retrieve
Soviet equipment. It was 1980, the Russians had just invaded and the
Afghans were fighting a superpower with the same tactics they had used
against the British before the first world war. Watching them fight
was like watching an old western: the Russian cowboys would come into a
valley and down would stream the Afghan Indians. My task was to teach the
Afghans modern guerrilla tactics. Without them, they would be exterminated.
I tried to go without preconceptions, but it was hard. Before leaving
Britain, everyone told me to be careful. The Afghans are barbaric,
they'll chop you up, they said.

My boss at MI6 gave me a Flashman novel about a cowardly British
officer in the first British Afghan war of 1839-42. It was full of
knife-wielding maniacs who carved up British soldiers. After a few months adjusting, however, I found the Afghans to be very pleasant. We got along. I
respected their bravery; they respected the way I instructed them.
I had much more difficulty coping with the terrain. When I arrived in
Peshawar, an Afghan military leader warned me: "I hope you are fit, my
men march very quickly." No problem, I thought, I was used to marching.
But my God: up, up, up we went. We entered the Hindu Kush mountains and
started climbing. Above 10,000ft the oxygen started to thin and my
concentration to lapse. The Afghans were used to it. There was only one thing we had over them: most of them couldn't swim, which made crossing lakes and streams tricky.

As fighting terrain, Afghanistan is a nightmare. It's a natural
fortress You can't get far with vehicles - you get bogged down, and the passes
are too steep. Laden infantry troops could take five days to reach a
beleaguered outpost, a journey that would take a helicopter 20
minutes. The Russians, consequently, had an awful time. It's one thing to put
in your infantry, but you've got to keep them within range of your
artillery. With difficult mountain passes, this is almost impossible.
None of this matters to the Afghans: they have it all organised,
moving from one village to the next, where they have stocks of food. This is
how they have fought and won wars for 200 years, with little bases all
over the place and holes in the ground where everything is buried. This
allows them to carry as little as possible and to cover ground much faster
than a western force could.

We didn't use tents, we lived in caves or slept rough. Most of the
army carried just a weapon, three magazines of ammunition and some nan
bread, all wrapped in a shawl on their back. No western soldier could carry
heavy equipment and keep up with them.

For a foreign army, establishing a supply route would be very
difficult. To try to carry food and water up those mountains, some of which are13,000ft high, would be madness. You have to carry bottled water and
each gallon weighs 10lb. On some days, we were going through two to three
gallons. A soldier in those hills is going to burn 4,000-5,000
calories a day. You need high-calorie rations and the Afghans can live on a lot
less.

And, of course, there is the weather. Towards the end of this month,
winter starts setting in. It begins with rain, then it freezes, then
it snows. By mid-October the snow will be up to neck height. A journey
that takes three days in summer will take 10 days in winter - and of course
in snow you leave tracks. The freezing conditions rule out helicopter
support, and the mist in the valleys invites crashes.

The Afghan fighters know the mountains as well as a Welsh farmer knows his
hills. I heard someone suggest last week that the ground could be covered
by putting in a series of four-man teams. That idea is ridiculous. The
Hindu Kush is a vast expanse. What can a four-man team do that you can't
do with a satellite? Never mind a needle in a haystack; it's like a needle
in Wembley stadium. Besides, a western taskforce will stick out like a sore thumb. Most of the Afghan fighters wear sandals soled with old car-tire treads - the ones I was given to wear were crippling. This means a western bootprint is instantly trackable.

Once identified, the Russian soldiers were sitting targets. We trained the
Afghans in "shoot and scoot"; they would lay a little ambush, let rip and
disappear. They picked it up quickly. Before long, they had learnt to let
the Russian convoys get halfway up a pass and then blow a hole through
their middle. The lucky ones died instantly. The unlucky ones were chopped
to pieces in the aftermath. In the Hindu Kush, don't expect to appealto
the Geneva convention. Other training procedures we put them through included marksmanship, tactical movement, training with weapons, anti-tank weapons and anti-aircraft missiles.

The Americans had been keen we teach them urban terrorism tactics too - car bombing and so on - so that they could strike at Russians in major towns. Personally, I wasn't prepared to do that, although I realized that eventually they would find someone who was.

The Taliban don't have much in the way of weapons. When I arrived, all they had were old 303s, sniper rifles, and some bolt-action guns. They weren't used to semi-automatics, very few had Kalashnikovs, only those they had captured from the Soviets or that had been presented to them by the many deserters from the Afghan puppet regime's conscript army. Now, of course, they are more sophisticated, but a lot of weapons won't have been upgraded since the Russian war. They might have a few Stingers left - one of the best shoulder-held surface-to-air missiles. But whether they're serviceable is debatable: weapons maintenance is virtually zero, many left to lie around in the heat and dust so they were rusting beyond use.

They do have a lot of old ZSU-23s, one of Saddam Hussein's favorite
weapons. It's a three-barrel, 50-calibre machinegun, usually arranged
in groups of two, three or four. It has a range of about 4,000 yards, so
if you're coming in on a helicopter and have four of these blasting away
at you from the back of Toyota pick-ups, it's devastating.

Then there are the landmines. In the early 1980s the Afghans cleared a buffer zone between Pakistan and Afghanistan - an area equal to four days'
walk - then put in observation posts on the high ground and mined it all.
Everything that entered the area was obliterated and it is possible that
the ground is still mined.

As for the composition of the army, back in the 1980s most of the men were 17-24 years old. In some ways, the Afghan soldiers were no different from young men everywhere and there was great camaraderie. One thing that struck me, though, was their discipline and motivation: they never complained, they got on with it. As time went by I began to realise that this stemmed from their
respect for their commander: there was no officer-soldier gap, they all mucked
in together, but their respect was absolute. Their discipline was hardly ever
relaxed - they might occasionally smoke opium (much of which was being
cultivated and smuggled to fund the war), but for religious reasons
they wouldn't drink.

They would get up at first light for prayers and cover some distance before the sun came up. They would stop five times a day for prayer, although never during battle - fortunately the Koran says that in combat you are excused prayers. But they always prayed afterwards. They were devout Muslims, but not fanatics. At night sentries would call out every 30 minutes "Allahu Akbar" (God is great) - this would give away our position, but then I imagine the Soviets had the same problem with their Afghan soldiers.

In terms of their efficiency as an army, their biggest problem was the mullah influence. Because of the doctrine that it is a great honor to die in a holy war - that from the moment you enroll as a soldier you are in fact dead, that every day is borrowed time until you die in glory and take your seat at Allah's right hand - they were fearless and took risks that western soldiers perhaps would not.

It is, in my opinion, extremely unlikely that Bin Laden is hiding in
the mountains. He must have a base from where he can communicate. He can't
communicate from inside the Hindu Kush. He is more likely to be on the
northwest frontier of Pakistan, a heavily populated area that the West
will be loath to attack. Besides, he will want to be somewhere where he
can see CNN coverage of the attack on America. Most of the Afghan military
leaders I encountered operated from the comfort of Peshawar in Pakistan.
They didn't take part in any fighting, because they wanted to be around
when it was over to reap the benefits.

If it comes to a ground war, I believe the western forces will have a very
slim chance of victory. The last army to win in Afghanistan was Alexander
the Great's. The Afghans are a formidable enemy and one of the legacies of the war with Russia was their need to increase the production of opium to pay for it. Afghanistan is now one of the most important sources of raw material
for the narcotics trade, and the money has been going into somebody's
pocket. I should know: I saw it being grown, smoked and transported.

The other terrible legacy of that war was the military know how we gave them: we in the West pointed them in the right direction and, with a
little bit of training, they went a long way.


Tom Carew served in 16 Parachute Brigade and 22 SAS Regiment. Since
leaving the army he has worked for the US Defence Intelligence Agency
and the US Drug Enforcement Administration. He is also the author of
Jihad! The Secret War in Afghanistan. A version of this article appeared in
The Guardian"

colmurph
6 October 2001, 02:51
Take it to heart son! For that's for sure where you're going! The secret is to learn "How to stay alive" and that's to kill anything or anybody that threatens you. "DON'T WAIT FOR AN ORDER FROM YOUR TEAM DADDY OR THE STAFF" or it will be too late for you and your buddies. Act on your "gut instincts", that's what usually keeps a person alive and his team-mates too. Good luck and God Speed from an old retired SF'er

Murph

colmurph
6 October 2001, 02:53
PS. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.............SHOOT IT!

Murph

colmurph
6 October 2001, 02:55
And then look around for "Rosie O'Grady", as in "Rosie O'Grady and the Colonels lady are sisters under the skin".

Murph

MEP
8 October 2001, 04:02
Ok this is what I heard.. first most of the Taliban are not Afghan, they are made up of Arabs from all over the arab world. Second most of the "fighting" forces are made up of 20 year olds who didn't fight against the russians, they were trained in Pakistan and took advantage of the infighter with different Afghan tribes. So in other words, when the Afghans were fighting amoung themselves the Taliban came from Pakistan (with Pakistan providing weapons etc) and whipped alot of them out. The Northern Alliance is made up of Afghans though. So is this true or not.

Daredevil
8 October 2001, 08:09
The part about the Taliban is somewhat right. The part about the Northern Alliance is to an extent but it's all a little misleading.

The largest ethnic group in Afghanistan is the Pashtun. Large parts of Pakistan are also Pashtun, many of the Taliban fighters came from Pakistan, but they are still Pashtun, so they aren't all that alien to the place. They do have fighters from other countries also.

While the Northern Alliance is nominally Afghan, they are largely made up of Uzbeks and other ethnic groups mainly from the North, where their name comes from. They used to be called The United Front, or the Islamic State of Afghanistan. One reason Pakistan supported the Taliban regime is because they figured the Pashtun Taliban would be a better neighbor and ally then the ethnically different Northern Alliance.

This is why Pakistan is saying they'll help us but are also saying that trying to set up a new government might not be a great idea. They fear the Northern Alliance.

Another consideration here is that many of the groups who make up the Northern Alliance are Shi'ite Muslims. The Taliban, and most Pashtuns, are Sunni Muslims. Iran is an Islamic Republic, but they are a Shi'ite one, this explains why the Iranians hate the Taliban and support the Northern Alliance. The theological difference seems small to us, but not to them. To put this in more western terms, imagine a group of hardcore fundamentalist Catholics living next to a group of hardcore fundamentalist Protestants. The likelihood of them being able to get along and play nice is slim, as we saw in Europe in the Middle Ages.

All of these areas of the world are made up of confusing tribal affiliations based on ethnicity and religion. Understanding it all can be a little difficult.

[This message has been edited by Daredevil (edited 10-08-2001).]

MEP
8 October 2001, 12:54
Ok, thanks for clearing that up Daredevil.

Tracy
8 October 2001, 13:08
Originally posted by Daredevil:
...To put this in more western terms, imagine a group of hardcore fundamentalist Catholics living next to a group of hardcore fundamentalist Protestants. The likelihood of them being able to get along and play nice is slim, as we saw in Europe in the Middle Ages...

Now you know what the UK feels like in Northern Ireland. The latest 'Troubles' have been going for 30 years straight. Any guesses where the IRA and UDF get a LOT of financial and moral support? US of A, specifically Boston and the New England region in general. Go figure.

Make no mistake, those bastards are every bit as dangerous as Al Qaeda. Hopefully, they'll be next. Then the FARC, etc.

Daredevil
8 October 2001, 13:31
Originally posted by Tracy:
Now you know what the UK feels like in Northern Ireland. The latest 'Troubles' have been going for 30 years straight. Any guesses where the IRA and UDF get a LOT of financial and moral support? US of A, specifically Boston and the New England region in general. Go figure.

Make no mistake, those bastards are every bit as dangerous as Al Qaeda. Hopefully, they'll be next. Then the FARC, etc.



True, Boston is the largest contributor to the IRA. Toronto is actually the biggest contributor to the other side of the fence (UVF, UDA, etc). A lot of Irish Catholics settled in Boston, while a lot of the later migrating Ulster Scots setted in Toronto. Now generations later they send money to fanatics out some misguided and exploited loyalty to the motherland. It's a shame.

Bin Laden's terrorists managed to kill more people in one day than the Republicans and Paramilitaries did in 30 years in Northern Ireland.