Misplaced Air Power

The US Air Force and CENTCOM haven't quite identified the need to be more sparing in their attacks with air against mixed civilian-insurgent combat targets. We have cases in both Iraq and Afghanistan where too many civilians are becoming collatoral damage. In Afghanistan:

After months of heavy fighting that began in early 2006, the British commanders say they are finally making headway in securing important areas such as this town, and are now in the difficult position of trying to win back support among local people whose lives have been devastated by aerial bombing.

American Special Forces have been active in Helmand since United States forces first entered Afghanistan in late 2001, and for several years they maintained a small base outside the town of Gereshk. But the foreign troop presence was never more than a few hundred men.

British forces arrived in the spring of 2006 and now have command of the province with some 6,000 troops deployed, with small units of Estonians and Danish troops. American Special Forces have continued to assist in fighting insurgents, operating as advisers to Afghan national security forces.

It is these American teams that are coming under criticism. They tend to work in small units that rely heavily on air cover because they are vulnerable to large groups of insurgents. Such Special Forces teams have often called in airstrikes in Helmand and other places where civilians have subsequently been found to have suffered casualties.

In just two cases, airstrikes killed 31 nomads west of Kandahar in November last year and another 57 villagers, half of them women and children, in western Afghanistan in April. In both cases, United States Special Forces were responsible for calling in the airstrikes.

And in Iran Iraq, these strikes in Sadr City:

An American raid and airstrike killed 32 people in the Shiite stronghold of Sadr City on Wednesday, in what American military officials described as an assault on a militant network bringing in money and bombs from Iran.
---------
Lt. Col. Christopher Garver, an American military spokesman here, said the airstrike was called in against suspected gunmen who were surrounding a vehicle and who were moving toward American troops who had been taking fire. He said 30 people around the vehicle were killed, and 2 more died during the raid, all of them combatants.

“They called in an airstrike on a tactical formation of individuals, on people who were operating as a tactical unit,” Colonel Garver said. “Those are the ones who were hit.”

American military raids causing Iraqi deaths, particularly in Sadr City, frequently lead to conflicting stories. Residents describe some or all of the victims as innocent, while American military statements typically describe those killed by American weapons as militants. In most cases, neither side can provide definitive proof.

I know that the Air Force really wants to prove that their offensive capabilities are of use in the Global War on Terror (because they need to defend their fighter budgets in the FY10 POM), but it isn't working out very well. Everything that Gen Petraeus does right is neutralized by a dozen civilian casualties from an errant AF bomb. How long does it take to learn this lesson? More than four years?

Comments

[NVH]

"And in Iran, these strikes in Sadr City:..."
Little freudian slip there J? Believe Sadr City to be in Iraq, last time I checked.
--Break--So you're saying that our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan are further hindered by our mistakes in bombing the wrong people, creating collateral damage with innocent lives, and all that? We haven't learned that lesson? What about the Congress who authorized the war doesn't have a clue that despite pinpoint Smart bomb technology you are always going to have the choice of whether to blow up innocent people in the hunt for Terrorists and the like. I guess Congress doesn't care though right cause it's not their ass hanging out in the wind, it's the General or Colonel, or President who pulled the trigger. You know, we had UBL in Afghanistan this way, and Clinton didn't want to blow him away on his farm b/c of the 80 wives and children he had living close by. The American Public needs to know the tough decisions need to be made, and sometimes that means good people get killed, by us. I don't remember any outcry when the 3rd ID or 4th ID went in to bomb Hussein's sons, and found the lone survivor, his 14 YEAR OLD nephew still firing his AK-47 at US troops, and they executed him. Rightfully so, but when UBL uses "innocent" women and children as cover, that's not innocence, they'll turn on us whether we get him or not, eventually. So deal with it now, we've got enough capital, or at least HAD it, with 9-11, to be ruthless here and there. War is Hell.

[J.]

Yes, NVH, war is hell, but the sooner that you (and the military strategists) figure out that killing 20-30 civilians every other week is detrimental to winning over the population and therefore drying up the insurgency, the better. Or do you think we ought to just carpet-bomb the villages at which US soldiers get shot, like the Soviets did in the 1980s? That was real successful.

Iran, Iraq. One little letter. I think Bush made the same mistake in 2002 when he made the decision to go after WMDs in the Middle East.

[NVH]

they got it figured out J, it's just f'ing difficult to deal with every little GD issue that comes up b/c of it. We're the most forgiving military on the planet and have watchdogs looking at every detail we do, what more do you want? we're f'ing trying, WAR IS HELL...buy a helmet.

[Retired Army Guy]

"we're f'ing trying, WAR IS HELL...buy a helmet."

NVH, what's with the "we" shit? You got a mouse in your pocket? Maybe you're bombing civilians indiscriminately, but I'm not.

BTW, what do you know about war? How do you know it's "hell?" And how do you know we have "a forgiving military?"

[NVH]

Oh christ, here comes my attack on the credentials. Look I've never been shot, never been in the military. I went to military school (VMI) for four years, which is about as close to the US military as you can get w/o being strung up by the short hairs and told what to do, meaning I could have quit any time. I did it to see if I could take the 6 months of boot camp, sweat parties and forced marches on top of 17 credit hours a semester. I was a cop for almost 3 years in the VA SP. No, I was never shot at, no I never got in a fight, but that might be because of my intimidating attitude more than anything. I've met, known, and trained with Rangers and SEALs, and myriad of other soldiers and read enough about war and killing than most of the people on this blog and definitely more than those that don't. At least enough to say that the Monday morning QBing we're doing here on all this stuff is to be taken with a grain of salt, b/c most people on this PLANET view us in a positive light. And I'll be damned if the press ever finds it again. One more thing " A mouse in my pocket?" What the hell does that mean?

[ajay]

The "mouse in the pocket" refers to you continually using the first person plural. And, no, most of the people on the planet don't view the US military in a positive light. Most of the people on the planet (or PLANET) think the US military is a bunch of jerks, largely because much of its counterinsurgency strategy appears to be dictated by people with all the military expertise of, well, a Virginia traffic cop.

[NVH]

FU AJ go back to the Sopranos...
obscure literary cliches criticizing my writing preferences will be summarily dismissed
I disagree, give me the poll that states the world wouldn't bow down and kiss the feet of a US soldier coming in to save their ass if say I don't know, Iran went fundamentalist all over again and we HAD to invade cause they blew up the embassy. Maybe I'm idealistic, but hey, you've got my creds, where's everybody else's here, I'm playing indian poker, and J.'s the only other one sitting at the table, so whaddya got AJ? I'm all in that I got more EXPERTISE than you...tough guy.

[Grandjester]

NVH,

You are wrong. There once was a time when "The Americans are coming!" meant liberation, salvation but not anymore. Instead of those words being shouted in joy, they have become fearful whispers.

[NVH]

Jesus spare me the drama the GJ, fearful whispers? look I know the uneducated and the educated in the ME think we're conspiring against them with the Israelis who want to take over the world of course, but seriously, Ok, the people that run the show over there, they aren't that stupid, they're at least as power hungry as the people we have but at least we let us call each other power hungry and criticize our actions on blogs like this, say what you want, bullshit or otherwise, I'll take us anyday and twice on Sunday. And let's get back to the point, we are benevolent to a fault, and we still get it wrong, but damn it, at least we're over there trying instead of over here covering up and praying we don't nick the wrong guy. Ignoring the world and reacting with "strategically" placed cruise missiles on abandoned facilities, with plenty of pamphlet warning, which we still do today in Iraq and during the run up to baghdad by the way, is what got us, gets us, keeps us in trouble in the first place. And where's all the rhetoric about how AQ isn't playing fair warning here either? We gave them 30 days to get out of Afghanistan and run for the hills in Paki, and NOW you say that was wrong, but think of all the innocents we saved? What no actionable intelligence to react quickly. Coupla B-2s, hell a whole squadron, would have probably taken care of our response on 9-12, no worries. But alas, I wasn't in the office that day to tell GW to just Let 'er rip...

[Grandjester]

And you're calling ME the drama queen?!?!? Sheesh, NVH, my point is simply this: the era of American "benevolence" (if there really ever was one) is over. No one is buying.

[ajay]

I'm all in that I got more EXPERTISE than you...tough guy.

NVH, you're a traffic cop who went to Virginia Hogwarts. Not exactly John Paul Vann here.

As for world opinion - most people in the world don't trust the US to act responsibly, and think it should do less, rather than more, in foreign affairs. Link:
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/views_on_countriesregions_bt/345.php?nid=&id=&pnt=345&lb=btvoc

Compare that to, for example, the European Union, overwhelmingly seen worldwide as a positive influence:
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/views_on_countriesregions_bt/335.php?nid=&id=&pnt=335&lb=btvoc

GJ's right. Even among its closest allies (such as Canada and the UK), the US has ruined its own reputation.

[NVH]

Did you just finish the 7th book Aj? I'm not saying I'm all that, just more than you, and it's on the table, pony up.
And why does it seem to me that a website called worldpublicopinion.org just might be a little one sided and not EXACTLY comprehensive in it's pursuit of evaluating world public opinion? Just like this website single handedly ascertains and directs the CBDP. Somebody tell me why we're defending our reputation when it got smeared for DECADES prior to this, and everyone is still doing business and will continue to do business with us? We're hardly the worst and only offender in the world, anyone wonder why the ME is the way it is in the first place, who separated everyone apart? Let's talk about Muhammad first and then the crusades from Europe, or maybe we're just waging our own crusade now, right? Yeah that's it.