Just like to know what you guy's think the chance of a ground war in Afghanistan is.

Ummm, it is already happening- see the news. As far as conventional ground forces, probably when we start hitting State-Sponsors such as Iraq, Syria, etc...

[b][size=1]Don Out[/size=1][/b]
[b][size=4][red]AIRBORNE!
2/505 PIR
H-MINUS[/red][/size=4][/b]

By the time we get done bombing,I dont think there will be any left to fight.

God, if only that were true.

If the Northern Alliance can't dislodge the Taliban from their positions of power, then we'll probably wind up sending in conventional ground forces.

So far the Northern Alliance hasn't been able to pull off a successful attack against the Taliban by taking even one of their key holdings.  We've obviously seriously crippled the Taliban by knocking out heavy elements such as rocket launchers, tanks and artillery... but the Northern Alliance is still greatly out numbered and poorly armed.  If we don't arm them and train them, we'll wind up doing the fighting ourselves.

Well let's hope the north can get the job done. If not I think there will be a lot of people who will be willing to go there and get the job done.

They finally got the NA matching uniforms from Russa.

I'm hoping never, keeping it unconventional.  The Taliban are hoping for conventional, large targets are easier to hit during spray and pray.

I hope never also. I think if we hit them in the winter we would have a good chance. U.N. not sending them any more food and we have bombed the hell out of there forces so right now they have just about nothing.

I don't think this is going to be an easy war to win but I do think it's going to take are troops being there to win it.

Depends on what you call conventional.

Is sending 10th Mountain to hold a couple airbases, than sending 101st AAD to conduct search and destroy missions out of them using intel developed by SPECOPS/NA forces conventional?

If the answer is yes, then we will do so in the spring.

But we are not going to send a whole Corps there like Desert Storm

It is a mistake to send large heavy forces to fight a gurillia war.  The British- who are batting .600 in this kind of thing (won in Kenya, Malaya, Oman; lost in Aden, Ireland) never had more than 50,000 troops in Malaya, mostly light infantry, SAS, and RAF support units, during the 16 year long campaign against the Communists. The fighting there was hardly noticed by the British public because of the low intensity. In fact at one point they were fighting 4 of these, Kenya, Malaya, Aden, and Ireland at ONCE and were still able to keep the public from turning against them.

Didnt do much for their economy though, they arent a world power anymore because they did so much at once.

How about a repost of that article on how the Russians had such a hard time there?

The Northern Alliance is a joke, we will be holding the lines by spring.

No they are not a joke, but neither are they big enough to defeat the Taliban troops and search through every nook and cranny of the country like we need to do. It wouldnt do to fight this war entirely by proxy anyway.  OUR forces have to kick some ass, or the Islamic world will still not respect us.

It seems that part of Rumsfelds trip to Asia this week was to cut a deal (again) for expanded use of airfields in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. USAF engineers are inspecting "two or three" sites to see what it would take to make them fully operational. If they need that many new all weather airfields, something big must be moving in.  Perhaps the 101st?

Thats excatly what we did with the taliban and look what it got us. I would rather not arm them and we fight them. The cycle may never end.

Well we are splitting the difference. We are arming them- but with 1950's and 60's vintage equipment we have bought up from warehouses and scrapyards in Russia and elsewhere in the FSU.  They are getting NO Western equipment or even modern Russian or Ukrainian equipment.  They seem to like it just fine, field radios and Saggers seem to be their maximum level of understanding in electronics.  If they were to try and use this stuff against US later they would be dead meat.

Tayous; it will be about the time you get out of boot camp as an e1 in the infantry!

"Conventional" is such a loaded word.

There is, as 11H1P has stated (ALL OKAY DUMB BASTAAARD!!!!), a conventional ground war going on right now.

Will our involvement ever be "conventional"? Good question. Again, define your terms. Was our involvement in Vietnam ever "conventional" - or are you looking for clear front lines, division and corps areas? Even after the Taliban is overthrown, we will still need to destroy the terrorist networks. The whole thing sounds pretty unconventional to me. (But a good chance for an infantrymen to learn skills and get experience no MP or border patrolmen will likely see [:)]) - Assuming you are in the kind of unit that will take (errhh, is taking?) part in such missions.


Adam

Not the same, but let's take a closer look anyway.

We assisted the Afghani resistance when they were fighting Soviet occupation.  No matter how flawed our view of this policy is today, the fact remains it was the pervasive policy to "stop communist expansion" (aka Cold War) during the 60's, 70's and 80's.  Personally, I would have opted to let the Soviets have it.  They would have realized very little gain for their investment... but hind sight is almost always 20/20.

So today the Taliban has a few old Stinger missiles laying around.  That's had exactly what effect on us?  They didn't use Stingers on the World Trade Center or Pentagon... Hell, the Taliban wasn't even the aggressor in these attacks.  Bin Laden isn't a member of the Taliban, he is a Saudi dissident who has sought refuge in the Sudan, Pakistan and Afghanistan.  The Taliban didn't attack us on 9/11, a terrorist group financed by Bin Laden comprised mostly of Saudi Arabians and Egyptians attacked us.  The Taliban is only giving him refuge due to his investment in their struggle against Soviet occupation.  He built roads, training camps and raised money for them, so out of gratitude they offer him a place to operate.  I'm sure they are now realizing the error of their generosity and are kicking themselves profusely... but pride is one of mans uglier qualities at times.

So, when you say "look what that got us" regarding the Taliban, what exactly are you implying?  I guess they've inundated us with Heroin in the past...

Are you suggesting that it's a worth while investment in lives to have our soldiers killed fighting a war against the Taliban when we could have used existing alternate resources?

To me it makes perfect sense to arm the rebels, train them and let them do the dirty work.  I'm not for nation building or occupying Afghanistan... or even being there with our forces longer than is necessary to kill Binny and inflict horrific damage on the Taliban regime.  Obviously you have a different opinion...

It's call fighting intelligently.  As ArmdLbrl already mentioned, they are getting  20-30 year old technology as military aid.  We're hardly arming them so they might invade the US or one of our allies.  [;)]  So, what the heck are you worried about again?

Nope I'm not getting in to it until Jan 0f 2002.  I'll also be having spelled out in black and white airborne school and RIP so that's another at lest 10 weeks there with 4 in A.I.T 3 in Airborne and 3 in RIP.

btt