What training techniques or fighing tactics can we show the Pakistani army that they don't already know? Is this a ploy to try and gain some control over them? If the taliban was able to get the best of the Pakistani army in recent skirmishes what can our trainers do to change the outcome of the next conflict? You would think that the Pakistani army is already better trained and equipped than the taliban fighters so there must be some other reason that the taliban are winning. Maybe the Pakistani army has a motivation problem when it comes to fighting fellow muslems.

I remember the first non-combatant combatants for the US in Vietnam were 'advisers'.





5sub

pull grenade, throw pin

advisors=SF

The Paki army has been getting its ass handed to them in some of the outposts surrounding Wazirastan, so we're there to improve their tactics.

Quoted: advisors=SF

100% verified..

Quoted: advisors=SF

So this is a ploy to go in and do the work that they are not willing or capable of doing themselves?

Pakistani army that they don't already know?

hmm.. maybe some discipline  ?
command structure ?



having a rifle doesnt make you a soldier..

doing it wrong everyday doesnt make you a soldier.

many times the Paki arrmy has been sent running by the locals out in the "territories "

YMMV


Ive seen them throw troops at the bad guys ..   everyone runs in and shoots in the general direction.. and then they carry thier dead away ..  



they do need help ..




they can stop an unarmed rebellion .. but have a bad guy shot back.. and they run..  


they simply go thru  SOME of the motions of a soldier

........grabs chair and popcorn...............OK....go!!

Quoted: Pakistani army that they don't already know? hmm.. maybe some discipline  ? command structure ? having a rifle doesnt make you a soldier.. doing it wrong everyday doesnt make you a soldier. many times the Paki arrmy has been sent running by the locals out in the "territories " YMMV Ive seen them throw troops at the bad guys ..   everyone runs in and shoots in the general direction.. and then they carry thier dead away ..   they do need help .. they can stop an unarmed rebellion .. but have a bad guy shot back.. and they run..   they simply go thru  SOME of the motions of a soldier

+1
Those guys are only marginally better than the talibans.

Quoted: Pakistani army that they don't already know? hmm.. maybe some discipline  ? command structure ? having a rifle doesnt make you a soldier.. doing it wrong everyday doesnt make you a soldier. many times the Paki arrmy has been sent running by the locals out in the "territories " YMMV Ive seen them throw troops at the bad guys ..   everyone runs in and shoots in the general direction.. and then they carry thier dead away ..   they do need help .. they can stop an unarmed rebellion .. but have a bad guy shot back.. and they run..   they simply go thru  SOME of the motions of a soldier

How can training from American advisors correct that.

Quoted: The Paki army has been getting its ass handed to them in some of the outposts surrounding Wazirastan, so we're there to improve their tactics.

...and then start fighting for them...

Maybe the Pakistani army has a motivation problem when it comes to fighting fellow muslems.

the only time being a Muslim comes into play during a war/fight/disagree meant is when one side is non-Muslim..  

they have no trouble killing themselvs .. they are human just like us..  

they diffrence is they will stop fighting each other long enough to fight the non-muslims .. then go back to fighting each other..  



the Paki DOES have a motavation proplem..  but I dont see it as a Muslim related issue.  

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=658679


Pakistan Will Deny U.S. Operations to Hunt Al Qaeda on its Soil
Sunday , January 06, 2008


ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Pakistan reiterated Sunday that it will not let American forces hunt Al Qaeda and Taliban militants on its soil, after a news report said Washington was considering expanding U.S. military and intelligence operations into Pakistan's tribal regions.

The Foreign Ministry dismissed as "speculative" a story in the New York Times on Sunday saying U.S. President Bush's top security officials discussed a proposal Friday to deploy American troops to pursue militants along the Pakistan-Afghan border.

"We are very clear. Nobody is going to be allowed to do anything here," said Maj. Gen. Waheed Arshad, the army's top spokesman.

"The government has said it so many times," Arshad said. "No foreign forces will be allowed to operate inside Pakistan."

In Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai's spokesman did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Bush's top security advisers — including Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice — debated whether to expand the authority of the Central Intelligence Agency and the military to "conduct far more aggressive covert operations in the tribal areas of Pakistan," the Times reported.

Recent reports indicate Al Qaeda and the Taliban are "intensifying efforts" to destabilize Pakistan's government, the newspaper said.

It said Bush's meeting with security advisors was to discuss Washington's strategy following the Dec. 27 assassination of populist opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, a moderate pro-U.S. politician who had vowed to fight Islamic extremists if she was elected in an upcoming parliamentary vote.

The Pakistan-Afghan border area has long been considered a likely hiding place for Al Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden and his top deputy Aymen Al-Zawahiri, as well as an operating ground for tribal Taliban sympathizers.

Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, a close U.S. ally in the war against terror, has blamed Baitullah Mehsud, a tribal militant leader allegedly tied to Al Qaeda, for Bhutto's death.

Mehsud has reportedly denied involvement.

Quoted: advisors=SF

Yep - in the role of force multipliers.




5sub

Wasn't the last significant military operation/campaign by the Pakistani army in the early '70's when they got their asses handed to them by India and lost Bangladesh?

Quoted: The Paki army has been getting its ass handed to them in some of the outposts surrounding Wazirastan, so we're there to improve their tactics.

+1

"Hundreds of militants have overrun a paramilitary fort in north-west Pakistan, killing or kidnapping many troops, the military says."

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=662786

Quoted: Quoted: advisors=SF So this is a ploy to go in and do the work that they are not willing or capable of doing themselves?

More like gather intel on target packages and locations and planning.  Training locals, etc.  However, I would assume that anyone that gets in the way of that will be stomped.  Words like "ploy" are what sensationalized journalists use.  Don't be so dramatic.

Quoted: Quoted: ...snip .. they can stop an unarmed rebellion .. but have a bad guy shot back.. and they run..   they simply go thru  SOME of the motions of a soldier How can training from American advisors correct that.

I dont really know..

but I cant see this as anything but GOOD..  

is the final outcome to actually train the Paki army ?  I dont know..

would it hurt my feelings to hear the .gov say that was the reason just  in order to get troops on the ground .. no.  

Do I think its OK to lie to get into a country where it is said the the Enemy is based out off and the host country has not let us in ?   yes,.  

could this all really be training for the Pakis... and nothing else..   it could be.. and i would be disapointed.


edit:

Di I need to know everything that is going on .. no

Quoted: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=658679 Pakistan Will Deny U.S. Operations to Hunt Al Qaeda on its Soil Sunday , January 06, 2008 ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Pakistan reiterated Sunday that it will not let American forces hunt Al Qaeda and Taliban militants on its soil, after a news report said Washington was considering expanding U.S. military and intelligence operations into Pakistan's tribal regions. The Foreign Ministry dismissed as "speculative" a story in the New York Times on Sunday saying U.S. President Bush's top security officials discussed a proposal Friday to deploy American troops to pursue militants along the Pakistan-Afghan border. "We are very clear. Nobody is going to be allowed to do anything here," said Maj. Gen. Waheed Arshad, the army's top spokesman. "The government has said it so many times," Arshad said. "No foreign forces will be allowed to operate inside Pakistan." In Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai's spokesman did not immediately return a call seeking comment. Bush's top security advisers — including Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice — debated whether to expand the authority of the Central Intelligence Agency and the military to "conduct far more aggressive covert operations in the tribal areas of Pakistan," the Times reported. Recent reports indicate Al Qaeda and the Taliban are "intensifying efforts" to destabilize Pakistan's government, the newspaper said. It said Bush's meeting with security advisors was to discuss Washington's strategy following the Dec. 27 assassination of populist opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, a moderate pro-U.S. politician who had vowed to fight Islamic extremists if she was elected in an upcoming parliamentary vote. The Pakistan-Afghan border area has long been considered a likely hiding place for Al Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden and his top deputy Aymen Al-Zawahiri, as well as an operating ground for tribal Taliban sympathizers. Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, a close U.S. ally in the war against terror, has blamed Baitullah Mehsud, a tribal militant leader allegedly tied to Al Qaeda, for Bhutto's death. Mehsud has reportedly denied involvement.

That was last week. Things have changed.

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. - Pakistan is taking a more welcoming view of U.S. suggestions for using American troops to train and advise its own forces in the fight against anti-government extremists, the commander of U.S. forces in that region said Wednesday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Navy Adm. William J. Fallon, commander of U.S. Central Command, said he believes increased violence inside Pakistan in recent months has led Pakistani leaders to conclude that they must focus more intensively on extremist al-Qaida hideouts near the border with Afghanistan.

He called this an important change from Pakistan's traditional focus on India as the main threat to its security, and it meshes with Defense Secretary Robert Gates' recent comment that al-Qaida terrorists hiding in the border area are increasingly aiming their campaign of violence at targets inside Pakistan

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080116/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_pakistan

Remember Obama, I mean Osama is supposedly hiding out in the non-governmentally controlled terriritories adjacent to Afghanistan.  Presently, Pakistan's own military will not go in those regions for fear of the local tribal forces.  So, if we improve the capability of the Pakistani military, then ultimately they may get back control of those regions, squeeze out Al Qaeda, and get Osama.

Quoted: Remember Obama, I mean Osama is supposedly hiding out in the non-governmentally controlled terriritories adjacent to Afghanistan.  Presently, Pakistan's own military will not go in those regions for fear of the local tribal forces.  So, if we improve the capability of the Pakistani military, then ultimately they may get back control of those regions, squeeze out Al Qaeda, and get Osama.

Get "back" control of those regions?  Tell me, when did they ever have control of those regions?

Quoted: Quoted: Remember Obama, I mean Osama is supposedly hiding out in the non-governmentally controlled terriritories adjacent to Afghanistan.  Presently, Pakistan's own military will not go in those regions for fear of the local tribal forces.  So, if we improve the capability of the Pakistani military, then ultimately they may get back control of those regions, squeeze out Al Qaeda, and get Osama. Get "back" control of those regions?  Tell me, when did they ever have control of those regions?

I dont believe they ever had "control" of those regions..  

seems it was a gentlemans agreement  .. leave us alone < ruling party..> and we will leave you alone. ..




right?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Remember Obama, I mean Osama is supposedly hiding out in the non-governmentally controlled terriritories adjacent to Afghanistan.  Presently, Pakistan's own military will not go in those regions for fear of the local tribal forces.  So, if we improve the capability of the Pakistani military, then ultimately they may get back control of those regions, squeeze out Al Qaeda, and get Osama. Get "back" control of those regions?  Tell me, when did they ever have control of those regions? I dont believe they ever had "control" of those regions..   seems it was a gentlemans agreement  .. leave us alone < ruling party..> and we will leave you alone. .. right?

We should try that south of chicago

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Remember Obama, I mean Osama is supposedly hiding out in the non-governmentally controlled terriritories adjacent to Afghanistan.  Presently, Pakistan's own military will not go in those regions for fear of the local tribal forces.  So, if we improve the capability of the Pakistani military, then ultimately they may get back control of those regions, squeeze out Al Qaeda, and get Osama. Get "back" control of those regions?  Tell me, when did they ever have control of those regions? I dont believe they ever had "control" of those regions..   seems it was a gentlemans agreement  .. leave us alone < ruling party..> and we will leave you alone. .. right?

Right, i'll delete "back"

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: advisors=SF Yep - in the role of force multipliers. 5sub From what I've read, the greatest force multipier these guys need is to learn how to actually aim and shoot.  It seems that if they hit anything at all it is simply a function of volume rather than placement.

whats worse is I dont think thats a simply product of non-training..   I think its a culturally  accpted norm.  



how are the Iraqis doing with aiming now..  ? anyone know ?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: advisors=SF Yep - in the role of force multipliers. 5sub From what I've read, the greatest force multipier these guys need is to learn how to actually aim and shoot.  It seems that if they hit anything at all it is simply a function of volume rather than placement. whats worse is I dont think thats a simply product of non-training..   I think its a culturally  accpted norm.   how are the Iraqis doing with aiming now..  ? anyone know ?

I saw three Iraqi policemen this week with AKM's that had the buttstocks removed with a hacksaw. Not much of the aiming type, these Arabs.

I'm cool with advisors going to Pakiland... They can "help" the Pakis get OBL before the next election.

'Cuz if a Dem wins, I do NOT want them in charge while OBL is still running amok. We have not learned any lessons from the last time a Dem was in the White House so we are doomed to repeat our failures.