America's new Electronic, Troop-less Wars

While the trend may in the direction of more robots, drones, and smart missiles and bombs, plenty of troops and civilian contractors are still needed and casualties will continue. In Afghanistan in particular General McChrystal's strategy is bound to bring more casualties for all sides in the conflict. The article is much longer I have just copied the abstract. This is from Global Research.

Towards America’s Electronic, Troop-less Wars
Future U.S Wars will involve Massive Use of Drones

by Prof. Marc W. Herold






Global Research, March 1, 2010




Abstract.

Future U.S wars in the Third World will involve massive use of drones to police the territory, employ local satrap[1] forces (like those of Karzai’s Afghan Army) and once the territory has been pacified sufficiently, the deployment of “Government Ready-to-Rule (GRR)” kits. The drones provide the critical and the weak link: critical insofar as they represent the ultimate American-style war where only the “Others” (opponents and civilians) die but weak insofar as this type of warfare only works against an opponent without any anti-drone/aircraft capability. In other words, this type of technological warfare can only be carried out upon weak opponents lacking independent industrial capacities (not against China, Russia, and India). This approach represents the culmination of disconnecting the delivery of deadly force – the rain of Hellfire missiles - upon the Others and incurring no human (physical or psychological – PTSD) costs. Or put in other terms, it represents the quintessential American way of “solving” problems with technological short-cuts, a military effort begun in 1942 with the Allied fire-bombing of German cities.[2] The current American war in Afghanistan is a harbinger of what is to come, America’s electronic, troop-less war.

Prophetically the first victims in 2010 of Obama in his Afghan war were a teacher in a government school, Sadiq Noor, and his nine-year old son, Wajid as well as three other persons. Both were killed on Sunday night, January 3, 2010 in a U.S. drone strike involving two missiles fired into the home of Sadiq Noor in the village of Musaki, North Waziristan in Pakistan.[3] During January 2010, a record number of twelve deadly missile strikes were carried out on Pakistan’s tribal areas. Three Al-Qaeda leaders were killed and 123 innocent civilians.[4] During 2009, 44 U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan killed 708 people but only five Al Qaeda or Taliban; that is for each enemy fighter 140 civilian Pakistanis had to die.[5]

Those who pull the gray trigger to fire are located in Nevada, Kandahar, or Pakistan.[6] As Philip Alston points out, “Young military personnel raised on a diet of video games now kill real people remotely using joysticks. Far removed from the human consequences of their actions, how will this generation of fighters value the right to life?”[7] In early 2010, the U.S. Air Force had more drone operators in training than fighter and bomber pilots.[8]

UK troops to be in Afghanistan for years.

I just wonder if the Afghan war will be much of an issue during the elections in the UK. Maybe not because the Conservatives would no doubt keep the troops there also. I don't think that the Taliban ever thought they could win militarily but they do probably feel that they can wear the occupiers down until they either sue for peace or simply give up and go home. Britain must somehow feel that it can be a little junior imperialist dog following the pack leader the US. This is from the BBC.

Troops in Afghanistan 'for years'
Britain will be "militarily engaged" in Afghanistan for a further five years, the head of the Army has said.

General Sir David Richards told the Daily Telegraph, while on a visit to Helmand, that he expected the military conflict to "trail off in 2011".

But British troops will continue in training and support roles, he said.

He also warned that coalition troops could not afford to fail and said UK forces now "for the first time" had the resources they had wanted.

Sir David said in August that he believed the UK would be committed to Afghanistan "in some manner" for the next 30 or 40 years, possibly through roles in development, governance and security sector reform.

Sir David said: "The combat role will start to decline in 2011, but we will remain military engaged in training and support roles for another five years, and we will remain in a support role for many years to come."

“ The Taliban is now beginning to realise that they can lose this war, which was not the view they had a year ago ”
General Sir David Richards
Speaking on a visit to Afghanistan during Operation Moshtarak, which is an ongoing offensive to attack the Taliban, he said the campaign was showing some "very optimistic signs".

He added: "A year ago the Taliban thought they had us on the run, but now the tables have turned. They are under relentless pressure and they are now having some serious thoughts about continuing the fight.

"I do not think we can afford to fail in Afghanistan because of the intoxicating effect failure will have on those militants who oppose democracy and our freedoms.

"The Taliban is now beginning to realise that they can lose this war, which was not the view they had a year ago."

Sir David's comments come after the deaths of three British servicemen in three days.

A soldier from 28 Engineer Regiment, attached to the Brigade Reconnaissance Force, died on Friday after being caught in a blast near a check point in Nad Ali, Helmand. He has not yet been named.

Rifleman Martin Kinggett from A Company 4 Rifles was shot dead in Sangin on Thursday and Senior Aircraftman Luke Southgate died in an explosion north of Kandahar airfield on Wednesday.

A total of 266 British service personnel have died since the conflict began.

Story from BBC NEWS: