When our forces first went into Afghanistan, it was all about the kinetics. A couple of years ago, the mission moved to “hearts and minds”, firepower being eschewed in favor of making nice. Then came the “Afghan surge”, which never included as many forces as the forward commanders requested, but definitely resulted in increased presence and concomitant kinetics in places the NATO coalition had never been, or where they had been too thin on the ground to effect either a tactical or strategic difference.
Now it seems, we’re back to playing nice again:
INSIDE STRIKE FIGHTER VENGEANCE 13, over Kandahar Province, Afghanistan — Cmdr. Layne McDowell glanced over his left shoulder, through the canopy of a Navy F/A-18, to an Afghan canyon 9,000 feet below. An American infantry company was down there.
The soldiers had been inserted by helicopter. Now a ground controller wanted the three strike fighters circling overhead to send a sign — both to the grunts and to any Taliban fighters shadowing them as they walked.
Commander McDowell banked and aligned his jet’s nose with the canyon’s northeastern end. Then he followed his wingmen’s lead. He dived, pulled level at 5,000 feet and accelerated down the canyon’s axis at 620 miles per hour, broadcasting his proximity with an extended engine roar.
In the lexicon of close air support, his maneuver was a “show of presence” — a mid-altitude, nonlethal display intended to reassure ground troops and signal to the Taliban that the soldiers were not alone. It reflected a sharp shift in the application of American air power, de-emphasizing overpowering violence in favor of sorties that often end without munitions being dropped.
The use of air power has changed markedly during the long Afghan conflict, reflecting the political costs and sensitivities of civilian casualties caused by errant or indiscriminate strikes and the increasing use of aerial drones, which can watch over potential targets for extended periods with no risk to pilots or more expensive aircraft.
Fighter jets with pilots, however, remain an essential component of the war, in part because little else in the allied arsenal is considered as versatile or imposing, and because of improvements in the aircraft’s sensors.
Perhaps it has something to do with timing, perhaps this go-around the softly-softly approach will work better.
Perhaps.
(McDowell) was above a home in which at least two Taliban fighters had taken shelter after firing on an American patrol. But he did not know who else might be inside. Neither he nor the soldiers requested clearance for an airstrike.
“What if we hit that house and two guys inside had guns and we get eight kids, too?” he said.
High over the Arghandab River, he banked over the home that he and the rules had spared.
Referring to the targeting display in the cockpit, he pointed out its proximity to other homes, and described the limits of what he knew about so-called “patterns of life” — the rhythm of the human activity at the compound where Taliban fighters hid.
“I didn’t think about these things at all in Kosovo,” he said.
The reach of a nuclear carrier, augmented with aerial tankers, made it possible for strike aircraft to penetrate 800 miles from the ship. But what was the point of projecting power if it was not projected responsibly? The changes, he said, have been good.
“I would say that in my younger days I would have been frustrated, because we have ordnance and we know where the enemy is, and I would have wanted permission to strike that building,” he said. “Did I feel frustrated this time? Not in the slightest. It is a different mission. It calls for a different mentality.”
We very probably will not be able to kill our way to victory, or anything that smells like it in Afghanistan. The Russians hit hard for 10 years, and had little to show for it when they fell back. But it would keep us busy until a better idea came along.
My hat’s off to CDR McDowell for his forbearance.
He’s a better man than me.



Sorry, but we were not carpet bombing in 2001, and anyone who claims that is the case if full of excrement. My husband was the commander for many missions over Belgrade during the Kosovo campaign, and I assure you the war lawyers scrubbed everything before it was approved for bombing
I’ll add…
The principle of proportionality concept has been around a long while. It’s part and parcel to the laws of war and McDowell isn’t the first to exercise the application. Most pilots who bomb a home do worry about hitting children inside. During the Kosovo campaign, pilots did often viewed homes as they were burned to the ground, the occupants dragged out. They asked for permission to strike and it was not granted. The rules were to wait until the drone tape came in and the Generals and war lawyers could view it and make a decision. Obviously by then it was too late.
Just 8 more kids that wouldn’t be killing our own soldiers in a few more years. Otherwise….meh.
I don’t know. There’s strong circumstantial evidence that says “Yes, We Can” isn’t just a political campaign slogan………….
You know, we really ought to try killing our way to Victory once, just to make sure it really doesn’t work. If it seems like it isn’t, perhaps you aren’t trying hard enough.
Subsunk
I dunno, I think we were fairly successful with that approach 1941-1945.
And I don’t remember the ‘Meritorious Award For Demonstrating Admirable Restraint’ on the Table Of Awards during WW2 combat. Lotta Purple Hearts, though.
People in that region respect only raw power and the demonstrated will to use it–plus staying power. Unfortunately the tactics needed to subdue the region are abhorrent to modern “sensibilities.” e.g., one Muslim leader who subdued one Afghan valley (iirc) by kidnapping all the women & children by force and stating they would all be killed unless all the men stopped fighting and converted to Islam. The valleys’ pop. remains Muslim to this day..
We would be able to kill our way to victory over there…it would just take a very LARGE bomb. And we would be left with glass over a sea of oil. Hmm…
Easy to drill through glass, though.
Naw, let the goatherders duke it out amongst themselves, as they have for a thousand years.
Refit and rearm for the larger threat to us and ours, Iran and Pakistan.
Ivan couldn’t do it and we won’t. It is time to re aim the big guns.
YMMV
I’m sorry, I missed the “indiscriminate” bombing strikes the Times referred to in the article. When did those happen? {/sarc}
WHEN, Casey? You really have to ask WHEN!!!??? Just EVERY SINGLE DAY according to the NYT and every left lib reporter in the country–implied or otherwise. Boy are you a slow learner!