Quote:
Originally Posted by goober
The Iraqi army may outperform the US army, because the insurgents will feel more comfortable openly challenging the Iraqi army.
I gave the example of the Afghans against the Soviets, where the advantage in kill ratio disappeared as the Afghans became better armed and more confident because they engaged the Soviets more openly, and suffered much higher casualties.
|
I dont understand your comparison with the Afghans Vs The Soviets. Its the Iraqi Resistance Vs US Army+Iraqi Army... they are considered the enemy. The Iraqi Resistance is openly challenging
both US Army and Iraqi Army. And it is causing casulties to the Iraqi Army more because they are untrained and pushed to the front line with little experience.
The Afghans were united against The Soviets. As far as I understand, The Soviets didnt use the tactic the US used,...turning Afghans against each other... because there arent many sects and factions... the vast majority of Afghanis are Sunni and you have the minority Northern Alliance up north who are predominently Shia. When the US attacked, it gave power to them and formed a puppet government out of them.... because lets face it.... number one enemy for the US has always been Sunni Resistance groups, they are standing up and fighting occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Russian Generals have admitted that the Taliban are unbeatable and even though they have light weapons, they have caused Nato and US Army some serious issues. Their strength lies in their passion to fight. Many of them have fought all their lives. You will have a big problem when you are facing an adversary who is not afraid to die.
A more correct comparison would be, The Taliban causing heavy casualties even though they have light and less sophisticated weapons with the Iraqi Resistance who has similar characteristics to The Taliban.
WS.