In all the back and forth regarding Canada’s post-2011 mission in Afghanistan, there are those who say CF troops could stay to train Afghan forces without it being considered a “combat” mission.
One point that’s shared via this post from the US Army/USMC COIN Centre Blog explains exactly why a TRAINING mission must be a COMBAT mission:
“Afghans trust and value those whose caveats permits them to go into combat with them”
Unless, of course, we want a training mission where the Afghan student troops and cops don’t have to respect the trainers.
Great use of resource, that – NOT.
One thought on “HERE’S Why a TRAINING Mission is a COMBAT Mission”
From what I have read, the training of the Afghan Army is highly over-rated. Is this your experience?
Yahoo News reports “Nearly 70 percent of Afghan police recruits drop out during training, the top US army officer in charge of shaping the new Afghan security forces [Lieutenant General William Caldwell] said”.
On the subject, Juan Cole writes: “Much has been said about those nearly 100,000 trained Afghan troops that Washington keeps boasting about.
“Many journalists doubt that there are actually that many troops in the Afghanistan National Army, citing the high turnover and desertion rates, while others suggest that two weeks of ’show and tell’ training for illiterate recruits is not exactly a rigorous ‘training’– even if it were done properly, which it does not seem to have been.”