• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Military review >Early Mistakes with Security Forces Advisory Teams in Afghanistan
【24h】

Early Mistakes with Security Forces Advisory Teams in Afghanistan

机译：阿富汗安全部队咨询小组的早期错误

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

It is tempting to view advisory teams as being flaccid, sapping combat power to secure, and yielding minimal visible results. Institutionally, we tend to defer to the warfighter. That is where leadership is most comfortable and the terrain most familiar. In the current operating environment, company commanders have to secure advisors at the expense of their own combat power. Operations officers have to apply scarce resources to advisors whose missions they often do not fully believe in or whose personalities make them unpleasant to interact with. Battalion commanders are often the same rank as advisors or possibly even junior to SFAT leaders who fall under their operational control. These factors intensify the sometimes-adversarial attitudes that can develop between conventional forces and their advisor counterparts. In the end, the solution is nothing new or unique, but will require the attentive officers and noncommissioned officers who lead the joint task forces, regional commands, and major Army commands to make decisions that may not be popular or with which they may not be comfortable.
机译：极具诱惑力的是将咨询团队视为脆弱，削弱战斗力以确保安全并产生最少的可见结果。从制度上讲，我们倾向于服从战士。那是领导最舒适，地形最熟悉的地方。在当前的作战环境中，连长必须以自己的战斗力为代价来确保顾问的安全。运营官必须将稀缺资源用于顾问，他们经常不完全相信他们的使命，或者其个性使他们不愿与之互动。营指挥官的职级通常与顾问相同，甚至可能在其行动控制下的SFAT领导人之下。这些因素加剧了常规部队与顾问部队之间有时会形成的对抗性态度。最后，解决方案并不是什么新奇的或独特的，但需要领导联合特遣部队，区域司令部和陆军主要司令部的细心军官和士官来做出可能不受欢迎或不受欢迎的决策自在。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Military review》 |2013年第3期|24-29|共6页
  • 作者

    Wesley Moerbe;

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号