<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis on Going Deep Rather than Long in Afghanistan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/18/lt-col-daniel-l-davis-on-going-deep-rather-than-long-in-afghanistan/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/18/lt-col-daniel-l-davis-on-going-deep-rather-than-long-in-afghanistan/</link>
	<description>News &#38; Commentary on Warfare, Policy and Counterterrorism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:22:41 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Herschel Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/18/lt-col-daniel-l-davis-on-going-deep-rather-than-long-in-afghanistan/comment-page-1/#comment-28514</link>
		<dc:creator>Herschel Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:37:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.captainsjournal.com/?p=4051#comment-28514</guid>
		<description>Lt. Col. Davis responds to Smith:

http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/23/lt-col-davis-responds-to-smith-on-going-deep-in-afghanistan/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lt. Col. Davis responds to Smith:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/23/lt-col-davis-responds-to-smith-on-going-deep-in-afghanistan/" rel="nofollow">http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/23/lt-col-davis-responds-to-smith-on-going-deep-in-afghanistan/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Captain&#39;s Journal &#187; Lt. Col. Davis Responds to Smith on Going Deep in Afghanistan</title>
		<link>http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/18/lt-col-daniel-l-davis-on-going-deep-rather-than-long-in-afghanistan/comment-page-1/#comment-28513</link>
		<dc:creator>The Captain&#39;s Journal &#187; Lt. Col. Davis Responds to Smith on Going Deep in Afghanistan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:23:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.captainsjournal.com/?p=4051#comment-28513</guid>
		<description>[...] up Smith&#8217;s commentaty Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis on Going Deep Rather Than Long in Afghanistan, Davis posts the following [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] up Smith&#8217;s commentaty Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis on Going Deep Rather Than Long in Afghanistan, Davis posts the following [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Herschel Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/18/lt-col-daniel-l-davis-on-going-deep-rather-than-long-in-afghanistan/comment-page-1/#comment-28478</link>
		<dc:creator>Herschel Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:55:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.captainsjournal.com/?p=4051#comment-28478</guid>
		<description>The Captain&#039;s Journal thanks Uncle Jimbo for the link.

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/10/priorities-politics-afghanistan.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Captain&#8217;s Journal thanks Uncle Jimbo for the link.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/10/priorities-politics-afghanistan.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/10/priorities-politics-afghanistan.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jules Crittenden &#187; Last-Man-Mistake-Death Opportunity Knocks</title>
		<link>http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/18/lt-col-daniel-l-davis-on-going-deep-rather-than-long-in-afghanistan/comment-page-1/#comment-28475</link>
		<dc:creator>Jules Crittenden &#187; Last-Man-Mistake-Death Opportunity Knocks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:50:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.captainsjournal.com/?p=4051#comment-28475</guid>
		<description>[...] Captain&#8217;s Journal looks at the Go-Deep-Vs-Go-Big &amp; Long paper by LTC Daniel Davis, finds it wanting. I have an idea. I have an idea. How about going Big and Deep, and see if we can make it less Long? Herschel Smith also goes house on the notion that an insurgency or a counterinsurgency will remain static during a drawdown. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Captain&#8217;s Journal looks at the Go-Deep-Vs-Go-Big &amp; Long paper by LTC Daniel Davis, finds it wanting. I have an idea. I have an idea. How about going Big and Deep, and see if we can make it less Long? Herschel Smith also goes house on the notion that an insurgency or a counterinsurgency will remain static during a drawdown. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TSAlfabet</title>
		<link>http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/10/18/lt-col-daniel-l-davis-on-going-deep-rather-than-long-in-afghanistan/comment-page-1/#comment-28474</link>
		<dc:creator>TSAlfabet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:32:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.captainsjournal.com/?p=4051#comment-28474</guid>
		<description>Well done, Captain.

Hard to believe that anyone with a lick of sense could not see the obvious flaws in the &quot;Go Deep&quot; approach.

What do you think about Major Jim Gant&#039;s proposal being featured over at Steven Pressfield&#039;s blog?   The full version has not yet been posted but it would seem to be an ideal blend of increasing force projection in the provinces with SOF teams rallying the tribes to our side, as Major Gant did in Mangwel.   It has definite echoes of the Marines&#039; approach in Anbar, although the tribal dynamics seem to require a lighter touch.  One practical aspect would be to use these small teams embedded with the tribes to gain solid intel while Quick Reaction Forces are ready to act on that intel with short notice.  Major Gant notes that it would likely have to be airborne units in order to avoid the IED&#039;s but that should become less of a problem as the tribes provide greater protection and intel against the emplacers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well done, Captain.</p>
<p>Hard to believe that anyone with a lick of sense could not see the obvious flaws in the &#8220;Go Deep&#8221; approach.</p>
<p>What do you think about Major Jim Gant&#8217;s proposal being featured over at Steven Pressfield&#8217;s blog?   The full version has not yet been posted but it would seem to be an ideal blend of increasing force projection in the provinces with SOF teams rallying the tribes to our side, as Major Gant did in Mangwel.   It has definite echoes of the Marines&#8217; approach in Anbar, although the tribal dynamics seem to require a lighter touch.  One practical aspect would be to use these small teams embedded with the tribes to gain solid intel while Quick Reaction Forces are ready to act on that intel with short notice.  Major Gant notes that it would likely have to be airborne units in order to avoid the IED&#8217;s but that should become less of a problem as the tribes provide greater protection and intel against the emplacers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
