The Second Wave
A look at the second day of strikes on Afghanistan.

By Charles E. Miller, a retired Air Force colonel
October 9, 2001 9:20 a.m.

he second round of attacks on the Taliban are reported to include ten long-range bombers (two B-2s and eight B-1s), ten Navy fighter bombers, two C-17s, and 15 cruise missiles. Even adding in the many support sorties (e.g., aerial refueling, logistics, and intelligence) not being reported on a daily basis as they were in the Gulf War, the scale of this new war appears much smaller than either the Gulf War or the war over Kosovo. In reality, it is just more focused. Here is why:

The Taliban has fewer targets. The country practically has been reduced to rubble from decades of war. The Taliban has done nothing to rebuild the country; its anti-Western, anti-progress bent may have reduced the potential target list even more. They have (had) a very small air force and only a few hundreds of tanks, artillery pieces, and other important mechanized vehicles. Their command-and-control, anti-air radars, and surface-to-air missiles were relatively few and far between as well. One suspects that "troop concentrations" will drop off significantly as well. There is nothing like being in a B-52 kill box to convince you to change tactics. There are already reports of the Taliban announcing that it will switch to guerilla tactics.

The percentage of precision munitions appears to be high — except in those kill boxes where you want lots of dumb bombs going off right where you aimed them. We don't have enough details, but the need (and desire) to hit what we are aiming at with minimum collateral damage (especially deaths of innocent civilians), leads inexorably to precision munitions. How precise? Two answers:

· First, generally three to ten meters, depending on the weapons. Many of these munitions are guided by the Global Precision Satellite (GPS) system. The munitions communicate with the GPS systems to guide themselves to their geo-located targets. Precision also can be achieved by laser designation (by the bomb-dropping aircraft, by companion aircraft, or by ground forces) and by on-the-bomb TV guidance systems.

· Superb intelligence is also required. Precision weapons demand precision intelligence. Commercial satellite images have startling details, so we can just imagine military capabilities. Signals intelligence, combined with photographic and radar image intelligence, is a powerful tool for finding and analyzing targets. Military intelligence processes, people, and technologies for conducting that analysis are likely the best in the world. The infamy of mistaken target identification (the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade comes to mind) is the exception that proves the rule.

Objectives drive target lists. In this case, broad campaign objectives appear to be to end the Taliban control of Afghanistan, win over the Afghan peoples, and to find and destroy the al Qaeda terror network Translated into military terms this has meant gaining air superiority by targeting aircraft on the ground, radar and SAM systems, and command centers. The coalition has also attacked Taliban military forces facing the Northern Alliance, and disrupting their leadership and command functions. The U.S. has sought to help win over the Afghan peoples by air dropping relief supplies (and perhaps by not destroying what little infrastructure there is). Bombing attacks on the terror training camps were aimed at the ultimate defeat of the al Qaeda network.

Raw numbers do not always tell the full story.

Correction: In my last article, I erroneously suggested that the electrical generation system in Kabul had been attacked. Today, reports indicate that the Taliban turned off the lights — perhaps to make bombing more difficult. Given that the coalition owns the night, and that bombing attacks do not rely on city lights, their efforts can't be too satisfying. I also said that a former home of bin Laden had been bombed, again in error. Reports today indicate that the "home" of a Taliban leader in Kandahar was the real target.