Are US Forces Detonating IED's?

Jihadis commonly use cell phones to detonate IEDs and recently these have been going off prematurely (while being planted) at a rate that defies chance. Is there some way we could be behind this, perhaps by satellite?

The link below is to a number of recent incidents.

http://weaselzippers.us/?s=jihadi+work+accident

 

Doubt it, more likely Darwin at work.
Some of the stories have the bomb going off while the "terrorists" are making the bomb in their house, one has the bomb detonating while the bomber's kids played with it. A few of the stories involve hand grenades accidentally detonating.

Heck, the video from September 17, show some kind of low order detonation(possibly a hand grenade), the "bomber" staggers a bit - but if you watch till the end of the video - he runs away(hardly "blowing himself up").

 

Yeah, the link is to a mixed bag of incidents pulled up by the search engine. However, if you zero in on just the actual IED incidents, it makes you (or at least me) think something may be going on.

 

They get downgraded to West Virginians.

 

From what I've read part of those targeted by the "decapitation" campaign has been the bomb makers and for that matter those planting them. This has not only eliminated many of the better bomb makers it has eliminated people that could teach the "craft" to others. The result has been a significant decay in the skills involved and resulted in at least some of the increase in accidents.
Here's an article that mentions some other factors:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htatrit/articles/20121127.aspx
You can find more looking around that site.

 

That certainly makes sense.

 

Kodiac Bear wrote:

First I need to make sure we're all on the same sheet of music. When they use the term IED it encompasses a wide range of devices, ranging from what in past wars would be considered and often times are actual anti-vehicle mines, down to actual anti-personnel mines and booby traps. They use this common term popularized by the media, even when they are not improvised, but are actual military mines. They have also come to be associated with "roadside bombs" when in actuality, in Afghanistan, the vast majority are anti-personnel mines, away from roads, targeting foot patrols, or booby-traps, again aimed at ground troops, not road bound vehicular traffic. Once again thank your journalists, they are lazy and act like they know what they're talking about when they don't.
We have had many systems for detonating or preventing the detonation of IED's with cell phones for a number of years now. I know of several systems the older son and his friends told me of when they were in Iraq in 2006-2007 that either pre-detonated radio controlled (cell phone.garage door opener, etc.) devices or jammed the signal spectrum when friendly vehicles were in the area. They terrorists switched to more mechanical or electrically triggered devices to counter our counter-measures. There have been some man-pack sized versions of these devices used in Afghanistan. I am not privy to how effective they are.

That has been a long standing program where sniper teams target bomb planters and raid teams target the "bomb makers" and distributors. The problem is that most times the bomb maker is well removed from the end users. The bomb maker in most cases is a very talented and experienced individual, and operates in secure areas. The higher ups in the organization arrange for mid-level facilitators to take the bombs the bomb maker has made and transport them to areas where the bomb planters are given them, instructed in their use and sent out to plant them. This last layer are the ones most severely attritted. Also the expansion of areas controlled by anti-Taliban forces has expanded while Taliban controlled areas have significantly decreased, reducing the safe areas the bomb makers use to produce their bombs. Its easier to produce bombs in a shop in Sangin, where you have easier access to materials and various equipment and tools, than in a more primative, less conducive, location such as a cave in the mountains.

That's assuming there is an increase in accidents. There has been a large percentage of accidenatally self-detonating bombers, since day one. We can be thankful for that. Actually, most of the "Master" bomb makers are in Pakistan or other safe countries. They train new bomb makers during the winter and they re-infiltrate Afghanistan the next spring for the fighting season. Infiltration interdiction efforts have hampered this yearly migration and has cut into the Taliban's manpower. They key taliban leaders still run the show from Pakistan.

I go to this site quite frequently and in my opinion their analysis is pretty good about 60% of the time and completely off track about 40% of the time. In this case I'd say they are partially correct. When they wrote: "That ratio held until 2010, when 368 foreign troops died. But then things began to fall apart (because of countermeasures)." They are correct here. In 2010 the bomb makers reached the peak of efficiency. My younger son was actually in the next vehicle back when an IED cut an M-ATV completely in half killing 5 Marines from 3/5. Up to that point that vehicle had the reputation of never having had a servicemember killed or seriously injured in one. During that deployment in 2010, Humvee's were no longer allowed outside of the wire, to reduce casualties. All vehicular convoys, in addition to the electronic counter-measures for defeating radio detonated devices, were, whenever possible to travel cross-country/off road, all convoys were to have several mine roller equipped vehicles present to detonate mechanically triggered devices, all vehicles were to travel in the tracks of the preceeding vehicle. Ground forces almost never used doorways leading into compounds, standard practice was now to blow your own entrance in the wall using explosive charges. Losses to ground forces, mainly wounds, mainly traumatic amputations were still very high. Its easier to protect a vehicle and its occupants than a troop patrolling a village, the mountains or farm fields. Then there is the "Culvert Denial System", started in 2009, but was recently mentioned in the news as being flawed.

"Last year only 252 foreign troops died from these bombs, but it took 66 bombs to cause each fatality. It got worse this year, when foreign troops deaths declined by half and it took over 130 bombs to cause each of these fatalities." Here's where the analysis begins to fall apart. First, they are comparing the number of western troops killed to the number of IED's encountered. In 2010 we reached our peak troop levels with US troops surpassing 100,000 in August, it only stands to reason that with more troops engaged in combat operations you will have more casualties. Most western countries began drawing their troop levels down in late 2010 and it accelerated in 2011. You should have seen a decrease in IED deaths, even if all other factors remained unchanged. Virtually all of the early withdrawls were ground combat troops, which should further skew the figures. A combat troop, patrolling on foot or actively engaged in combat where medical treatment may be delayed or unavailable until the ground situation can be stabilized, is more likely to become a fatality than a supply soldier whose armored, bomb resistant vehicle is hit.The drawdown actually accelerated in 2012. then slowed somewhat in 2013 because a disproportionate number of the personnel left are support types. They are still being required to support Afghan forces, even though western combat operations have been cut way back.
The quoted article was written in November 2012, by that point many day to day combat operations had been handed off to Afghan forces. While they are generally accompanied by western forces or advisors, there was a period in 2011 when US forces did not operate jointly below the battalion level due to fear of Blue on Blue attacks, but when operating together the western forces are smaller in size and not in the lead. This decreases the likelyhood that the western troops will be the ones hit by an IED, even if all other factors remained unchanged. Also, a high proportion of those units surged in 2010 were combat units. The US averages only about 32.5 percent of deployed forces actually engaged in combat. During the surge that percentage increased slightly. With the drawdown that percentage has skewed in the other direction, again because there is a greater need for forces to support the ANA who are performing a larger percentage of ground combat operations. You need less western infantrymen, armored vehicle drivers, and tankers, but because you're supporting Afghan troops in combat you still need the logistical, medical, and command elements. What this means is that an ever decreasing percentage of shrinking western forces are performing a job that would expose them to an IED.
To make a long story short, the IED death rate was around 3.68 per 1,000 troops deployed in 2010, it has remained constant at around 3.7 percent per thousand since that date (I only have statistics through July 2013) so the actual number is dcreasing because overall western troop levels are decreasing.
It is also worth noting that the StrategyPage is using IED strikes against western forces as one of their parameters for showing a decrease in IED effectiveness. IED strikes should logically go down as less western forces are involved in the security and stability operations and offensive combat outside of bases.

The article you linked to stated; "It got worse this year, when foreign troops deaths declined by half and it took over 130 bombs to cause each of these fatalities."

While it is true that western deaths and wounding declined by 50% in 2012, the year they're citing, that's only half the story and doesn't account for the drawdown in western combat forces and the increase in combat operations by Afghani forces.

From USA Today 18 january, 2013. The headline,

IED casualties dropped 50% in Afghanistan in 2012
"U.S. troop deaths and wounds from makeshift bombs in Afghanistan dropped by almost half in 2012 as Afghan forces take a larger share of fighting and Americans find and defuse more bombs than ever, according to Pentagon data...."

but then way down in the article it states;

"Afghan troops, however, suffered a 124% increase in 2012 in the number of IED attacks against them, records show,"

This is also as you would expect given the expanding combat/security and stability role of Afghan forces and the corresponding pull back of western forces. US forces in country declined by about 1/3 over the same time period and the vast majority of those were combat troops and the ones being hit by IED's in disproportionate numbers.

Again from the linked StrategyPage article;
"As a result, the same number of bombs were used this year as last (1,200-1,400 a month) but more of them were detected (by civilians as well as Afghan and foreign troops) and destroyed or disabled."

Actually, according to the military. the number of IED's dropped by 8% in 2012 as compared to 2011, the two years referenced in the article. Believe it or not the Mark I eyeball and a soldier trained to spot something out of the ordinary or a similarly trained soldier and his dog are still the most effective IED detector.

 

Well, anything about the 72 West Virginians?

 

Well if they're from West Virginia, they likely ain't virgins. Their Pa's and brothers done been there.

 

Ewwwwwwwwwwww

 

One of the main reasons the Military media folk bring to the fore when discussing UAV's...the elimination...lazy yes...even by military providers of information....of IED's...particularly their laying...And as USMC says we should not forget the media like to miss out the previous Russian mining campaign which still accounts for a fair few of our injuries and deaths...It is not beyond reason though to push out the are we doing something etc...

I did not watch the video so won't comment.

But in 1978 whilst in the safety of my base in Northern Ireland..I stupidly wanted an adrenelin buzz and volunteered for a trip by boat with the Scots Guards...Camoed up, not trusted with a weapon..didn't need one...went onto the local waterway and whilst they played soldiers, I went through the frequency ranges hoping to explode any remote controlled radio terminal explosives...None found...but it was a regular trip for volunteers...

Old as the hills...

KB's thinking is not askew in the theory.

 

That has been one of the focuses of the forensic data collection and analysis work mentioned in other posts though. The bomb makers and the money men along with the leadership have been the key targets.

The evidence on the site is anacdotal and thus it makes it hard to actually justify a conclusion one way or another. I have read on other sites though that accidental detonations have increased. Some of this may be due to unskilled people trying to make use of bomb making directions on the internet which is becoming more common.

I tend to find them a bit better than that. In particular I wouldn't say completely off track 40% of the time. There's a good percentage of the time when their analysis is correct for the point they are making but not necessarily of much use to related points. It can also be only part of the story. In this case I suggest there are elements of both of those coming into play. They've also mentioned in other articles that the Taliban have shifted to targeting Afghan security forces in some cases and that more civilians are providing information on IED's being plannted both of which also affect the numbers.

Rather depends on your measure of effectiveness does it not? A friendly civilain or a UAV that see the emplacement team or even evidence of the bomb being implaces are also pretty good and certainly less risky especially if complex attacks are being used.

 

The boys at Creech like to watch the way folk walk Pricey...then they make a decision whether they walk like a farmer or a bomb planter...The rest is a hole...created by a uav.

 

During the program you can hear Lt. Cdr Andy Baverstock of the Royal Navy, previously part of a 3 man UAV remote control team describe how he can tell by the way people walk whether they are people moving ‘tactically’ and thus deserving being put to death on the spot by a UAV pilot thousands of miles away….or if they are farm workers.
When observing potential targets on the ground thousands of miles away, Lt. Cdr Andy Baverstock says,
” the guys move differently. You can tell whether people are moving tactically or whether its a group of guys going to irrigate a field”.

http://i-hls.com/2013/09/new-system-for-jamming-remote-controlled-explosive-devices-activated-against-vehicles/?utm_source=activetrail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=English%20Newsletter%2019/9/2013

Today's version of our old hand held kit...

 

Why do I picture John Cleese saying that?

 

He better keep out of the poppy fields....

 

Why drag Poppy into this?

 

Cos they are his fields....Now you mention it...Poppy looks like an IED Layer..Whats in the bag poppy....

Sqwark...Alfa one one...Release Maverik...