algerian counter-jihad tactics (enemy, cost, terrorist, children)

[HiFi]

The Algerians won their civil war against Islamist militants in the 90s with an eradication policy which they called counter-jihad.

An oil worker was just quoted in a recent article saying it's rare for the oil fields to be attacked despite them being remote and isolated targets. The reason is the Algerians have the strict policy of simply sending in helicopters and killing everyone without negotiation, there is not much for a terrorist to gain by attacking them. Is this a good policy? Is it worth the increased cost of civilian casualty? Does the fact that less civilians will be captured in the first place due to the chilling effect of the policy make it decrease the civilian casualties overall?

[padcrasher]

Well how has it worked for us? We kill civilians all the time. We've been at war for 11 years now. Have we taught them a lesson yet not to mess with us?

[HiFi]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Well how has it worked for us? We kill civilians all the time. We've been at war for 11 years now. Have we taught them a lesson yet not to mess with us?

I'm wondering about hostage situations specifically.


Overall though 'killing civilians' is obviously not the key. Its more instant and lethal strikes wherever the enemy shows up.

[thecoalman]

I'd agree with the policy of not negotiating but just going in there with overwhelming force is not ideal method. "Negotiations" in situations like this sometimes bear fruit like release of women and children, ultimately they are a ploy stalling for time so preparations can be made and to wear the hostage takers down emotionally and physically.