Distressing, depressing, either way...
Just read this article about another valley in Afghanistan where things aren't going quite so well. Unfortunately, this time it seems like it's the Americans who are purely at fault. What kind of commander decides that Counter-Insurgency = engaging the "enemy"?
I think the most distressing element of this article is that everything the Brigade and Battalion officers say are so blatantly maneuver warfare tactics:
"[W]hen it comes to the enemy, you have leadership, supply chains and formations."
"if you degrade formations, supply chains and leadership near simultaneously, you’ll cause the enemy in the area to collapse, and that is what we’re trying to do here."
"dislocate the enemy so they don’t want to continue operations."
I'm glad that the younger officers seem to be getting it, and I am not surprised at all that the enlisted soldiers have been getting it from the very first day.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It is very distressing. I can't help wondering if someone didn't have McChrystal read that article. And you know there's a New Yorker article in the works on that outfit and the challenges it has faced. Not that anyone who really needs to will read it. More's the pity.
Post a Comment