Small Wars Journal

The Greatest Afghan War

Sat, 10/03/2009 - 12:36pm
The Greatest Afghan War - Michael Yon, Washington Times.

The coalition is weakening. While the US has gotten serious, the organism called NATO is a jellyfish for which the United States is both sea and prevailing wind. The disappointing effort from many partners is best exemplified by the partners who are pushing hardest: The British are fine examples. The British landed in Helmand province after someone apparently vouched that Helmand would be safe, and they believed it. Helmand is today the most dangerous province in Afghanistan.

British combat tours are arduous and the troops suffer in countless ways. The soldiers sweat and freeze in the desert filth; British rations are terrible; mail can be weeks late; and they fight constantly. Troops endure high casualties yet they keep fighting. These things are true. Some say the British "lost Helmand," but this is not true. Helmand was a mess before they arrived. British soldiers are strong but their government is pitiful, leading to an average effort in Afghanistan...

More at The Washington TImes.

Comments

Rigs (not verified)

Sun, 10/04/2009 - 12:42am

I don't know how you could have perceived my above comment as a shot at SWJ, the editors were clearly linking to an article at another site which I was responding to.

Herschel, perhaps you could add to the discussion by talking about the opinions in the article or perhaps even news media essentially presenting opinion as fact. I would be far more interested in that than sending a compaint to a news outlet I almost never read.

At the Small Wars Journal Blog it wasn't posted under anything. It was posted for discussion. If you have disagreements with the Washington Times and their rubric for this article, why don't you lodge a complaint with them?

Rigs (not verified)

Sat, 10/03/2009 - 2:19pm

This was posted under news and not op/ed?!

This is pure conjecture. Yon is not a prophet, he has no idea when and if the coalition crumbles. And what's worse, I think he's off the mark. I don't think it's going to be our allied partners shirking their responsibilities - the coalition is going to weaken at the heart - with US troop and $ commitments. It's increasingly looking like the US will marginalize McCrystal and move away from the new COIN strategy. It seems Obama has been feeling out what opinion would be on a strategic re-focus away from the current strategy.

At least when I march towards the future with my divining rod in hand, nobody mistakes my opinion for news.