- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 3,059
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...07/23/AR2009072303801.html?hpid=moreheadlines
"A member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and an Army historian are raising serious questions about the performance of Army commanders prior to an assault that killed nine U.S. soldiers at a remote outpost in eastern Afghanistan last July. "
..."The letter cites an unreleased draft report written by an Army historian at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., that is sharply critical of the way senior Army leaders in Afghanistan performed before the assault. Soldiers at the remote base were short of basic necessities such as water and sandbags and repeatedly complained that they were in a precarious position, according to the historian's report."
I think that this is gonna be ugly. This battle (Wanat) last year in Afghanistan wound up costing 9 troopers from C/2-503 Abn (173rd Abn). I am not confident that the Army will get a balanced review of the circumstances surrounding this battle, as I automatically suspect an investigation led by congress as being at least equal parts fact and grandstanding, but Sen Webb at least has the virtue of having "been there- done that" and unlike may of his political compatriots understands that not everything is as crystal clear at the time as appears in retrospect. This platoon acquitted themselves well, hanging on to this OP in the face of a pretty intense and sustained attack, but it sounds like the after action review that was put together by I believe the Army Center for Lessons Learned out at Ft Leavenworth is pretty critical of the Brigade leadership. The link to Foreign Policy below has a fairly extensive summary of the battle.
http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/post...han_battle_what_happened_at_wanat_last_july_i
"A member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and an Army historian are raising serious questions about the performance of Army commanders prior to an assault that killed nine U.S. soldiers at a remote outpost in eastern Afghanistan last July. "
..."The letter cites an unreleased draft report written by an Army historian at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., that is sharply critical of the way senior Army leaders in Afghanistan performed before the assault. Soldiers at the remote base were short of basic necessities such as water and sandbags and repeatedly complained that they were in a precarious position, according to the historian's report."
I think that this is gonna be ugly. This battle (Wanat) last year in Afghanistan wound up costing 9 troopers from C/2-503 Abn (173rd Abn). I am not confident that the Army will get a balanced review of the circumstances surrounding this battle, as I automatically suspect an investigation led by congress as being at least equal parts fact and grandstanding, but Sen Webb at least has the virtue of having "been there- done that" and unlike may of his political compatriots understands that not everything is as crystal clear at the time as appears in retrospect. This platoon acquitted themselves well, hanging on to this OP in the face of a pretty intense and sustained attack, but it sounds like the after action review that was put together by I believe the Army Center for Lessons Learned out at Ft Leavenworth is pretty critical of the Brigade leadership. The link to Foreign Policy below has a fairly extensive summary of the battle.
http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/post...han_battle_what_happened_at_wanat_last_july_i
Last edited: