Troops Angry At Media Bias and Laziness
July 21, 2008: American troops in Afghanistan are not happy with how a July 13th battle with the Taliban was reported. In that action, some 200 Taliban attacked a U.S. "base" and killed or wounded more than half the 50 or so U.S. and Afghan troops found there. Actual U.S. casualties were nine dead and fifteen wounded (including walking wounded).

U.S. troops were irked that, once again, the mass media got lazy and didn't bother to report the action accurately. For one thing, there was no "base". What the Taliban attacked was a temporary parking area for vehicles used to conduct patrols of the area. These are set up regularly, and have been used for years. These are secure areas, but basically a parking lot surrounded by barbed wire and several sandbagged observation posts. This one was set a few days before the attack, and was due to be taken down soon, as the patrol activity moved to another area.

Such defensive precautions are taken any time U.S. troops stop for more than a few hours. That's a tactic pioneered by the Romans over two thousand years ago. In this case, it paid off. The Taliban infiltrated several hundred fighters into a nearby village, and opened fire from homes, businesses and a mosque. The U.S. and Afghan troops called in air support and kept fighting until the Taliban fled, taking most of their dead and wounded with them.

The troops are angry because, while the Taliban got lucky (such attacks are rare), the enemy did not succeed in taking the U.S. position, and fled the battlefield after suffering heavier casualties. The U.S. troops are much better shots, and know they killed far more of the Taliban. Moreover, they saw smart bombs and missiles hitting buildings that Taliban were firing from. From long experience, they know that people inside bombed buildings rarely survive the explosion.

Finally, the troops involved were from the 173rd Airborne Brigade, and paratroopers do not like anyone implying they were beaten at anything. Especially because, in this case, they weren't.





http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htinf/articles/20080721.aspx




Provost

Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.

Calvin Coolidge, President of the United States 1924-1929

Typical media, it always suits them to report coalition casualties and losses as fact while casting doubt as to how many of the Taliban killed were "civilians".

As much as i disagree that the Taliban were "lucky" (they often show at least a basic understanding of the skills needed to conduct attacks, defensive actions and ambushes) it seems pretty clear again that in a stand up fight coalition forces (in this case US paratroops) outclass the Taliban on almost every occassion. The nine friendly dead is of course a blow and a terrible loss but above all it should be remembered they defeated the Talibans effort to over run this area and caused considerable casualties to boot.

How do we KNOW we killed a lot more of them than vice versa?

Of course, our troops naturally report the Taliban carried away the bodies of their dead comrades. Our troops claimed the same thing in Vietnam. As it turns out, estimates of enemy dead were usually vastly exagerrated.

It's strategypage.

Unless i see this from a reputable source it's just a load of crap.