Ever wonder what it is like out on the very tip of the spear of Operation Enduring Freedom? Last weekend an estimated 300 Taliban insurgents swarmed a COP (Combat Outpost) in remote Nuristan, Afghanistan forcing US soldiers to fight in an Alamo-esque situation – which was only relieved with air support from other bases. Eight Americans died there, as did at least 2 Afghan soldiers, with 35 Afghan policemen captured (fate unknown).
You can see a video showing the landscape around COP Keating a few months prior to this attack. Imagine fighting an enemy who controls all the high ground around you, while you control a postage stamp-sized base literally in the middle of nowhere. Oh yeah, and your base contains hulks from armored personnel carriers that were destroyed there during the Soviet invasion of the same real estate 25 years ago. The fact that the Americans held the base despite these odds speaks volumes of the quality of our fighting forces – but what of the strategy of employing these remote outposts in hostile territory? One rumor has it that the Allied forces expended a billion dollars in munitions defending this base over the course of the battle…
What we are seeing in microcosm may be extrapolated to the entire history of warfare in Afghanistan. The US and its allies have nearly infinite munitions and materiel, and are highly skilled in the art of warfare. But the Taliban and its allies have a seemingly endless supply of bodies to hold RPGs and rifles committed to the war, costing virtually nothing but the time to recruit.
President Obama and his planners have some tough choices ahead.
[PS. Note that in the link above you will find information on donating to the US soldiers who were in that firefight. All their personal items were apparently destroyed as the base was attacked]
Related Articles |
Afghan Tip of the Spear « Great History said:
[...] [I originally published this story at GreatHistory.com] [...]
October 8th, 2009 at 11:43 am
loggie20 said:
The tactical sitaution was worsened by diosregarding the terrain.
Who is responsible for such a blunder?
October 8th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Bernard MICHEL said:
It seems that NATO , or US Generals did learn nothing of the campaigns fought by their elders !!!
Remember Dien Bien Phu where the french legion got a beating !!!
Remember Da Nang and other places in South Viet Nam , where the US got beaten !!
And now the big brass send the boys in the same low places to get shot from above !!!!
How stupid those generals are ??? Or do they NEED big body counts to ask for more money from the politics in Congress ??? What about sending them there , so that they understand the shit they put the boys in !!!
October 8th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
Brian King said:
I think the answer is that they had too few men to effectively build defenses on the surrounding hills. Plus, I believe they were defending a village along a mountain road, which would not be possible if they were high above it. You can’t protect your villagers from afar.
Clearly the military knew this was a precarious base – but I don’t see how they could have improved the situation without more troops.
I’m not saying it was smart, only that the only other viable option was not to be there in the first place. A decision which obviously coincides with the pullback happening now.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091009/D9B7HP4G0.html
October 9th, 2009 at 10:10 am
History Roundup 10-09-2009 « Great History said:
[...] resulted in the death of 8 US soldiers, 2 or 3 Afghan soldiers, and approximately 100 Taliban. The Afghan Tip of the Spear takes a look at this. Some interesting video in the link, plus it gives a good sense of the [...]
October 9th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Robots in Afghanistan: Shouldering the load for our troops? « Great History said:
[...] spending some of our hard earned cash on upping the ante on military robotics. In one recent firefight at a remote outpost, some estimates are that a billion dollars in ordnance were spent defending the tiny base over the [...]
October 13th, 2009 at 3:11 pm