You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Afghanistan
Battle Company Is Out There
2008-03-13
Very, very long NYT article about Battle Company, 2nd Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment, to secure the Korengal Valley in the northeastern province of Kunar, Afghanistan. Multimedia as well. Written by an NYT contributor who apparently was an embed, there is lots and lots of hang-wringing but also some interesting nuggets of information about life on the ground in hostile territory.

But be warned: stop-loss, prozåc, "what are we doing out here", gloom, despair, combat fatigue, aimlessness, and defeatism, as only the NYT can do it.
Posted by:Steve White

#12  gloom, despair and agony on me ....
Posted by: legolas   2008-03-13 21:07  

#11  I'm going to do a little background on this NYT reporter. More tomorrow perhaps
Posted by: Steve White   2008-03-13 17:45  

#10  "Why, with all our technology, were we killing so many civilians in air strikes?"

Because:
1) We're not; a lot of the civilian deaths are fictional,
2) We're not; a lot of the deaths are actually militants in civilian clothes, and
3) The Islamists routinely use civilians as human shields, either with or without their consent.

350 civilians killed, per Human Rights Watch - even if that was accurate and unfortunate, it pales in comparison to ANY other war ever. NYT, you have a REAL story in front of you but you don't even see it, because it doesn't fit the template.
Posted by: Glenmore   2008-03-13 17:32  

#9  NS - didn't Patton or some other WWII general say something to the effect that he didn't worry if the men were bitching. It was when they stopped bitching that he got worried.
Posted by: Rambler in California   2008-03-13 16:48  

#8  Soldiers bitch? Who knew?
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2008-03-13 16:02  

#7  Ever since the first part of the Gulf War (Operation Desert Storm), I realized that reporters, if they look hard enough, can always find one or two dissatisfied soldiers and quote only them as if they are representative. And probably every soldier on a battlefield has times when they are blue and/or angry. If they look hard enough, they can find a newby officer who gets confused sometimes, makes mistakes, gets laughed at behind his back, and represent those officers as typical.
Reason #45223523 why I don't bother to read the MSM anymore.
Posted by: Rambler in California   2008-03-13 14:50  

#6  Chuck: no, reeeeaaaallly?
Posted by: Steve White   2008-03-13 13:11  

#5  But be warned: stop-loss, prozÃ¥c, "what are we doing out here", gloom, despair, combat fatigue, aimlessness, and defeatism, as only the NYT can do it.

I chewed right through my T shirt while reading it.. me Hands hurtz too...
Posted by: RD   2008-03-13 12:59  

#4  Just so everyone knows, some feedback from the unit involved suggests they were yanking her chain just a bit. The Captain is well-liked and well-respected by his peers and the situation is not what was reported.
Posted by: Chuck Simmins   2008-03-13 09:46  

#3  Will the NYT ever learn?
Posted by: Chanter Smith3492   2008-03-13 07:03  

#2  TOPIX > MEDVED - THREE [US] OPTIONS FOR DEALING WITH TERROR. OBAMA's versus RON PAUL'S versus MCCAIN's, etc.; + TERROR WAR WORKHORSE IS FALLING APART [C130 series] + AFGHANISTAN:SEARCHING FOR AVAILABLE NATO MIL HELICOPTERS [too few/aren't any].
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2008-03-13 02:43  

#1  ION, DEFENSETECH.ORG > NAVAL UCAVS [Carrier-capable/borne Squadron(s)] BY 2015 + RADAR TECH CAN SHIFT MILITARY MIGHT.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2008-03-13 02:32  

00:00