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
Afghanistan
Taliban repel British assault in south Afghanistan
2006-12-05
al-Rooters, of course
British Marines attacked a Taliban-held valley in southern Afghanistan on Tuesday but withdrew after a ferocious counterattack that withstood air strikes and artillery fire, witnesses said. One Royal Marine was killed and a second wounded during the battle, the UK Helmand Task Force (UKTF) said.
My sympathies to the families.
Scores of soldiers ran across a bridge over the Helmand River under a full moon shortly before daybreak and began sweeping south through wheatfields in the south of the province, the opium center of the world's major producer.
A Reuters cameraman said the Marines initially faced only sporadic resistance but when they advanced, Taliban fighters launched a ferocious, organized riposte
they had a sword?
with heavy weapons
like a ... 133mm gun? 120mm mortar? More likely a RPG or 60mm mortar
and tried to outflank the British troops.
The fierce resistance illustrated the challenges facing the NATO troops in Afghanistan where they are trying to subdue well-armed Taliban and other militants bolstered by profits from a record opium crop, according to Afghan and foreign officials.

Major Andy Plewes, who led the Royal Marines of Zulu Company 45 Commando, on the assault, said the soldiers had expected resistance: "What we didn't know was how strong it was. We don't currently have enough forces in the area to hold ground completely and that has to be done by Afghan security forces," he told a Reuters reporter with the Marines.

The 32,000-strong force NATO-led International Security Assistance Force took over command of the war against the Taliban from U.S.-led forces in October and has launched a string of offensives.

British casualties have been mounting since ISAF took over command of operations in southern Afghanistan at the end of July. Britain has lost 41 soldiers since the Taliban government was toppled in 2001, the bulk of them this year.
And how many talibunnies are dead? Eh?
The British forces, who make up the bulk of NATO forces in Helmand, opened fire from light armored vehicles and engaged small groups of guerrillas with mortars and machine guns.
Ah, so by "heavy weapons" he means crew-served light weapons.
Afghan police and soldiers have so far held just the bridgehead and the short road at the north end of the valley, criss-crossed by networks of ancient canals that make Helmand fertile enough to produce a third of the world's opium crop.

BARRAGES OF AIR STRIKES
Ummmm, Barrages come from artillery. Dude.
The Taliban withstood barrages of air strikes from Apache helicopters, 500 pound bombs dropped by B1 bombers and withering cannon fire from A-10 attack jets before the British finally withdrew after a 10-hour battle.
10 hours of combat ya say? Against a company of Royal Marines with supporting arms? And the Brits retreated?? Musta run outta targets to kill.
The fearless, strong, brave and handsome Taliban fighters, who say they have the expertise to defeat the strongest army, had dug sophisticated networks of trenches often leading from compound to compound.
Sophisticated trenches? WTF izzat? Cable TV, Wine Cellar, iPod stereo? Prolly not. I think they mean the holes in the ground were almost linear.
This year has seen the worst fighting since U.S.-led forces ousted the Taliban's strict Islamist government in 2001. About 4,000 people have died, a quarter of them civilians.
And the rest of the dead were...NATO or US troops?
The alliance troops were deployed to aid reconstruction and to help Afghanistan's government by build stability. But they have been increasingly drawn into battles with the Taliban and other militants in the opium poppy-growing south.
Heh. Notice the editorial comment about opium.
Tuesday's assault was the latest in a series of battles by British forces around the bridgehead.
Major Plewes said he considered the assault a success as they had cleared out areas near the "D.C.," a tiny strip of road and ruined buildings on the eastern side of the Helmand River.
But without more Afghan troops to hold the ground there was little hope of doing much more.
"In the mean time we have to try to provide as much as security to the D.C. as possible," said Plewes.
Any enemy dead from the marine company...or the arty...or the B1...or apache...or A10? Nothing hit and the Brits forced to retreat by the brave lions of islam? Come on, this is actually an AP report, correct?
Posted by:Threregum Thrique8640

#17  P.S. Anyone need a Quartermaster out there? Always looking for work.
Posted by: newc   2006-12-05 23:34  

#16  Gentlemen, it is time to kick out the fake "News" fluffers and take care of business. I have not the time, beer, nor the marijuana, to watch this continually for another 5 years. Afghanistan is a PC free zone. See how that works.
Posted by: newc   2006-12-05 23:30  

#15  That's why it should be SOP when all reporters enter the AOR they are told in no uncertain terms by team members what is expected of them wrt their adjectives in a story.

I like to ask folks their name, share a cup of joe, and then tell them how easy it would be for me to find them via ZABA search when I get back home.
Posted by: Broadhead6   2006-12-05 22:04  

#14  The Rooters byline is Peter Graff. Oddly enough, Peter Graff of Rooters, or another guy with the same name, was reporting from London not two weeks ago on the Litvinenko murder, as shown here. Reggie Bush doesn't get around that fast. Or is the story based mostly on the unnamed, affiliation-unstated, Rooters "cameraman"?
Posted by: Matt   2006-12-05 22:02  

#13  Also, the restraint of these soldiers is almost superhuman. If the a$$hole who wrote this was anywhere near me in a combat zone, I doubt very much that I could resist the impulse to put one behind his ear. He and his ilk are the enemy.
Posted by: PBMcL   2006-12-05 20:13  

#12  Sounds like a 3 a.m. visit from Spooky is in order here. Or an Arclight strike. Need to stay in practice...
Posted by: PBMcL   2006-12-05 19:58  

#11  Taliban will always put up stiff resistance when its opium they be fighting for.

Perhaps they are taliban by day and opium drug ring members by night....two jobs one purpose....

these are exactly the kind of places that many troops will be found...hope this is an expeditionary report.

Can you imagine the memory of crossing that bridge under a full moon...twenty years hence.....they'll never forget it.
Posted by: Whenter Grenter7664   2006-12-05 19:56  

#10  Same. Same for everything. Same as for a replacement mess kit spoon.
Posted by: .com   2006-12-05 19:42  

#9  That makes more sense than the rest of it! :-)

"Which option has less forms, the MOAB or the nuke?"
Posted by: gorb   2006-12-05 19:39  

#8  Probably a lot of forms to fill out.
In triplicate.
Posted by: eLarson   2006-12-05 19:18  

#7  the MOAB requires a certain time warning to use, since it's dropped out of a cargo plane, say 2 weeks

They're not using this concept to its full potential by any means. Shame. Could have saved a lot of effort here.

Perhaps the MOAB bomb as it exists today is a bit of an overkill. Maybe a 5000 pounder would be more practical. If they are whining about not using it "because it's too heavy" then just lighten it up.

I don't see why cargo planes need two weeks notice to pick up a 20000# load. It's what they do.
Posted by: gorb   2006-12-05 19:02  

#6  Just put the MOAB explosive slurry into old planes in the boneyard, add UAV control systems, and fly them into targets like this.

Posted by: 3dc   2006-12-05 18:19  

#5  Did they have dark flashing eyes and gleaming teeeth set in faces etched with the lines of thousands of years of struggle? I think I'm in love.
Posted by: Seafarious   2006-12-05 18:16  

#4  For the Umpteeth time + 1, the MOAB requires a certain time warning to use, since it's dropped out of a cargo plane, say 2 weeks. The weapon was a very successful exercise in high speed engineering. Nothing more, nothing less. Less than 5 exist.

Better to just say NUKE 'EM!
Posted by: Shipman   2006-12-05 18:11  

#3  Why did we invent the imbedded reporter if his only use is to subvert us.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2006-12-05 18:03  

#2  I want to beat this reporter to death with a leaking baby seal in the spirit of journalistic relativism.
Posted by: pihkalbadger   2006-12-05 18:01  

#1  Again, for the umpteenth time: Why did we invent the MOAB bomb if we didn't intend to use it?

I'll bet that would fuc& up their trench system and whatever else but good!

Like you said, it all centers around the drug trade being their lifeblood. You'd do better with a KC-10 or two full of Roundup(TM). Imagine the headlines: "Taliban Ultimately Defeated by Roundup(TM)". Not so manly, I guess.
Posted by: gorb   2006-12-05 17:36  

00:00