Taliban attack inside Camp Bastion

[davidbfpo]

Added: Originally this post was within another, wider thread on Afghanistan, but now I feel that this audacious attack needs a separate thread as more information trickles out and I have moved previous posts to here.


It has been interesting to read the reporting on this skilful, determined attack; in particular these two explanations:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/9545508/Ive-been-inside-Camp-Bastion-and-it-seemed-like-the-safest-place-on-earth.html and the incisive Afghan analyst:http://afghanistananalysis.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/what-was-the-camp-bastion-attack-really-about/

This attack is a weird reminder that the original SAS mission was to attack Rommel's airfields in North Africa, approaching from the desert.

[jcustis]

It has been interesting to read the reporting on this skilful, determined attack; in particular these two explanations:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/9545508/Ive-been-inside-Camp-Bastion-and-it-seemed-like-the-safest-place-on-earth.html and the incisive Afghan analyst:http://afghanistananalysis.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/what-was-the-camp-bastion-attack-really-about/

This attack is a weird reminder that the original SAS mission was to attack Rommel's airfields in North Africa, approaching from the desert.

I was thinking the same thing David. Sadler must be scratching his chin.

I wonder what the visibility conditions were, besides it simply being dark. The fact that the enemy continued to observe the airfield and video ongoing aerial operations, while an a/c smouldered, is very bad.

[carl]

I was thinking the same thing David. Sadler must be scratching his chin.

I wonder what the visibility conditions were, besides it simply being dark. The fact that the enemy continued to observe the airfield and video ongoing aerial operations, while an a/c smouldered, is very bad.

If you left off the dates and location, the attack on Bastion could have taken place in Vietnam. Sappers penetrate the perimeter and blow up some airplanes.

When I was at my big base, my LSA was the first thing somebody getting through the wire would bump into. I used to think of things I read about the sappers of old and be relieved that it wasn't the VC or NVA who were out there. Looks like the Taliban & Co and the Pak Army/ISI are upping the game.

Somebody speculated somewhere about where they got the layout of the base. Couldn't you get most all of what you need from Google Earth? And barring that, I suppose the Pak Army/ISI could get even more details of the base layout. I wonder if people on the inside would really be needed.

[Fuchs]

If you left off the dates and location, the attack on Bastion could have taken place in Vietnam. Sappers penetrate the perimeter and blow up some airplanes.

I guess we'll hear from Mr. J. Poole soon again.

[davidbfpo]

There is something very odd in this official statement by the UK Defence Secretary on the attack IMO - an amateur in a faraway armchair.

I have added the text in italics and the emphasis
...securing a base with an area similar to that of Reading, was inevitably a struggle....troops on Friday night had to fight off a significant (fifteen men) Taliban force...Despite its extensive garrison, numerous fences and remote location....People living in several villages and settlement close to the base’s fence line have been told they must move “so that we will have a clearer field of fire,” Mr Hammond said.

Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/9548646/Philip-Hammond-its-difficult-to-defend-Camp-Bastion-from-Taliban.html

Until this attack all the reporting I've seen stressed Camp bastion was selected for being remote from the local population and the terrain enabled clear observations. Now we read of farmers cultivating maize nearby and villages are to be moved.

Not to overlook the Taliban took a video of the base - not the attack - and it is in circulation on the web. The BBC tonight showed a tiny clip of helicopters amidst smoke. The attack was at 2200hrs and so in darkness:
..poor visibility wasn’t an issue Friday night. It was a low-light evening with little moonlight, but it isn’t clear if that played a role in the attack.

I note that in the attack:
...killed two Marines, including the commanding officer of a Harrier squadron....Virtually all of the Marines working on the flight line at the time responded to the attack

Link:http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2012/09/marine-camp-bastion-afghanistan-attack-taliban-091712/

[ganulv]

The Danger Room write-up (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/09/insurgents-posed-u-s-troops/) states that the six Harriers destroyed in the attack amounted to 1/15th (6.7%) of the USMC’s inventory of the aircraft. Is that indeed the case?

[jcustis]

Even if that stat is true, it probably shouldn't be talked about here.

I hadn't heard about the squadron CO being killed before.

[stanleywinthrop]

The short answer is yes. The usmc has 120 or so harrier airframes and it lost between 6 and 8. Thats 5-6.7%.

[jcustis]

I amend my position. I thought the topic was airframes in AFG.

[carl]

Reading what David has observed and what the Defence Minister said, I am drawing the conclusion that a base that has 21,000 people living on it has no idea about what is going on amongst the people who are living outside the wire. I conclude this by observing that they seem to be basing the security of the installation completely on physical things, high walls and remote location, and not on knowing what is happening out there. It is as if we can't even manage to 'ink spot' the area just outside a major base.

Like David, I am a civilian far away but the big failure here seems to be one of local intel. Somebody had to looking at the base and putting things into place for some days prior to the attack and nobody detected it or had a local contact who was willing to tell them what was going on.

[tequila]

Reading what David has observed and what the Defence Minister said, I am drawing the conclusion that a base that has 21,000 people living on it has no idea about what is going on amongst the people who are living outside the wire. I conclude this by observing that they seem to be basing the security of the installation completely on physical things, high walls and remote location, and not on knowing what is happening out there. It is as if we can't even manage to 'ink spot' the area just outside a major base.

Like David, I am a civilian far away but the big failure here seems to be one of local intel. Somebody had to looking at the base and putting things into place for some days prior to the attack and nobody detected it or had a local contact who was willing to tell them what was going on.

Doesn't that assume the attackers were local or locally based?

This sort of sophisticated attack seems much more like the work of a trained cell of guys who rehearsed and planned well. That is, more "professional" outsiders, maybe even from Pakistan or Iran, not a local group. Obviously we don't know anywhere near enough about what has happened to make a judgment on this yet. Very interested to hear what the one survivor has to say about where and how this attack originated.

[carl]

Tequila:

No, I don't think that assumes they were locally based. I imagine (just a guess) that if one of our units was planning a commando raid, they would do all their planning and rehersals (sic) far away and would only show up shortly before the attack commenced. I would further imagine (here is a civilian going way out on a limb) that there would have to be some local support to do some scoping and set up a local staging house or something but the local support wouldn't have to actually participate in the attack. In fact I would imagine you would want to keep the local support out of it because that kind of talent might be more rare than that of a well rehersed (sic) trigger puller.

So as you suggest, I would bet that this was all set up and trained for, with massive ISI help, in Pakistan. But that there were some good agents, who may have been locals, or not, in the local area to support the effort.

[slapout9]

So as you suggest, I would bet that this was all set up and trained for, with massive ISI help, in Pakistan.

I was wondering about that myself. Details are sketchy but this attack seems much better planned than a lot of the others.

[carl]

Slap:

That surviving attacker will tell them where he was trained and who trained them. If, as I suppose everybody is expecting, he says he was trained in Pakistan by ISI people, it will be fascinating, in a forensic bureaucratic sense, to see how the powers that be inside the beltway find a way to give the Pak Army/ISI a pass once again.

[TDB]

The other possibility and a far more alarming one, is that the attackers were trained by ISAF. I do remember reading that they were wearing American uniforms, though that may not mean anything what with the wonders of the internet.

Also if the real target was our dear Captain Wales, surely an argument for his immediate return home?

[JMA]

Also if the real target was our dear Captain Wales, surely an argument for his immediate return home?

Good to see you posting again. :)

Its more than that isn't it. On his first tour as soon as the journalist blew his cover (an Australian IIRC) he was sent home.

This time it was announced some time ago that he was scheduled for another tour... and blow me down if they don't announce his arrival to media fanfare.

This deployment of royals is indeed a problem as your man Admiral Sandy Woodward - commander of the Falklands exercise - was quoted (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9150339/Falkland-Islands-Britain-would-lose-if-Argentina-decides-to-invade-now.html) as saying after his experience with Prince Andrew:


“To put a royal in the front line is quite inconvenient. You have to take special measures to make sure he doesn’t lose his life. That means you service his aircraft three times as carefully as anyone else’s. If something goes badly wrong, you’ll be blamed. So you protect the Royal Family from their own wish to serve. They are a liability on the front line.”

Then there was the latest run-around with Prince William in the Falklands.

Normally people learn from their mistakes... so what gives with the Brits on this?

.

[Fuchs]

Royals could also be employed as an asset.
Imagine a real prince attending negotiations with some petty regional representatives.

There might be some respect stuff to be exploited if the 19th century connection can be kept out.

[TDB]

Good to see you posting again. :)

Its more than that isn't it. On his first tour as soon as the journalist blew his cover (an Australian IIRC) he was sent home.

This time it was announced some time ago that he was scheduled for another tour... and blow me down if they don't announce his arrival to media fanfare.

This deployment of royals is indeed a problem as your man Admiral Sandy Woodward - commander of the Falklands exercise - was quoted (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9150339/Falkland-Islands-Britain-would-lose-if-Argentina-decides-to-invade-now.html) as saying after his experience with Prince Andrew:



Then there was the latest run-around with Prince William in the Falklands.

Normally people learn from their mistakes... so what gives with the Brits on this?

.

Good to be back.

It's an odd move, I can understand from his perspective that he wants to serve his country and he'd rather have a serious role rather than a ceremonial one. It's just a nice morale boost for the lads and something the Daily Mail and their ilk can trumpet on about.

Rather cynical of me I know.

[TDB]

Royals could also be employed as an asset.
Imagine a real prince attending negotiations with some petty regional representatives.

There might be some respect stuff to be exploited if the 19th century connection can be kept out.

I've got visions of him turning up and trying to teach the natives to play cricket.

[ganulv]

I've got visions of him turning up and trying to teach the natives to play cricket.

I don’t know, he seems the sort who might be up for some Buzkashi if his handlers were to allow it.

[Steve Blair]

If you left off the dates and location, the attack on Bastion could have taken place in Vietnam. Sappers penetrate the perimeter and blow up some airplanes.

When I was at my big base, my LSA was the first thing somebody getting through the wire would bump into. I used to think of things I read about the sappers of old and be relieved that it wasn't the VC or NVA who were out there. Looks like the Taliban & Co and the Pak Army/ISI are upping the game.

Somebody speculated somewhere about where they got the layout of the base. Couldn't you get most all of what you need from Google Earth? And barring that, I suppose the Pak Army/ISI could get even more details of the base layout. I wonder if people on the inside would really be needed.

None of this layout stuff would be especially hard to determine, especially if you've got the time and patience to do the right kinds of recon (and you don't need Google Earth to do that). I suspect that they'd do the wise thing and back up any remote observations with people on the ground verifying as much as possible. It's not rocket science, after all. And the techniques are out there to be studied. You don't need ISI support to do that (although some may want to make the linkage - real or imagined - for reasons of their own).

The assumption that it couldn't be planned locally strikes me as being more based on ego than reality. If we want to use the Vietnam model, most sapper teams actually did their planning and rehearsals fairly close to their targets (if memory serves the sapper team that hit the MACV/SOG compound in Da Nang did their planning close by). US forces often do their training at a distance because, quite frankly, we can. We've got the resources and mobility to shift teams quickly (and move so much junk that it's frankly fairly easy to hide them in the shuffle). Others don't have that luxury so have to conduct things closer to home.

And, in point of fact, that same "it must be skilled outsiders" argument was often used (mistakenly) during Vietnam.

[carl]

Steve:

All your points are well taken. It could very well have been pulled off by locals. But given the history of the area, it is just my opinion that it was most likely done with a lot of ISI help. I think I recall that the stagey attacks in Kabul were done by the Haqqanis and the attackers came from outside. It is just a lot easier to do all the planning and practicing in Pakistan than in Afghanistan.

The survivor will tell us and then somebody will know. I didn't say we will know because if what he says is judged inconvenient they will just lie about it or super classify it. That would be one more in a never ending string of tragedies that is our effort in Afghanistan.

And I assume your right about the VC or NVA practicing nearby. But it was a different time, place and enemy. The VC and NVA both had the first team close by. They didn't have the recourse to drive their Toyota Hi-Lux from the practice place to the target. And last but not least, I believe from what I've read, the VC and NVA were a bit of a cut above Taliban & Co when it came to fighting.

[davidbfpo]

Hat tip to Circling the Lion's Den for its commentary, notably drawing attention to the similarities to the attack on Camp Salerno (June 1st 2012) and the profusion of official photos of the camp - originally on Cryptome:
for pointing to the extraordinary array of tactically useful photographs of Camp Bastion published by the UK Ministry of Defence (369 images) and the US Department of Defense (over 500 images).

It seems quite remarkable that these two organisations should have published photos that allow Taliban strategists to make accurate models of the layout of the camp. The positioning of hangars, medical centres, troop bivvies - pretty much everything - is on view in these high-res photos. The photo of the church is pointless and inflammatory in the hands of a Taliban recruiter.

Link:http://circlingthelionsden.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/how-official-pics-help-taliban-attack.html

Link to Cryptome photos:http://cryptome.org/2012-info/camp-bastion/camp-bastion.htm

A "lurker" commented on the post-attack Taliban video:
Still, in a supposedly clear area around the base, it is remarkable that someone was able to get close enough to film the smoke plume. ISAF says it has detained a local Taliban leader who provided support to the attack team, but details are scanty.

We have briefly looked at "high tech Taliban" before:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=16197

[Steve Blair]

Steve:

All your points are well taken. It could very well have been pulled off by locals. But given the history of the area, it is just my opinion that it was most likely done with a lot of ISI help. I think I recall that the stagey attacks in Kabul were done by the Haqqanis and the attackers came from outside. It is just a lot easier to do all the planning and practicing in Pakistan than in Afghanistan.

The survivor will tell us and then somebody will know. I didn't say we will know because if what he says is judged inconvenient they will just lie about it or super classify it. That would be one more in a never ending string of tragedies that is our effort in Afghanistan.

And I assume your right about the VC or NVA practicing nearby. But it was a different time, place and enemy. The VC and NVA both had the first team close by. They didn't have the recourse to drive their Toyota Hi-Lux from the practice place to the target. And last but not least, I believe from what I've read, the VC and NVA were a bit of a cut above Taliban & Co when it came to fighting.

In terms of competence, the VC and NVA varied quite a bit depending on the time and place. What I've seen indicates that the Taliban is no different.

Part of my point is that we do have an unfortunate tendency to decide that any sign of competence on the part of current opponents MUST be due to outside influence (going all the way back to the Indian wars).

[Fuchs]

As long as those official photos did not have GPS info embedded...that's what's supposed to have doomed two parking Apaches a few years ago.

[carl]

Steve:

Again your points are well taken. But when I read them something occurred to me about how this is viewed. If the bulk of the training took place in Pakistan with beaucoup ISI help, I don't think that should be viewed as "outside". The Quetta Shura is based in Pakistan. The Haqqanis are in Pakistan. Taliban & Co can't exist without the Pak Army/ISI. So if the training, planning and practice took place in Pakistan under sponsorship of the ISI it isn't "outside" anything. It is part of the normal whole that has existed for over a decade.

[JMA]

Steve:

Again your points are well taken. But when I read them something occurred to me about how this is viewed. If the bulk of the training took place in Pakistan with beaucoup ISI help, I don't think that should be viewed as "outside". The Quetta Shura is based in Pakistan. The Haqqanis are in Pakistan. Taliban & Co can't exist without the Pak Army/ISI. So if the training, planning and practice took place in Pakistan under sponsorship of the ISI it isn't "outside" anything. It is part of the normal whole that has existed for over a decade.

Local? I really have my doubts.

Did these guys forget to formulate an extraction/withdrawal plan... or were they going to keep going until done?

Local knowledge, yes... local Taliban, no.

.

[Fuchs]

Wasn't this kind of mission without return the speciality of AQ mercs inside Afghanistan till late '01?
If I understood reports from years ago correctly, this was the speciality that made them so useful to the Taliban leadership whose own troops were either chieftains or not motivated enough for such tactics.

[AdamG]

Somebody speculated somewhere about where they got the layout of the base. Couldn't you get most all of what you need from Google Earth? And barring that, I suppose the Pak Army/ISI could get even more details of the base layout. I wonder if people on the inside would really be needed.

Exactly - Open Source is a sword that cuts both ways.

[Ken White]

...I wonder if people on the inside would really be needed.Not needed but helpful, very much so. You can bet they are there -- just as they were in Viet Nam and where they contributed heavily to NVA Sapper success, such as it was (they didn't do all that well but the media loves 'disasters.' If they can't find one, they'll get all creative..).

Google earth makes a difference but it can be fooled. So can observers located on distant or even nearby peaks that look down on the area in question ;)

In Viet Nam, only the Australians were smart enough to site their main camps where observation was difficult, then surround them with large, high berms so they were not only very difficult to attack but one could not view or map the layout from outside. The Strines had a sort of fenced of quarantine area just inside the gate were they met with local dignitaries and military people; those visitors could not leave that secure meeting area.. They absolutely refused to hire local nationals to work inside their Camps, no matter how much the US pressured them to do so. Why did the US want to hire local nationals? Because westerners can't do scut work? Nope -- why "to boost the local economy..." Why else. :rolleyes:

We're nuts...

[Fuchs]

In Viet Nam, only the Australians were smart enough to site their main camps where observation was difficult, then surround them with large, high berms so they were not only very difficult to attack but one could not view or map the layout from outside.

I believe I remember that the Brits used the opposite against the IRA, reasoning that it's important for security to see the outside from the inside (even concerning soldiers not on guard duty).

[carl]

Very clever those Strines. Do you think that would work given the size of our bases now? Those things are beyond huge.

In an attack like that the primary thing would be to work out where the airplanes were parked. If you know about airports you can work that out pretty easy without ever actually looking at the place. I won't say how but I'll bet Ken knows. Combine that with Google Earth, even a fooled Google Earth and combine that with commercially available sattellite (sic) imagery that the Pak Army/ISI could get hold of and there isn't really much you can hide about the layout. But inside confirmation of patterns and behavior is invaluable.

I can see helping the local economy in a way that would help us too but without having to allow locals on base. One thing I could never understand is why they didn't seem to buy local produce where I was. They flew in Wonder Bread, shiny yellow cheese and peaches from Chile. The best place to eat on base (when they let us) was the chow hall of a Turkish construction company that used local produce. I don't get it.

[Ken White]

Very clever those Strines. Do you think that would work given the size of our bases now? Those things are beyond huge.They are huge because we do not adapt to the mission, local people and terrain, we take the US with us and try to make the terrain, local people and mission adapt to that...

So two answers, first; No, not without changing the way we do business. Second; Yes by changing the way we do business (and, concomitantly, the equipment we buy and the number of our people needed to support it). That means not using the GPF for such missions -- or, better, avoiding such missions. Sort of like the second Fire Extinguisher -- if you have to resort to that, you may already be too late.
I can see helping the local economy in a way that would help us too but without having to allow locals on base. One thing I could never understand is why they didn't seem to buy local produce where I was. They flew in Wonder Bread, shiny yellow cheese and peaches from Chile. The best place to eat on base (when they let us) was the chow hall of a Turkish construction company that used local produce. I don't get it.Heh. That's due to two factors, one of which is something I keep mentioning and which you discount. Congress. They like it when US Contractors they support and love use US and favored nation products. So talk to Congress.

The second and less important but ostensibly defensible reason is to preclude introducing locally contaminated and / or tampered-with food that might sicken the Troops. There are other minor things but those are, in order, the two most important.

On the airfields, you are of course correct. Doesn't take much planning or help if you understand the basics of layout and construction and can watch takeoffs and landings even from a distance. Their necessary size also makes them vulnerable and that's hard to counter, even if one had enough troops (which will almost never be the case). Two good options are more and better S/VTOL birds or Hoptiflopters and more range and loiter time for more secure and distant airfield locations. The Bone and the Warthog are the birds of choice in the 'Stan for good reason. A better option is avoiding such employment in the first place -- that isn't that hard either

[ganulv]

One thing I could never understand is why they didn't seem to buy local produce where I was. They flew in […] shiny yellow cheese […].

Ah, Canadian cheese (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120601194701AAwgBZC). :D


There are other minor things but those are, in order, the two most important.

Plopping a G8 institution down in the middle of a place like Afghanistan and having it buy local certainly presents the possibility of playing merry hob with pricing, don’t know if that is one of the whys. Probably not, as it is also an issue with utilizing local labor.

[jcustis]

Wasn't this kind of mission without return the speciality of AQ mercs inside Afghanistan till late '01?
If I understood reports from years ago correctly, this was the speciality that made them so useful to the Taliban leadership whose own troops were either chieftains or not motivated enough for such tactics.

Good connection of the dots.

[Firn]

They are huge because we do not adapt to the mission, local people and terrain, we take the US with us and try to make the terrain, local people and mission adapt to that...

So two answers, first; No, not without changing the way we do business. Second; Yes by changing the way we do business (and, concomitantly, the equipment we buy and the number of our people needed to support it). That means not using the GPF for such missions -- or, better, avoiding such missions. Sort of like the second Fire Extinguisher -- if you have to resort to that, you may already be too late.Heh. That's due to two factors, one of which is something I keep mentioning and which you discount. Congress. They like it when US Contractors they support and love use US and favored nation products. So talk to Congress.

The second and less important but ostensibly defensible reason is to preclude introducing locally contaminated and / or tampered-with food that might sicken the Troops. There are other minor things but those are, in order, the two most important.

On the airfields, you are of course correct. Doesn't take much planning or help if you understand the basics of layout and construction and can watch takeoffs and landings even from a distance. Their necessary size also makes them vulnerable and that's hard to counter, even if one had enough troops (which will almost never be the case). Two good options are more and better S/VTOL birds or Hoptiflopters and more range and loiter time for more secure and distant airfield locations. The Bone and the Warthog are the birds of choice in the 'Stan for good reason. A better option is avoiding such employment in the first place -- that isn't that hard either

The whole effort looks a bit like a farmer trying to grow rice in a isolated desert. The big difference is that with science on his side, very deep pockets and a massive investment of ressources he has an excellent chance to succed in his stupid enterprise.

It is of course tragic to see so much human live and ressources wasted, sometimes in a noble, sometimes in a criminal manner. There is no simple technological solution to the behavior of persons and institutions and sometimes, when the aim is something more then to loot, burn and kill even the best effort can fail if the horse does not drink.

---

In this case Fuchs is right to point out that supposedly everybody of the attackers was wearing suicide vests. If this has not to do with foreign mercs ( I don't know how socially acceptable suicide missions have become for Afghan insurgents in the various regions) it certainly required quite a bit of effort to get so many individuals willing to blow themselves up and to prepare them as a unit for the mission. This and the the use of American uniforms as well as the ambitious aim of the attack seem to point, even if you grant them luck, to an effort on a more regional level. Great support on the local level seems highly likely for various phases of the mission.

[carl]

Plopping a G8 institution down in the middle of a place like Afghanistan and having it buy local certainly presents the possibility of playing merry hob with pricing, don’t know if that is one of the whys. Probably not, as it is also an issue with utilizing local labor.

Plopping a G8 institution down is going to affect the local prices no matter what you do. I always figured that if you bought what you could local, at least you could get the money more directly into the hands of the local and regional farmers.

[carl]

The second and less important but ostensibly defensible reason is to preclude introducing locally contaminated and / or tampered-with food that might sicken the Troops. There are other minor things but those are, in order, the two most important.

On the airfields, you are of course correct. Doesn't take much planning or help if you understand the basics of layout and construction and can watch takeoffs and landings even from a distance. Their necessary size also makes them vulnerable and that's hard to counter, even if one had enough troops (which will almost never be the case). Two good options are more and better S/VTOL birds or Hoptiflopters and more range and loiter time for more secure and distant airfield locations. The Bone and the Warthog are the birds of choice in the 'Stan for good reason. A better option is avoiding such employment in the first place -- that isn't that hard either

Do you think a possible problem with contamination is a realistic worry, could it be gotten around?

As you say, B-1s are great because they can be based far, far away. A-10s are great because of their effectiveness at killing people but I don't know if they can get away with a short runway. In the summer with a load they may require a long runway and therefore a big base anyway.

Helos are great and STVOL aircraft are always a promise on the horizon. But in either case the limiting factor isn't the combat airplanes, it is the runway and ramp space required for the logistics airplanes, the Hercs, C-17s, IL-76s and the 747s. If those are going to come in, you need a long runway and hence a big base.

My concern with the attack is not that such a big place can't set up invulnurable (sic) physical defenses but that such an important installation apparently has so little idea of what is happening just outside the wire that this thing could be set up and carried out. I know that is going to happen occasionally no matter what you do but if this got to be a regular thing that would be bad. We'll see I guess.

[ganulv]

Plopping a G8 institution down is going to affect the local prices no matter what you do. I always figured that if you bought what you could local, at least you could get the money more directly into the hands of the local and regional farmers.

An influx of foreign money can cause serious social tensions. You see it often when refugees arrive and they have access to food aid. This tends to drive the costs in the local markets up and create resentment towards them.

[JMA]

An influx of foreign money can cause serious social tensions. You see it often when refugees arrive and they have access to food aid. This tends to drive the costs in the local markets up and create resentment towards them.

Without being too picky... it often destroys the local "economy" as the influx of food and other stuff supplied to the refugees quickly finds its way into the markets driving some costs up and mostly others down. The down side is normally for the "chain" - the local traders who used to source goods from afar, the distributors who brought goods from afar in all manner of vehicles on impossible roads, the wholesalers based in a regional town and on the the importers/manufacturers. They all get screwed.

[davidbfpo]

Taken from the article linked by SWJ Blog for the return to the USA of Lt. Col. Christopher K. Raible.


The assailants, assembled into three teams of five fighters, cut a hole in the fence on the eastern end of the airfield at approximately 10:15 p.m. Wearing suicide vests and armed with automatic rifles and rocket-propelled grenades, they moved toward hangars where AV-8B Harrier jets were parked and began to open fire.

Link:http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/2012/09/21/f4703c76-042d-11e2-91e7-2962c74e7738_story.html?hpid=z2

[davidbfpo]

More details are appearing, no doubt some are inspired as I doubt if any media in Camp Bastion will upset their handlers.

In particular I refer to Christina Lamb's in The Sunday Times (UK, behind a pay-wall), but reproduced in The Australian and fully accessible via Google:http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/bastion-raid-signals-birth-of-taliban-sas-in-afghanistan/story-fnb64oi6-1226479699623

She reports that:
A local Taliban commander who gave his name as Abdul Bari told The Sunday Times that planning began a month ago when a senior Haqqani network officer asked for 20 volunteers to become suicide bombers. They were trained in Pakistan, he said.

Prior to the attack the base's remote position was often cited as part of the security advantage, so when she reveals:
A cement-mixing plant, lorry parks and a hotel for local workers were built just a few hundred yards from the camp's eastern fence, where the attack took place.

This passage does not sound right - from my armchair, ostensibly made by a suicide bomber in a high concrete wall
A two-metre hole had been blasted high in the razor-wire-topped wall surrounding what was thought to be one of the most impregnable military camps on earth.

[davidbfpo]

The BBC clearly has gone into over-drive, with numerous clips / reports on this attack, including a short portion of the pre-attack Taliban training and to my bemusement:
Note: For security reasons, the main image and video tour of Camp Bastion are graphical representations of the base and not accurate plans:wry:

A report:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19704120 and the gateway to more:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19635544

Note a moon-less night helped.

[davidbfpo]

Ah!
The U.S. military has launched a formal investigation into whether a two-star Marine Corps general and his subordinates bear responsibility for lax security at a large coalition base in southwestern Afghanistan where a Taliban ambush killed two Marines and destroyed a half-dozen U.S. fighter jets.

The report refers to guard towers being unmanned by Tongans and fewer USMC perimeter patrols.

Link:http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-military-launches-probe-into-deadly-assault-in-afghanistan/2013/05/29/4aeef780-c879-11e2-8da7-d274bc611a47_story.html

[jcustis]

David,

Our Commandant is taking heat for a recent round of officer reliefs where he stated he'd lost confidence in the commanders for a variety of reasons. These come in the wake of a tour he conducted last year around the Corps, seeking to impart a sense of moral and ethical accountability back into the Corps, and hold individuals and commanders accountable.

There is a media dustup that neither the 2-star responsible for Bastion/Leatherneck, nor subordinates, have received public scrutiny for the calamity that ensued from the raid.

We erely needed to look back on the days of David Stirling and 'L' Detachment, to know it was not only possible, but inevitable.

[davidbfpo]

Well the USMC Commandant has acted now, with the WaPo headline 'Two Marine generals fired for security lapses in Afghanistan' and their removal, and likely retirement:
The commandant, Gen. James F. Amos, said the two generals did not deploy enough troops to guard the base and take other measures to prepare for a ground attack by the Taliban. The two, Maj. Gen. Charles M. Gurganus, the top Marine commander in southern Afghanistan at the time, and Maj. Gen. Gregg A. Sturdevant, the senior Marine aviation officer in the area, “failed to exercise the level of judgment expected of commanders of their rank,” Amos said.

Link:http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/two-marine-generals-fired-for-security-lapses-in-afghanistan/2013/09/30/b2ccb8a6-29fe-11e3-b139-029811dbb57f_story.html

Now what will happen here, in the UK? As WaPo says:
The British are responsible for guarding Bastion

[SWJ Blog]

Marine Generals Ousted After Bastion Attack (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/marine-generals-ousted-after-bastion-attack)

Entry Excerpt:



--------
Read the full post (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/marine-generals-ousted-after-bastion-attack) and make any comments at the SWJ Blog (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog).
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.