Helmand: reality -v- spin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JustJrEnlisted
Little America demonstrated quite convincingly that Helmand acquired outsized importance simply due to it being the terrain the USMC wanted. Then the extremely competent USMC propaganda machine went into overdrive, convincing many of the strategic importance of Helmand. I spent most of 2012 there, and could easily see that the gains made were not tenable. I certainly agree with you that the Afghan government realizes Helmand is not strategically significant, and has only committed troops in any number there to mollify the US and UK. ANSF will be quickly redeployed to more critical areas within the next year or 2.
The Vice documentary "This is What Winning Looks Like" is an incredibly accurate portrayal of Helmand.
JJE,
I've not read 'Little America' and the cited film appears to be one I missed. It is by Ben Anderson, an intrepid sometime BBC reporter whose work and views have appeared on SWC before.
This is a link to the documentary (90 mins) and accompanying text:http://www.vice.com/en_uk/vice-news/...ke-full-length
Something to watch later when the football is on.:D
Snatching defeat from victory
A long detailed report on the mistakes made in Helmand, that predated the current fighting around Sangin, from the Afghanistan Analysts Network (AAN), the full title is:
Quote:
Snatching defeat from victory: How ISAF infighting helped doom Sangin to its ongoing violence
Link:https://www.afghanistan-analysts.org...oing-violence/
Everyone gets a mention, IMHO it dissects much of what SWC have discussed about this 'small war'. Indeed in places you can get lost at the pace of themes and places: Marjah, 'government in a box', the UK PRT, civilian advice if not direction, human terrain, negoitation with the Taliban etc.
Hitting a potentially defecting local Taliban leaders meeting with 500 pound bomb(s) I expect prompts the article's title.