I was less concerned about the manpower versus mission thing than the fact the force they did have did not appear to be well employed, was not using fire discipline, locating themselves where an 81 could do some serious damage etc. They never had the initiative. They were targets the whole way.
I guess the armor changes the way you approach that.

If they "cleared" the hamlet it only stayed clear for about 30 minutes after they left. If you rae taking ground, hold it. If you are hunting bad guys then there are better ways than walking into a situation where they chose the time and place to engage you.

Two more points:
an associate pointed out that they carry lots of gear. I don't see how you move quickly or quietly with all that gear, let alone the armor. I wonder if the tactics are not being dictated by the amount of gear they drag around.

finally, I don't believe that inconclusive engagements like this bear to our advantage. When they can engage us and break it off when they choose (as was the case here-that platoon had no chance to pursue), they are learning how we fight and we are simply weeding out the less competent ones. In a sense we bred a better insurgent. If we have the initiative, we can engage when it is decisive for the units involved and when we can inflict substantial casualties. If we do that, they don't get better with each engagement but when we let them make that choice we are just a teaching vehicle