I love when he talks of flanks and feints

Confederate Yankeepops a vein over a NYT article in his post–“Shocker: NY Times Decries Laughably Incompetent Taliban Rout As “Complex Attack.”First he lists all that was not mentioned in the article such as flanking attacks and feints and camouflage and interlocking fields of fire so we know he’s an expert on this I guess.

He then concludes:

The attack on the French base, by contrast, had far more deadly
ramifications, with 10 French soldiers killed and another 21 wounded,
but for theTimes to try to inflate the importance or the
complexity of the Taliban attack on Camp Salerno beyond the buffonish,
ill-advised and utter failure that it was isn’t simply bad reporting,
but verges on making excuses for the other side

What Confederate Yankee doesn’t mention is this from theNYT article:

Insurgents have increased their use of roadside bombs and suicide bombs
but have also shown a growing sophistication with several
well-organized, complex operations employing multiple attackers and
different types of weapons systems, NATO officials say.(my emphasis)

So its not the NYT but NATO officials who called it “complex.”

All this also reminds me of the lede of a June article in that dirty hippie lefty bastion…Stars and Stripes:

ARLINGTON, Va. — Attacks against U.S. troops in Afghanistan are increasingly
sophisticated and complex, the senior U.S. commander in the country said
(my emphasis)

3 thoughts on “I love when he talks of flanks and feints

  1. Traitors! All traitors.
    Dolchstoß, I say. And sheer Bolshevism!
    Especially Stars and Stripes. Those Commie Nazi Islamopinkos.

  2. So NATO is like saying that the insurgents have learned better ways of attack (concurrent with our helpful influence )??

Comments are closed.