"NATO officials reported that nine soldiers were killed in the Kunar attack but did not specify the nationalities, in accordance with the policy of letting member countries report them first. A senior military official in Washington said that all nine were American.
The Kunar attack also left at least 15 other NATO soldiers — almost certainly Americans — and 4 Afghan soldiers wounded, and it was one of at least three significant attacks on Sunday, including a devastating suicide bombing in a southern city’s bazaar that killed at least 25 people, 20 of them civilians.
This year of the Afghanistan war is already proving to be the deadliest since the American-led invasion. Bush administration officials are now considering a redeployment of troops to Afghanistan from Iraq to help deal with the rising threat." NY Times
A single tactical event such as this attack in Kunar is of interest in itself, but may be the result of local circumstances of terrain, misjudgment, good judgment, weaponry, sheer numbers, weather or any number of other factors singly or in combination. The command will undoubtedly examine the event to decide what happened. Evidently, the hostiles penetrated the position before they were repulsed. That is not good. The difference between that and losing the position altogether is often just a matter of luck and passing determination on the part of some of the defenders. Evidently the action lasted several hours. I would be curious to know if the position was reinforced by air during the battle and how much fire support the garrison was given.
The fact that there were several other attacks more or less simultaneous to this one, that is worrisome. It
That may be reflective of a new ability to command and organize on the part of the hostiles.
Information would be welcomed. pl