‘Precise Synchronization’ Part II
Building on yesterday’s question of how “precisely” Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s Afghanistan strategy is “synchronized,” take a look at Brandon Friedman’s post at VetVoice. Brandon reads a CBS report about U.S. troops distributing a flyer to two villages in eastern Afghanistan that appears to tell the entire villages they “will be targeted” unless a captured colleague is freed. He observes:
“„Ultimately, I think whoever came up with the idea to print these things didn’t really think it through. While the likelihood of success using a technique like this is slim, the chance of inflaming the locals even further is much higher. This whole thing seems clumsy and ham-handed, and will almost certainly do more harm than good. I’d love to be proved wrong.
How does threatening villages — even implying that villages will be targeted — comport with McChrystal’s message that mission success is measured by population protection?
For more questions about the “precise synchronization” of McChrystal’s strategy, see Josh Foust in World Politics Review.
