I've never read this Foust fellow in the past and I probably won't in the future after seeing how quickly he turned things personal and catty. Good on the LTC for maintaining a professional detachment after someone basically accuses him of being a criminal in order to get a good OER.

I applaud LTC Flynn's willingness to engage a blogger, but he still didn't answer some of Josh Foust 's questions. For example, in the first section Flynn quotes, Josh raises the question of the legality of Flynn's arming of the militia. Flynn answers with a lot of blustery brouhaha about their process for arming the militia, but never actually says if all of this is in keeping with General Patraeus's orders and legal restrictions, which is what Foust was getting at. We are still left to wonder. And are they just straight up beating people in the street? No answer there either.

Foust's style was certainly inflamed and could be toned down, but his questioning of the strategic benefit to razing operation still stands. (More here: http://www.registan.net/index.php/2011/01/18/talking-tacitcs-with-andrew-exum/ ) And LTC Flynn's response could probably do without all the belittling of Foust. (e.g. "Orator at a desk in Washington") There are a lot of well meaning and thoroughly knowledgeable "orators" at a "desk in Washington." Foust has lived and traveled extensively in Central Asia and has come by his right to an opinion the hard-earned and honest way. Exum and Foust touch on it in the above link, so there isn't much else there to say.

You know I am certain there are a few careerist officers who only care about their OER, but I would measure them in the gross minority. In any effect anyone who has made it to the position of Battalion Commander has already all but secured his 20 year retirement. Ever since I have known of such things completing a successful Battalion command - esp a combat arms command - has been the very mark of a career well-done. In today's Army I don't see much compelling beyond that, though I suppose there are some with stars in their eyes looking for stars.

Regardless the notion that every Battalion Cdr out there is looking for a byline in the next Fiasco book or just looking out for their OER is stupid and offensive.

While Flynn didn't answer every charge he was far more diplomatic than I might have been in dealing with a guy who basically accused him of multiple crimes in the book. But let's let no good deed go unpunished.

LTC Flynn's responses are not comforting nor do they really address the questions and issued posed by Foust.

Yes, Foust may ave been unnecessarily snarky, something I was complaining about just yesterday on this blog but really, these sort of techno-speak acronym-laden answers remind me of what professional officers justifying inane projects in Vietnam sounded like.

None of this makes me any more sanguine about our prospects in Afghanistan.

The analogy would be levelling Washington DC or Tel Aviv to kill all the terrorists that operate and reside there. Not only is it incredibly inhumane and disproportionate, but many more terrorists would be inspired by such an event. The war is over, you lost. Go home. Save your cannon fodder for another hopeless war of aggression.

I read a determined officer who sees the way to complete his deployment by making progress on the mission right in front of him. He is on board with, if not rigidly following, his commanding general's counterinsurgency doctrine. He thinks of Afghan army troops as his brothers (by inference, as his own soldiers' brothers as well, an assessment I'd like to hear them confirm themselves), and he is cautiously optimistic that his Joint Task Force will end up serving as a kind of cast or splint on the Arghandab District of Afghanistan until the injury inflicted on the area by the death of a Alikozai tribal elder has healed.

Boy, are we ever in the soup. Col. Flynn is just putting one foot in front of the other, doing the best he can with what he has got until his deployment ends, and he thinks that is good enough. He has men under his command at risk while his Task Force burns through ordnance and supplies like a blowtorch, all to restore the tribal balance of power in one valley in southern Afghanistan.

I don't expect someone in his position to wonder in print if the strategy to which he's being asked to contribute advances American interests; that kind of question is above his pay grade. Nor do I expect a serving officer to publish comments even suggesting doubt about whether his mission makes any sense. But my goodness: the description Col. Flynn has given about what his Task Force is doing in the Arghandab manages to generate all manner of questions and doubt about whether the American command in Afghanistan is pursuing objectives valuable to us.

Mr. Foust. If you think there is a problem, set it out and describe it. Don't suggest someone is doing something for the sake of getting a good Officer Evaluation Report. Assume good faith. As soon as you accused your target of doing this for the sake of an OER, you lost me.

LTC Flynn: As for the "legalities" of the situation, you aren't a JAG, and you shouldn't be tripped up by a bunch of pettifogging barracks lawyers sitting 8,000 miles away. Get the job done and use your best judgment to execute the mission. That's why the taxpayers (should) pay you the big bucks.

Signed,
-A non-pettifogging former barracks lawyer sitting 8,000 miles away.

LTC Flynn's response took big ones. I'm very glad he responded and disappointed that many had trouble reading his response objectively.

He pointed out that the recruits will not be issued weapons until what sounds like too many bureaucrats chop on their clearances. In such a society, only the elders and his neighbors can vouch for him. The addition of so many others sounds like opportunities for graft. In addition, the police are *said* to be the most corrupt element in Afghan society. (See Wanat.)

He appears to be making the most of the resources in his AOR.

He chose not to comment upon the bombing of the village and that would have been helpful. Of course he is irritated when someone calls him a criminal after he has devoted 20 months of his life in that part of Afghanistan! As befits his position, he controls himself well.

One observation, however, is that this is happening in only 4 of 38 villages. That's not his fault, but it shows that there is a long road in front of us - too long a road.

Please tell me that not all 38 villages need a self-defense force.

Finally, Foust uses more acronyms than Flynn. If you want to communicate with the public, you need to either toss them or use standard US government style standards and follow the full spelling of a term with (its abbreviation in parenthesis) the first time it is used. Thereafter, you can just use the acronym. Mr. Foust probably uses them so liberally to show that he belongs.