Where was the interest in Afghanistan between 2002-2008 when the current situation was put in to place? Essentially a strategic vacuum for six years. The emphasis of the US and UK was on Iraq which was very much a “war of choice” facilitated by the precedence of the Afghan campaign of 2001.

The policy in 2001 was in Clausewitzian terms the total overthrow of the Taliban government and its replacement with . . . well that is the problem is it not? A war of unlimited war aims instititgated by the US/NATO as a response to 9/11. The response did not really fit the cause, which could have been the suppression of Al Qaida in Afghanistan but with the retention of the Taliban government since we had nothing to replace it with. Instead, following Bush, NATO chose an essentially unlimited war for the (re)making of Afghanistan . . . something that we had not the resources or will to undertake.

The leaks are simply a result/characteristic of the political/policy confusion at the highest levels which has been in place since 2001 . . . blame the politicos, not wikileaks.

I would suspect that if they want to know how we operate at a tactical and operational level they simply need to open their eyes, ears and mouths.

Perhaps the words ‘precisely nothing’ were a bit too strong, how about ‘almost precisely nothing’

I will change the post because you are right, there is a very slim outside chance that there may be something of value

Accusing me of not being troubled by endangerment to NATO troops is precisely wrong though, I care a lot, just because I don’t see much value in this storm in a teacup does not change that.

All the column inches and time being devoted to this nonsense is time and column inches not being devoted to things of more importance to those NATO soldiers you seem to think I don’t care about.

Just a thought

Specifically is this leak this wars Pentagon Papers (my guess is not but who knows) and (as mentioned in the OP) does this constitute anything new that we didnt know.

I do think there is a mine of small data to be pulled from such information, certainly when it’s in such bulk but unlike the Pentagon Papers this appears to be in the raw and not processed.

If anything it may turn out to be the footnotes to the failure of operations in Afghanistan and the fact that there is an elephant in the room.

You said the leaked intelligence reports “reveal precisely nothing that isn’t already well known“. As other commenters here have pointed out, the leaked reports will certainly give hints as to how ISAF conducts operations, tactics, and how they relate to locals in ways that the enemy can and will exploit. You seem to be dismissing this because the reports are at least 18 months old. First of all, I’m not clear how December 2009 (which is the date the Grauniad gives as the end of the covered period) to July 2010 is 18 months. Perhaps you got confused about which year this is. Even if it had been 18 months and not 7, how quickly do you think tactics change? How quickly do hitherto friendly locals move house?

Charitably, I infer that you realise you made an error of overstatement in saying the reports reveal “precisely nothing”. I don’t know why you’re sticking to that.

Finally, do you seriously and honestly believe that the Taleban and AQ’s intelligence people aren’t poring over every one of those reports, looking for stuff that will help their efforts? Do you seriously and honestly believe they won’t find stuff that will materially help them in their operational methods and/or who to target? I genuinely would like to know your view on these points.

Just because I question the actual value beyond the shock horror then I don’t care about ISAF or local forces is clearly rather a jump. This will be hyped by the newspapers for weeks to come but will make precisely zero difference to anything that matters.

You say ‘likely’, have you read them all then, the youngest is over 18 months old.

I think it is over hyped and the more we foam and froth the more we prolong things.

The left will hail it as a great victory for free speech and a vindication of their objections and the right will complain about OPSEC and raise the demons of ISAF casualties being caused by the leaks.

From the ones I have read and the analysis so far in the newspapers they don’t see to tell us anything we or the Taleban did not already know.

If this is subsequently changes then fair enough, I will change my view but as it stands I think we should be concerning ourselves with the conduct of operations driven by a coherent strategy not with the release of a load of low level data from 18 months ago.