Aye, that would be the one, the 1842 Retreat from Kabul. Terrible mess that was, and well deserving of its entry in that book.
The NATO-Afghan war...I think would belong in three and four, with a touch of two. The actual invasion plans were sound, the military operations fairly straightforward. It was everything after that went wrong. NATO went into Afghanistan thinking that a) there would be minimal insurgent activity post-victory, and b) that they would be welcomed as liberators by the local populace and be able to westernise and 'free' the public. It backfired completely and while a great deal of Afghan general public are indeed much happier for the presence of NATO forces in Afghanistan...they also know that when they leave, it's the Soviet withdrawal all over again.
The Soviet one, I honestly couldn't say, I think perhaps again an underestimation of the strength of the insurgent activity, although that was aided by the US.
Out of interest and since I haven't read the book, which commander do they refer to as incompetant in the Charge of the Light Brigade at Balaclava? The only one that I could think of, really, would be Captain Nolan for his vague response to Lucans question of what guns to attack. Raglans plan was good, but the communication between Raglan and Lucan was poor and that's primarily what lead to the disasterous charge. Although admittedly, Lucans refusal to commit the Heavy Brigade was rather daft although in hindsight probably saved a lot of them from being mown down.
Cardigan was a bit of a jerk, but it wasn't really his decision to mount the charge.
