"Nice knowing you Middle East. It hasn't been fun and we're leaving now. Go ahead and kill yourselves and drink your oil. We're going to use our own."
If only that could be true... :frown:
We just need to bring all our troops home and send drones with "sensitivity" training back in their place.
Of course. By mere proximity he should be MORE connected, but alas, my assumption may be incorrect.Quote:
This assumes it is not Gen. Allen that is suffering the disconnect does it not?
As a problem, I would expect the military to explore all avenues. Having said that, the military has a number of bright talented individuals with advanced or terminal degrees in numerous different fields of study. I have no doubt they have some extremely bright and dedicated folks in Leavenworth and elsewhere. I would hope they are given free rein to explore and study all avenues, not merely those politically expedient. The risk may well be a certain collection of circumstances exacerbates the likelihood of an adverse event. The thesis of the Manual appears, however, to my untrained eye, to be politically expedient and perhaps simplistic? Maybe I am merely reading the Cliff Notes and should hold my tongue.......
Anyway, regardless of the above, if I have offended anyone, particularly any members here, please accept my heartfelt apology. I have not intended to disrespect anyone that has served or is serving, and I certainly hope I have not opened or reopened sores best left alone. I am sorry.
I think Israel provides the USA with significant value in intelligence and other clandestine matters, just as many of our other allies which we support in a financial and in a military manner. The world is fluid, our allies and co-joiners today may well be different in the future. Examples are numerous and inlcude The Shah of Iran; Nasser, Stalin and others. Israel is an ally now, and foreseeably into the future. The are a democracy and have many attributes sorely lacking otherwsie in the Mid-East.Quote:
Also, I didn't really read anything in your posts that would give anyone a good reason to be offended. It might have been directed at the military in general, but I suppose if they are in the military they should get some thicker skin or just hit the back button.
I doubt that the people who drafted the Field Manual/handbook are in the military but are General Service (GS) civilian employees.
Originally Posted by Rotorhead84
You have proof of this?Quote:
"They kill us because they quite literally have not a single clue as to what is going on. One second they're minding their own business trying to manage day to day existence on this planet and a helicopter full of Marines shows up and starts killing everything. Destroying their homes, killing the livestock they desperately need to survive, etc. But why? Well they don't know. They have not even the slightest clue as to why we are in their country, or why we hunt the Taliban. And it angers them and pushes some of them to the breaking point."
My thoughts is that we're overly concerned about avoiding collateral damage instead of killing them all and letting Allah sort them out. It's hard for the politicos to win hearts and minds when they're all expired.
I have not read the handbook (yet)...but I did spend 365 days working directly with the Afghans (Afghani is their money).
In my time working with them, there were only 1 or 2 who I thought were worth anything...as military officers and professionals.
The rest? --> Afghan forces engage in thievery, are "gutless in combat," are "basically stupid," "profoundly dishonest," and engage in "treasonous collusion and alliances with enemy forces."