Posted on 03/13/2012 7:43:10 AM PDT by Cocoa2012
Right now, our troops are being used as props in a campaign year, as pawns by dull-witted generals who just don’t know what else to do, and as cash cows by corrupt Afghan politicians, generals and warlords (all of whom agree that it’s virtuous to rob the Americans blind).
What are our goals? What is our strategy? We’re told, endlessly, that things are improving in Afghanistan, yet, ten years ago, a U.S. Army general, unarmed, could walk the streets of Kabul without risk. Today, there is no city in Afghanistan where a U.S. general could stroll the streets. We may not have a genius for war, but we sure do have a genius for kidding ourselves...
www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.11585/pub_detail.asp
(Excerpt) Read more at familysecuritymatters.org ...
That’s right, and the Taliban don’t pose a threat to the region at all. They are not a real takeover risk in Nuclear Armed Pakistan either. And they don’t seek to carry out terrorist attacks on foreign nation’s soil.
Other than that, a brilliant presentation.
Does anybody besides me think it is odd that we still know so little about this soldier? Makes me wonder a bit about his religion, race, political belief, etc.
Somehow, if he were Billy Bob So and so, from the deep South, NRA member, devout Christian, Anglo Saxon, male, I’m pretty sure the left stream media would have screamed it.
I’m still waiting for the other shoe to drop on this story.
Where is the outrage?
(Not that I am a supporter of him, but will he ever get traction off of this hopeless situation and "quagmire" we have once again gotten ourselves in, in a place that if you had a global map with borders but without country labels probably only 5% of Americans could put their index finger on "Afghanistan"--and yet we are to send so many young men and women there to die under Obama, Clinton, Biden and Panetta.
Why no ID on the rogue soldier?
Maybe he’s a Muslim- or maybe he’s an ‘African-American’.
Normal coverup by the MSM. They only point out the negative with our troops when it is Republican in office.
Prove it.
I've heard that this guy is a sniper, was on his fourth deployment, is thirty-eight years old, had at some point in time set his wife on fire and had a serious and debilitating head injury This are several things here that don't make sense. That he had attacked his wife in such a manner should have set-off some alarm bells, not to even mention the head injury.
In the military world that I come from, it would be highly unusual for a person to be thirty-eight years of age and still a Staff Sergeant. I recall that, in the AF, certain limits were set on rank and years of service. All of these things are variable over time and need of course, but I believe that Staff Sergeants (E-5) were not allowed to remain in service past fourteen years. But maybe he was a damned good sniper.
Little facts continue to creep out on this incident but I believe that we'll never know the entire truth. The whole truth could be embarrassing to the administration and to the military and will likely not be released.
After ten years of war, budget cuts and ridiculous ROE maybe the military is that stretched.
What I notice about this incudent is that those in charge, president, Sec of State, Sec of Defetse, etc have shot off their mouths before the facts were/all determined. This is one sure sign of poor leadership at its worse. I too have wondered why an ID was not made on the E 5. May God have mercy on this country.
What I find totally unbelievable about this story is that the village did nothing to stop him. This is a people that will kill their own kids for supposedly dishonoring the family. That believes that suicide bombing is ok. Yet not one tries to stop him in the actual act, sounds more like a set up to me.
I believe that there was more than likely a very specific issue that this Staff Sergeant was seeking to address by his actions. Was this family involved in some way in the deaths of this man’s fellow troops?
If the guy was totally broken, I don’t think he would have gone back to base and turned himself in. He seems to have made a calculated decision to remedy some situation, and face the full range of penalties.
I hope that we do find out what was up at some point in time.
I personally think our troops are being undercut by rules of engagement directed by Barack Obama himself, and filtered down on the troops by our Generals. So I am sympathetic to the points made in this article. Perhaps it’s a great article if this guy wishes to remedy the situation. If he’s merely going to demand a pull-out, he’s going to lose me there.
There actually is a reason why we’re there in the region. It’s a good reason. As bad as things look with us there, I’m not convinced they get a lot worse when we’re not there.
I’m not convinced they DON'T get a lot worse when we’re not there.
Here is Churchill's question and his answer to his policy in waging the second world war:
"You ask, What is our policy? I will say; “It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us: to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy.” You ask, What is our aim? I can answer with one word: Victory…"
Have we learned nothing in more than half a century?
Can anybody articulate a coherent policy out of the Obama administration concerning militant Islam, the so-called Arab spring, Iran getting the bomb, our occupation of and playing at war in Afghanistan, the militant Islamic crescent forming from Afghanistan and extending the Atlantic shores of Morocco?
What is our policy?
I agree. There is a lot more to this story and we (Citizens) will probably never get the facts.
I was watching Huckabee the other night and he had the Father of a wounded soldier on. His son could not get treatment needed. There are many others in that same boat.
Totally unacceptable. We send our brave men and women off to war, then they should receive anything they need if they are wounded.
I was in the US Army from 1964-1968. The tour of duty was 13 months for Viet Nam. 18 Months for Marines. Our guys now are in combat for several tours. This is not right.
What this soldier did was not right; however we don't have much to go on. We probably will never get all the facts. If he had severe brain damage, then some higher ups if they knew should be held accountable.
Do you have a link that he’d set his wife on fire at one point?
There’s a lot we don’t know. Women and children? Maybe, but as far as I know we just have the word of Afghan Muslims on that.
Maybe he was just crazy. Or maybe it has some connection with the American troops who were murdered by the Muslims over that Koran incident—although, typically, those whom they killed had nothing to do with the Koran burnings. There is a time connection on that, although it might just be a coincidence. Or maybe the added pressure was what made him snap.
On another note, there is a story going around that the Obama Communists want to unionize the military—an international union, under the UN and NATO. The obvious way to do it is to behave unfairly to the troops, and increase their anger at their leaders, or bosses. How better to do it than for Obama to apologize to the Muslims when they kill our men, and then threaten to punish the five guys who were just doing the job they were told to do, burning those Korans with the terrorist notes written in them. No matter which side kills the other, Obama always punishes our troops and apologizes to the Muzzies.
Kind of neat. Obama treats the troops worse and worse, with the intention of getting what he wants—gay-infested military, downsized, severely underequipped, and unionized. He plays the part of the unfair boss, but in the end he brings them into the public union/Democrat coalition.
“Here is Churchill’s question and his answer to his policy in waging the second world war:”
An even more telling fact: before the war even ended, the English people turned Churchill out of office.
That is the event I use to mark the point at which civilized societies began to lose their minds! What we are seeing today is just a continuing of that madness.
The conventional wisdom is that the English were tired of living on half rations but Clement Attley's socialist policies kept the British, the winners, on half rations until even after the Germans, the losers, had recovered their more market oriented economy from literal ruins.
In fact, socialism drove Britain to the point of anarchy and disintegration only to be saved by Margaret Thatcher two decades later. It seems the remedy for failed socialism always more socialism until there is no more to confiscate.
I guess it is human nature to follow the Pied Piper and to shoot the messenger and that is what they did to Churchill.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.