Welcome to PatsFans.com

Our generals are betraying our soldiers

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DarrylS, Oct 1, 2007.

  1. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,845
    Likes Received:
    90
    Ratings:
    +151 / 3 / -19

    No this is not from move on, but from a source whose name shall not be mentioned, Col. Hunt has a strange way of framing issues.. maybe he will pull a Rush, first say it, then delete part of it and say he did not say it..

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298203,00.html

    Our generals are betraying our soldiers … again

    Sorry, but I have to get your attention on this one. In both Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States Army — not the much maligned “LIBERAL PRESS” or BILL CLINTON or the LIBERALS IN CONGRESS — NO, the UNITED STATES MILITARY is prosecuting its soldiers for doing their jobs. I have tried, I have yelled, I have used nasty words. I have even tried to use humor, but none of this is sticking. You either do not believe me … or much worse, you do not care.

    We did one of these stories on O’Reilly last week. Two great Special Forces soldiers, along with their team, tracked down a terrorist who was on the 10 Most Wanted list in Afghanistan. The Special Forces soldiers were operating under the much-hated rules of engagement, which said to capture or kill the bad guy, who was a bomb maker and terrorist leader. The soldiers followed this killer to his house/compound, used guile and trickery and lured the waste of life out of his lair and put a bullet in his head.

    It was a perfect operation — a “Nice going guys,” high fives, take the day off, “Get ready for the next one,” type of operation. So how do you think our Special Forces soldiers were rewarded — or if not rewarded, treated — after this? THEY ARE BROUGHT TO TRIAL, INVESTIGATED AND FORCED TO SPEND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR LAWYERS.

    These poor excuse for officers do not deserve the soldiers they dare claim they lead. We as a nation had better go out and find us another Marshall, who at the beginning of World War II fired hundreds of senior officers because they were not cutting it. We need him today, as many of our senior officers are way overdue for a one-way trip to the woodshed.
  2. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,731
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +249 / 3 / -2

    Why would he want to delete anything he is saying? Do you know what his point is, or are you simply misreading another article? His point is that the military, or the command in the military, is being far to PC dogooder. I think it's partly because of all the people in both the public, and the press, that has vilified our guys for the last 4 years. When you focus so much more on putting underwear on an inmates head, and not enough on operations to save children who need medical attention, you get a command that wants to prove it's accountable.
  3. bmf31c

    bmf31c Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

  4. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    .


    Just on the face of what you have posted here in this thread-starter, all one has to do is look at Washington, where the liberal-left wing types are salivating over their prospects to "get back into the game big-time". If anyone doubts that this does not filter down to the officer corps, you are woefully ignorant. The officer corps of the U.S. military is, by nature, permanently tuned into what goes on in politics; it's the way they plan for the future. It's a necessity. If you don't know what's coming down the pike, you get blind-sided. And every soldier knows that's the worst thing that can happen: getting blind-sided.

    So, it is absolutely no surprise that, with the current anti-Iraq war attitude bubbling up out of Capitol Hill, these soldiers resort to the timely tradition of C.Y.A -- cover your ass. Because in war, if you don't CYA, nobody else will.




    //
  5. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Not surprised about this, I think it is shameful and asks too much of our soldiers to have to operate within these ridiculous guidelines. I'm glad (if its true) that charges won't go forward. I'm not going to blame the liberals here GJAJ15 like some others have done. The blame resides squarely on the officers, they should be operating in the best interests of their men, not poorly thought out rules of engagement. As someone else said, they need to start looking out for their men or get out and let someone with some sense start making decisions.
  6. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0



    Personally, I heartily concur with your sentiments. Would that war were as neat and pretty as we think it should be. But human beings being what they are will almost always look out for the guy in the mirror before anyone else; and that goes doubly so for military personnel whose lives are constantly on the line.

    Which is why I advocate a moratorium on ALL military action by U.S. forces for the future; ONLY if directly attacked by a military force should we wheel out our own military; if it is an attack by a few radicalized fanatics -- a la 9/11 -- we need to deal with it by using appropriate counter-measures: micro-surgery is far better for the patient than whacking him with a machete; and healing is done as much by good "bed-side manner" as it is with scalpels and medicines.


    //
  7. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,672
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    I agree 100% (No...I'm not drunk)
  8. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0



    Bully good!! Let's get elected!



    //
  9. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,672
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    Not a chance...I'm a Libertarian loser:(
  10. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0



    As Tom always says: we got to keep getting better.

    I like that sentiment!! Also: where there's a will, there's a way!! Especially if it is the will of God.



    //
  11. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,845
    Likes Received:
    90
    Ratings:
    +151 / 3 / -19

    So I guess that operating within the expectations that the US Gov't has placed on them is not efficient? Therefore the officers on the ground can employ situational ethics and make judgements on their own..

    Don't get me wrong, the issue is war here and our rules of engagement, officers have no choice except to operate within the framework of the military, if they do not then we have a poorly paid Blackwater.

    It might be difficult to completely replace all of the Military chain of command, as you suggested, this is what is expected of the military when we are agressors on foreign soil and when we occupy countries.
  12. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,242
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +20 / 3 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    A little something sent from a friend,a Captain serving in Iraq sent this to me to read. Thought I'd share it. A little snipit

    America's generals have repeated the mistakes of Vietnam in Iraq. First, throughout the 1990s our generals failed to envision the conditions of future combat and prepare their forces accordingly. Second, America's generals failed to estimate correctly both the means and the ways necessary to achieve the aims of policy prior to beginning the war in Iraq. Finally, America's generals did not provide Congress and the public with an accurate assessment of the conflict in Iraq.


    2) http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/05/2635198
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2007
  13. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I'm not advocating replacing the entire chain of command, I'm guessing that many officers see the difficulty of the situation as it stands for the guys in the field. Also, who makes the call on rules of engagement? Is it the White House? The Joint Chiefs? I honestly don't know, but whoever it is, that is where the blame starts.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>