Slashdot Mirror
Meet the Men Who Deploy Airstrikes
Lanxon writes "Wired followed US Army Staff Sergeant Kevin Rosner into Afghanistan to see first-hand the tools, tactics, and pressures involved in coordinating military airstrikes. This lengthy piece explores the people and technology involved in high-risk airborne warfare, from their perspective. From the article: 'Strapped to his chest, Rosner carries a handheld video player called a "Rover," built by L3 Communications, a New York-based defense contractor. The device, the size and shape of a PSP game console and costing tens of thousands of dollars, reads signals transmitted by the camera pods strapped to the underside of all NATO fighter aircraft. With his Rover, Rosner can see everything a pilot sees, from the pilot's perspective. On his back he carries a radio programmed with secure frequencies that tie him directly to the pilots overhead and to his unit's headquarters, several miles away. At the headquarters, another JTAC monitors a bigger, more sophisticated video terminal that displays the same video Rosner sees, plus other data.'"
You're going to get modded down desperately for that, but your statement is sadly oh so true, up until at least the "for". Whether it's just greed or a more complex mix of pride, greed, hubris and misguided hate and ambitions is another discussion.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
you're forgetting that all this expensive technology was at least partially developed to avoid mistakes leading to civilian casualties.
weinersmith
So, what's his key binding for deploying airstrikes? F5? S? shift-F?
My first program:
Hell Segmentation fault
They didn't explain why I have to get 5 kills to get an airstrike :(
As an Army qualified and certified JFO, let me just say that Air Force JTACs are some very highly trained individuals, many of which who could easily work for the FAA (as airspace deconfliction is one of their primary jobs and they're damn good at it). Close Air Support, or any sort of Fires Support for that matter, are very stressful and complicated tasks, and if your calculations or designation are wrong, 2000lb JDAMs can easily end up coming down on the heads of either friendlies or non-coms.
The Joint Service Joint Fires Observer course itself is no joke, and I can only imagine what type of training the JTACs themselves go through, but I have a very good idea.
The bullet points for why we invaded Iraq:
What they didn't consider:
Of course that's the simplified version but pretty much the way I see it.
Oh, the rest of the Bush Administration should have listened to Powell.
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
From TFA, Staff Sergeant Kevin Rosner is in the U.S. Air Force, not the U.S. Army.
Not fair to attack the individuals. They're regular people just doing what they're trained (and ordered) to do.
If, on the other hand you want to go after the political policies that put the individuals in that position in the first place, be my guest. I'm with you on that.
This ain't rocket surgery.
War is always economically-driven. It always has been, and always will be.
The pride, hubris, and misguided hate that you speak of are merely tools that are used by those in power to trick fools into dying in distant lands.
Not at all. Mistakes lead to the deaths of civilians and friendly forces.
Hello, Pedantic Man here...
reads signals transmitted by the camera pods strapped to the underside of all NATO fighter aircraft. With his Rover, Rosner can see everything a pilot sees, from the pilot's perspective
emphasis mine
Um... no, not quite the pilot's perspective. (Arguably, it's actually a better picture of the terrain beneath the nose of the aircraft than the pilot sees. But it's not the pilot's perspective- at least, I hope not!)
Please learn just a little bit about military history before you spout off such complete, utter nonsense.
Please correct the military branch. Its US Air Force Staff Sergeant Kevin Rosner, not US Army!
What they have volunteered to do.
While I am also uncomfortable with singling out the individuals who actually push the buttons which cause death, at some point we have to remember that the same "volunteer" military that has given the sons and daughters of wealth and privilege the ability to avoid being put in harm's way has also created a "warrior class" of people who for one reason or another, have chosen to participate in what are often the ugliest sanctioned acts that our society perpetrates, necessary or not.
It was the draft that created generations of Americans who each (except for the Dick Cheney's of the world, who will always find a way to get out of it somehow) have a direct connection to the defense of the country. It makes wars harder to start, when everyone is involved in a direct, physical way. The notion of a "professional" military class is in conflict with the beliefs of every single Founding Father, nearly all of whom believed that the US must never have a standing army, and that the kind of international adventurism which has defined all of our military actions since WWII should be avoided at all costs.
While it makes me uncomfortable to connect the faces of young American men and women with the sort of remote-control violence that much of our "wars" have become, it also makes me uncomfortable to say that those young men and women somehow had no moral involvement at all.
It's ugly business and I believe compulsory national service, like that of Israel or some European countries, is preferable to having professional soldiers who get "bonuses" for joining up and then get to wash their hands when innocents are killed.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Seriously. All students, please report to the battle room; or play more Modern Warfare.
*AppleTRON*
"High risk airborne warfare" ???? Are you afraid that an afghan made A4-paper-plane may shot down a N-billion dollar (tax-payer-paid) fighter?? Wake-up first-world guys!! And jokes about civil casualties are easy if you're 10 steps away of your full fridge and 10 minutes away from a super-if-you-have-the-money-market.
La culpa no es del chancho...
From TFA:
The device, the size and shape of a PSP game console and costing tens of thousands of pounds, reads signals transmitted by the camera pods strapped to the underside of all NATO fighter aircraft.
From TFS:
The device, the size and shape of a PSP game console and costing tens of thousands of dollars, reads signals transmitted by the camera pods strapped to the underside of all NATO fighter aircraft.
This kind of shit is totally insulting. This isn't even the old sawhorse of /. being a US site - this is just plain outright vandalism of TFA
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
I love all the self-promotional talk about how awesome these weapons are, I'd love to see what would happen when they deploy their unencrypted video streams and "secure" radio transmitters against an enemy that at least have weapon systems designed in the last 20 years. These "secure frequencies" would be like a huge flashing beacon when fighting an enemy that doesn't rely on AK-47s and blending in with the civilian population.
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
You do have a point. I guess I'm worried about the veterans of the Iraq/Afghanistan wars experiencing the same demonization that happened to Vietnam vets. Speaking as someone who was actively involved in the anti-war movement of the Sixties and Seventies, that's the single aspect of the entire endeavor I'm not proud of.
You're right that they volunteered, but they did it either out of a sense of patriotism--possibly misplaced patriotism, but patriotism none the less--or economic necessity. I know a number of young people who joined up because they had no other prospects. BTW, I agree that some sort of compulsory national service is called for, but only if there's an option for non-military service allowed.
As far as young American men and women having no moral involvement, that's a tough call. The thing is, there's a reason beyond mere physical strength and endurance that compels the military to chose young people and that's the fact that human brains aren't fully developed until about age 25. Young people haven't yet acquired either the life experience or synapses to make wise judgements on fine points of morality. That's why young people do the dumb stuff they do, and why they deserve at least a little bit of slack in this case.
This ain't rocket surgery.
Now the only thing left is to make the worker class, the religious class and the warrior class work together before the shadows come. As Valen has predicted.
Oh, and by the way, are you sure you're not just saying this because I wouldn't visit your farm, then dumped you on Facebook? Like I I told you, it's not you, it's me.
This ain't rocket surgery.
Slaughter: I don't think that word means what you think it means.
A choice between the bloodbaths that WW1 and 2 were, and this, is an easy choice.
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
Those recent revelations? You are referring to the video from wikileaks? I only saw two innocents - and they were dragged into a battle site by the opposition. Nice try at making villians of our guys though.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Please draw a moral distinction between: the side who goes to great pains to avoid casualties, versus the side whose stated goals are the massacre of innocents. Analyze the goals of each side and tell us why intentionally killing innocents helps or hinders each side. Bonus points for including the phrase "Bu$hitler".
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
I doubt the soldiers on the ground, the JTAC or the pilots are trying to hurt civilians (maybe a few really are, you can never really know). When the soldiers on the ground are in danger, the stress and need for quick action can easily make it hard to coordinate these airstrikes properly. If anyone is to blame, it is the higher-ups who set the policies and training procedures, and decide who should be piloting or calling in the strikes.
Using an engineering analogy, it's like an engineer designing a brake system that has unexpected failures (Toyota's specific problem is too rare to be a good analogy). The drivers who get people killed aren't at fault- they did as they were trained (through driver's ed/experience), but the system failed and people die. While no one was malicious about it, if anyone you have to blame the engineer for designing a faulty system, and to a lesser extent the government for not training drivers to better handle exceptional circumstances. The engineer has the responsibility to fix the braking system and ensure the faulty braking system is no longer used.
We make a huge deal out of civilian casualties- and we should- but I expect our military is putting more effort into balancing saving soldiers lives and saving civilian lives than any previous effort by any military since the development of long-range artillary. If we assume the military loves blowing things up as much as they can (which you seem to imply), they would still want to minimize civilian casualties. The better their track record is, the more freedom they have to keep using bombs at will. Unless you've performed these airstrikes yourself you shouldn't assume it's as easy as video games make you think.
My webcomic
Jeee-Zeus, Godwin'ing thread already? Give it a rest, the Nuremberg defence failed for your Nazi comrades and it isn't any better here.
Politicians wanting to get Iraq producing at 100% again and more importantly, not controlled by US haters, invade.
It would be nice if the actual politicians would invade themselves, instead of sending young boys to do their dirty work.
While it is true some volunteered after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan began, others were already in the service and though they may not agree with the policies of the administration, they still have a contract to fulfill. And then you have the other that are 15 years into their 20 year career, would you have them just throw that all way?
Yes it is a volunteer force... doesn't mean we agree with the wars.
*Disclaimer: I know what I'm talking about as much as the average slashdotter (not at all), so I defer to anyone with real knowledge on this should they disagree with any/all of my points.
My webcomic
Not fair to attack the individuals. They're regular people just doing what they're trained (and ordered) to do.
Why did the Allies/Soviets/and Post-Nazi-German government try and convict concentration camp guards?
Weren't they just "doing their jobs"?
No sir. If you doing something morally wrong... It makes it even worse if you are doing it for the money. Its a volunteer position after all.
Albeit, I don't think what these guys in the story are doing is wrong, but the "I was following orders" was used by many German and Japanese war criminals who swung on the gallows.
So please don't defend our troops with the same methodology. In fact, the US Military has rules to say our soldiers are supposed to disobey unlawful orders. Find something else to defend them with.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Thanks PopeRatzo and gyrogeerloose for having calm, rational, and civil points to make about this. My opinions are somewhere near or between you two and it's tough for me to grasp the complexity and the ethics of the battlefield. Clear, concise, and reasoned discussions are very much needed today.
who order truck bomb after truck bomb against iraqi civilians, killing many orders of magnitude more than the us (and on purpose, as oppposed to mistake), and now increasingly in pakistan and afghanistan, then i will listen to you
or more exactly, when you develop an ability to actually stop those guys, then i will listen to you
and i already known your answer: its all the fault of western imperialism, neocolonialism, oilthirst, etc
fella: if the usa turned into a giant lake tomorrow, the madmen bombing in the middle east would not celebrate and turn into pastoral sheep farmers. they would step up their aggression, and they would sow more suffering and destruction, because now there is nothing to hold them back
recognize that the fight going on the middle east is a lot larger than your small and simple recriminations
and recognize that the madmen in the middle east are not some cartoonish reflection of what the west does. they are their own original manifestation of all that you detest, but, for some reason, only see in western actions. you suffer from a form of blindness, you see only menace in one direction, when the menace in the other direction is the real enemy of your values
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Considering the american love affair with guns in general, why not just round up some random gun-toting militiamen and call that the US army ?
Now the world has gone to bed, Darkness won't engulf my head, I can see by infra-red, How I hate the night.
That would have held a lot more weight with me if you'd been brave and certain enough of your convictions to post without hiding behind anonymity.
And, if you'd actually, you know, read my comment, you would have noticed I'm not defending them being there in the first place. Also, if you weren't a troll, you would have been aware that there's a difference between what the Nazis did and a lawful order in combat.
Mistakes happen in war, which is one of thousands of very good reasons not to engage in it. I will match my life-long opposition to war with anyone else's.
This ain't rocket surgery.
Erm, what happened in Germany was legal on their laws at that time. Laws can be changed.
murder is murder.
And killing isn't always murder.
Can they send nukes from orbit?
One that hath name thou can not otter
First-world countries don't go to war because of an economic factor, never have, and the burden of proof is on you to back your ignorant comment up.
9/11 involved 17 Saudi Arabian hijackers. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy ruled by an Islamic leader. Saudi Arabia has a terrible human rights record, doesn't allow non-muslims to testify in court, and allows young girls to be raped by old men through arranged marriages. Hardly a democratic paradise. So, why did we decide to invade Iraq? First, they said it was revenge for working with Al Qaeda, which is pure bullshit. Then it was WMD, which is also pure bullshit. Now it's to spread freedom and democracy, which yet again pure bullshit, otherwise we would have invaded Saudia Arabia for reasons one and three.
Short answer: Saudi Arabia plays ball, does what we tell them, and Saddam Hussein did not. Iraq also happens to sit on unexploited oil resources. Consider the headline, "West Sees Glittering Prizes Ahead in Giant Oilfields," printed in the London Times in 2002. That pretty much says it all.
If you like, I can go back through the history of just the United States for our wars, fought either for power or economic reasons. We invaded many Latin American countries because they kicked out US corporations and tried to reaffirm ownership of their own resources. We overthrew the democratic government of Iran in 1953 in Operation AJAX to restore British and American access to their resources, mostly oil. We invaded the Philippines after they refused our attempt to annex them in 1898 after the war with Spain, which also involved Cuba.
We have denied the right of nations to self rule for hundreds of years, beginning with the Native Americans, and even as I type, we are denying the rights of Iraqis and Afghanis the right to determine their own future. Economically, we strive to destroy local economies in order to enrich our own, from opening up agriculture markets in Mexico to put millions of poor farmers out of work, or opening up "free trade zones" to allow manufacturers to create something akin to a slave labor camp to push up their profit margins, and ship local jobs overseas.
First world countries are usually first world countries because they have raped and pillaged the third world for labor and resources. This was true for the British Empire, where the sun never set, and the Irish said because God would never trust the English in the dark. We are the new empire. We have over 750 military bases around the world trying to maintain our empire. You, just like many other Americans, are simply in denial about it.
Let me guess, that's the highest you can count?
Or are you just a racist asshole that doesn't consider unarmed civilians innocent unless they are WASP Americans?
Not to mention journalists, people trying to help the wounded and kids.
It'd be nice if the young boys would stop enlisting to begin with.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
No, sadly enough, they are our are our eras baby "Vietnam". Haven't you been paying attention?
I agree with most of what you have to say, but there are some who volunteer for the military because they want to ensure that if in the unlikely event the United States does face some sort of external threat, there is a force in place to defend against that threat. The standing army also provides a means for deterring threats like that from coming up in the first place. These people dislike the "international adventurism," but are willing to put up with it for the reasons given above.
compulsory national service? No - no - no and again NO! Service for a country is full of people that cry and moan about taxes yet doesn't have a problem with a political system "of the rich, by the rich and FOR the rich"? A country that makes me pee in a bottle to keep my livelihood? A country that protects greedy CEO bastards? Not my sons!! Come and try to get them, I'll show you the second amendment. I support the young men and women that put their life on the line but if we had an HONEST government (run with a common sense), they wouldn't be there. We have Raygun Ronnie Retard to thank for the mess in that country.
Not fair to attack the individuals. They're regular people just doing what they're trained (and ordered) to do.
I seem to recall that defense working surprisingly well at the Nuremberg Trials too!
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Love to know about this - there's no such thing as a 'secure frequency', if you know it, you can jam it. I'm assuming 'secure' here obviously means more than 'we've switched to a new one they can't guess' - hoping and there's some cool spread-spectrum, channel jumping geekness occurring, or even better some new tech way beyond the levels of current software-defined radio open source stuff that's ahead of the game. I love radio - whether it be it cell phones, wifi, ham's bouncing signals off the moon or distant medium-wave broadcast stations fading in and out after dark, but it still leaves me worrying that one man with an expensive PSP and a transceiver in backpack can launch a missile strike with such easily comprimised communications.
What they have volunteered to do.
They didn't volunteer to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan.
and then get to wash their hands when innocents are killed.
That's military top-dog's responsibility. And the politicians' who don't push for "change". (In Vietnam a lot of people got away with fragging. Where was the hand of the law then? You know there aren't a lot of witnesses in a war zone, it's not the same as a crime in a city street.)
Hey, how did the draft prevent killing 4 million Vietnamese civilians?
Clear, concise, and reasoned discussions are very much needed today.
For reasoned discussions you need objective, accurate data, of which isn't an abundance of in the battlefields, as it's mainly chaos. It's the same chaos that fuels injustice and revenge.
It was the draft that created generations of Americans who each (except for the Dick Cheney's of the world, who will always find a way to get out of it somehow) have a direct connection to the defense of the country. It makes wars harder to start, when everyone is involved in a direct, physical way.
Bull. The decision to wage war has always been in the hands of those who would not be affected by a draft. If you are saying that those who were affected by a draft are less likely to wage war in the future, that's also bull. Look how many conflicts the US has been involved in in the past 25-30 years, when the Vietnam generation has been in charge.
I would argue with that; you have to remember that there were oil men from Texas in the White House.
My point being that the invasion of Iraq had NOTHING to do with lowering the price of energy, which would have been good for ALL of the American people; rather, it had to do with enabling a few people to increase their rate of wealth accumulation. Consider: The former objective is Democratic; the latter, Republican.
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
Compulsory national service, at least in the history of the United States, leads to poor services and terrible morale.
Having a tiny professional service that is bolstered by a draft isn't a good way to respond quickly either, look at World War 1 and 2, the small US professional services that were then bolstered by conscripts were slow to react, often poorly trained and often ineffectual.
The US declared war on the Central Powers in the spring of 1917, yet large formations were not available until the summer and fall of 1918. US build up for the Second World War began in the spring of 1940 and large units weren't available for Europe until the fall of 1942.
Large conscript armies, like the Cold War era US military from 1946-1975 were morale pits and many were combat ineffective when sent into combat in Korea and Vietnam.
The idea that it is harder to start a war if everyone has served is ridiculous, the Soviets were more than happy to sent young men into combat from Hungary, Czechoslovakia ad Afghanistan while the Americans, Israelis, British and French all had World War Two experienced leadership yet began adventures abroad.
The Founders of the United States could envision a nation without a standing army, they had a sea to protect them. Today a bomber can destroy Boston after a flight of 10 hours from Murmansk.
Regardless of the rightness of the occuptation, the Wired piece was naive military cheerleading. No attempt was made to do any investigation beyond the tidbits that the Army/AF doled out to the reporter. I think it was also pretty obvious from the text that he was no war correspondent.
Wired is not exactly known for getting U.S. military exclusives, so no doubt they jumped at this chance. But the text of the article was actually no more technical than I would have expected from some random NYT stringer. Secure frequencies? I think he also got a little confused about the strict meaning of "going kinetic." A Wired reporter got this story because he would be unqualified and uncritical.
Even if you fully support (ahem) "bringing democracy to the people of Afghanistan," you can't seriously claim you just read anything but a military press release.
the side who goes to great pains to avoid casualties
Which side would that be? It can be the US since they sure as hell started the whole war to begin with.
Considering the hardware I find it peculiar that they kill so many civilians. I guess the people meant to limit the amount of false positives are basically hillbillies. I guess good hardware has no effect as long as you do not train your forces to fight fair. No amount of "freedom" or technology can explain away the fact that the largest army on the planet are still basically just killing for fun / at random. I hope those stupid oil-/gass-wars end soon. I wonder if they would have if we invested all the money we currently invest in those wars in alternative energy. Considering that they evidentially have the needed technology to avoid civilian casualties; I guess not. :/
Whether one agrees or disagrees with my comment, it surely is not a troll (it's also on topic). I do hope the mods who did that get punished in M2. Moderation is not supposed to be used to suppress comments one finds disagreeable.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
If they stop enlisting the politicians will just reinstate the draft. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I love this logic.
It means you can drop large quantities of high-explosives and other munitions on a country, paralleling the total tonnage dropped in WWII on Germany, in the full knowledge there *will* be many civilian deaths - both immediate and over time (e.g. from the bomblets from cluster bombs, and various toxic effects of phosporus, DU, etc) and then say "Ah, but our intentions were noble". This logic is made doubly delicious when at the same time you claim that the insurgency side is "evil" because they set off bombs knowing they will kill civilians, even if they do so against military targets (convoys, bases, etc).
I find it pretty disgusting when people trot out what is surely a most classic case of Orwell's "double-think" in both justifying and condemning "collateral damage" at the same time.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
back out of the middle east?
ok
and the madmen in the middle east will do what then?
celebrate and go to sleep?
you suffer from a strange blindness
they are not going away. and not opposing them means they only grow stronger. and they do intend you and your values harm. this really is the truth. you cannot solve this problem by avoiding it
the substance of your complaint seems to be the death of civilians. which is a valid complaint, and the west does not desire those deaths. so the west should work mor eto avoid such deaths, i agree with that. but what is the other choice?
in reality, real choices are not simple ones between rainbow unicorns and horrible violence. in the real world, its complicated grey areas between horrible violence and maybe a little less horrible violence. recognize reality, and see the west needs ot be involved in the middle east, because there are men in the middle east who most certainly are involved in the west. then form a coherent opinion. currently you represent nothing but simplemindedness, ignorance and naivete
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
not done with drones - but how much easier it would be if you're even :-P
one more level detached from the reality?? when killing is like a videogame..
wiki-leaks video of airstrikes on reporters
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/04/05/wikileaks-video-of-u.html#more
would you like to address what i actually said? or are you only capable of thinking in simpleminded extremes of position that have nothing to do with my actual words?
the world is complicated, the middle east is involved in the west and west is involved in the middle east. nothing will ever change that
so talking about binary choices is not something i am doing. it is what you are doing. you are criticizing me for a position i am not taking. you are criticizing me for a simpleminded interpretation of the world that only exists in your head. because your perceptual abilities are crude and limited
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Don't be so arrogant, you'd probably react the same way yourself. You don't believe it? Ever heard of the Milgram experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment)?
it seems that you somehow believe that your grasp on reality and history is superior to mine. i await your indoctrination into the tired narrative of one side or the other being the malevolent player, and other such propaganda for low iq tools
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
you're forgetting that all this expensive technology was at least partially developed to avoid mistakes leading to civilian casualties.
At some point, people stop caring that the military is trying to avoid civilian casualties and just focus on the fact that they are causing civilian casualties. Especially given that most seem to happen because we're trying to limit friendly casualties, not win battles - that is, we could still win the battles, but at a higher cost, if we didn't use airstrikes.
Given that our soldiers are - presumably - there to help the local population, it stands to reason that our soldiers should be placed at greater risk if it means protecting more Afghans. I know the current rules have been adjusted to this effect, but too many civilians are still being killed.
Making force protection the primary goal inevitably leads to a cheapening of enemy & civilian life.
The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
There was a draft, but the boys who became the politicians managed either to avoid it or to get their dad to have them assigned to cushy, safe reserve jobs at home.
In a further touch of irony, the few politicians who *didn't* dodge that draft and signed up then had their patriotism questioned by the supporters of the draft dodgers, because they dared speak out against torture or war.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
You have a pretty good analogy. No one on the US side wants to kill civilians. When it does happen, it is because of a miscommunication, or other mistake.
The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
Off topic? I think so.
Yes, you are totally right. I mean it's not like Afghanistan was ever at war before in their history! They were a country never in conflict and always at peace. (end sarcasm) Actually it was the other way around. In the last several decades the "peaceful years" could be counted on one hand. The Coalition forces definitely try to avoid casualties of innocents as much as possible as it hurts the long term goals of the operation there. The same could not be said for the various opposing forces. For them the more chaos the better.
This is the kind of info that should be classified and not be made public in so much detail.
Next we will be seeing car bombs outside the offices of L3 and any other organizations mentioned.
Why make the terrorists jobs easier?
Absolutely. There's a 30 year-old veteran of a couple of tours in Iraq in my tai chi class. His therapist suggested that the internal, relaxed nature of tai chi might help him with some of his PTSD, which is not as bad as some, still keeps him from sleeping and sometimes even wanting to go out. I see other peoples' reaction to him and wonder myself about what goes on in their heads. Being close to someone who has seen horrible things can make people react strangely. Some are curious, some really don't want to know anything. But all seem to react in some guarded way, almost as people react to cancer patients. Sympathetic, but detached out of some vague fear.
I think there were other factors that caused the shameful way our society dealt with Viet Nam era vets, though. The early part of the negative reaction, I believe, had to do with the rancorous battle going on at home against the war itself.
But soon after the war ended, I saw a shift, with members of the anti-war crowd seeing the vets more as victims, while the "patriotic" Right seemed to place something of a stigma on anyone who participated in this war that "America did not Win".
I guess the reaction to the Viet Nam vets is really a reflection of the way the country was so deeply divided during that war, a division that is the genesis of the even deeper division that exists today.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The French did a lot of the heavy lifting for us, if I remember correctly.
They pretty much paid for the Revolution, too. It's interesting, during the current screaming over our national debt, to remember that our country was born in debt, to the French.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The submitter didn't read the article too well. TAC-P is linked with an Army group when they deploy but are still part of the USAF. He's even wearing ABUs in the picture. You will see AF CCT, TAC-P, etc. wear ACUs but i've never seen an Army person wear ABUs when they're with an AF group.
Oh, I agree, absolutely. I would say that most probably volunteer with that in mind.
But that is just too much to ask of only one segment of our society. And the last thing we want as a country is to be so comfortably removed from the realities of the world, by allowing this very small group to take the responsibility upon themselves. If a war is worth fighting, then it should be worth every single one of us taking some part, however small. Having a certain segment of our citizens enjoying fat tax cuts, while putting two wars on the national credit card, is abominable. It's a recipe for disaster, as a society.
In fact, I'd say it's un-American for us to do so.
You are welcome on my lawn.
No, I'm saying that when it's your own son or daughter that stands a chance to end up blown to pieces in some desert or jungle, it makes you think a little bit before voting to engage in unnecessary foreign entanglements.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Then why exactly did the US attack Iraq?
You're an idiot if you really believe that. Al Gore just bought another mansion. Think about it.
I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
GPs point is that, if you had compulsory national service, then maybe (just maybe, this is U.S. after all) you'd have a much more honest government, and particularly when it comes to being trigger-happy.
It's one thing to be hawkish when the issue at hand is basically when you're debating whether to send mercenaries overseas. It's another when everyone voting has the well-being of their children at stake in a very direct and obvious way.
Who knows, if you had conscription, perhaps Bush would have never been elected in the first place; and I very much doubt he'd ever get the second term.
It's interesting, during the current screaming over our national debt, to remember that our country was born in debt, to the French.
I think that calls for a re-naming of a certain foreign-themed fast food menu item. As in "Gimme a Big Mac and a large order of Debt Fries, please."
This ain't rocket surgery.
"Poor services" that helped win WWII, by the way.
You're probably right, Wyatt, that compulsory service is not ideal when building a fighting force, but remember, our military is supposed to exist for the country's well-being, not the other way around. We are not Sparta, we are a civil society, not designed for everlasting war. Hell, we're not even supposed to have a standing army at all, if the majority of Founding Fathers have anything to say about it.
Even with the additional challenges a compulsory service brings, it's a better choice for the US as a society, and ultimately that's a more important measurement than how efficient we can make our military and how quickly we can fight a war. The convenience of the military must never be the first thing taken into consideration when we administer our institutions. As has been said, "It's not a perfect setup, but it's better than all the others".
You are welcome on my lawn.
Please see Wikileaks. As seen from that particular video, you can see that the American military treats this as a video game. Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare anyone?
Which part of my post were you referring to? You posted a reply but it makes no sense as it doesn't even discuss the same topic I'm discussing.
Except it isn't.
If you enter a country whose inhabitants have a very very long track-record of not liking foreigners coming in and ordering them about; if you stay there for nearly a decade with only an ever-growing insurgency (just like against the Russians, and the British and...) to show for it; with ever increasing numbers of civilian casualties due to the chaos; with no real military objectives anymore; then as occupying power over that near-decade you bear a great responsibility for the situation there.
This isn't true.
If you enter a country whose inhabitants have a very very long track-record of not liking foreigners coming in and ordering them about; if you stay there for nearly a decade with only an ever-growing insurgency (just like against the Russians, and the British and...) to show for it; with ever increasing numbers of civilian casualties due to the chaos; with no real military objectives anymore; then as occupying power over that near-decade you bear a great responsibility for the situation there.
It does not matter what the USes *intentions* are. What matters is what its responsibilities are, what it *should* be aware of and what the *effect* is.
You can't wave away the continuing deaths of thousands of people every year in a country you've been responsible for quite a long time with "well, we didn't really intend that". That's just the drunk-driver defence: "I didn't mean to get drunk when I drove to that bar, I didn't mean to kill that person when I drove back", which clearly is *NO GOOD*.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
1 million dead Iraqi civilians for an illegitimate war and you suggest that the US "goes to great pains to avoid casualties." Right. Which side is it exactly that fights to "massacre" innocents? +4 "insightful". What bullshit.
Compulsory national service, at least in the history of the United States, leads to poor services and terrible morale.
We might be doing it wrong. Switzerland and Israel don't seem to have poor services and terrible morale. Personally I think it sounds like a good idea, but we have to change our implementation. First of all, you can't have compulsory service ONLY in times of war. That's basically admitting that you just need fuel for the meat grinder. The point of compulsory service is to be trained in advance and ready to go.
Second of all, we need to make being in the army more respectable in society. I'm not sure how to accomplish that. Maybe it's just a matter of propaganda and pushing a view that being successful in the military, or on the battlefield, is pretty damn cool. It would also involve seriously curtailing all the crap we have about rules of engagement and prosecuting soldiers for accidents and the like.
claim that the insurgency side is "evil" because they set off bombs knowing they will kill civilians, even if they do so against military targets (convoys, bases, etc).
But that's complete bullshit. Many of their attacks are not against military targets. Many of them are just in the middle of a market place. Many of them are against targets like schools. Many of them are against political targets who they see as betraying their own country. What's your response to all that, just to ignore it and focus on the minority of attacks that are successfully carried out against military targets? You are completely ignoring the degrees on both side.
Well, I believe it; however, I'll pass on the title of "idiot". I would observe that the derogatory nature of your introduction of Al Gore into the conversation rather defines your position on the subject of environmental responsibility. No doubt you fall among those who believe that mankind is incapable of altering the world "because it is too big to affect", and so however man uses it or whatever man pumps into it is no big deal?
While I cannot say that this is true of you, I have found that people who have such beliefs have often never been outside of their niche in the U.S. of A. Curiously, I have also found that people who hold that "too big to affect" belief often tend to pee in other people's swimming pools.
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
Really? As if they don't pour over anything they might find left over on the battlefield? They (Al Queso, et al) are not stupid, even if they are social and cultural backasses, even in the Islamic world. They're probably getting some I2 help from some of our "friends" as well as enemies as well... if the govment ok'd it, that toothpaste has already been squished out of the tube long ago. and it's not too hard to read AvLeak, Janes's publications, etc. and put two and two together, either.
Get over it.
The "terrorists" are not quite as rational, though. Their motivation seems to be to make us weaker with their own form of "shock and awe", and as such, these things are made to trigger our sphincter reflexes socially and culturally, not by rationally trying to identify strategic weak points or single points of failure and going after them.
Bomb goes off outside of L3's corporate offices? For our press, though, it's a BFD, unless L3 also had the corporate child care center there. It would still be some good press, but wouldn't really do much at all to stop what L3 does, as production would ship to other facilities or maybe even competitors helping out. The long-term net effect would be like pissing in the ocean to turn it yellow.
there isn't a shred anything remotely racist in anything i said. the tragedy is someone modded you up for hurling a smear which is completely bullshit
and the rest of your post, you are responding to some sort of bogeyman that resembles absolutely nothing about what i said. try talking to me and what i say, instead of the demons in your head which i don't actually resemble, asshole
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Except it isn't bullshit, it's what UN report on protection of civilians says. See my comment and quote in the other thread.
Further, I am not ignoring one side at all. I abhor and condemn violence regardless of side. Similarly for double-think and hypocrisy.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
A Texas based oil company could also own oil fields in Iraq. Post-invasion and U.S.-friendly regime change, a certain group of companies might benefit from preferential buying rights in said newly reformed country.
Really disappointed "maverick" and "iceman" are constrained to be taking directions from earth-bound non-coms.
Always thought they were type-A take charge types.
They are called evil because they do all the other things I mentioned, not because they attack military targets in guerrilla fashion and occasionally kill civilians by accident.
American military believes that it's always good to collect loads and loads of unprocessed information, and then dump it up the chain of command. Video feeds, reports, observation from absolutely everything that observes, interception of everything that can intercepted -- no one on the ground (or in the air) is good enough to handle it, it all has to go up to the highest level.
Then people are surprised that crucial information is lost in this unstoppable torrent of shit, all high-level decisions are made based wishful thinking, and all low-level decisions are based on prejudice.
Good job, control freaks -- now build a monitor into a contact lens and give it to Obama. Maybe he will accidentally stop the next attack on journalists or something.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
And the US forces have blown up market places, weddings, etc. "Oh but those were mistakes". Well, there are also many cases of groups of US soldiers just outright committing murder - and there are probably an order of magnitude more incidents unreported than there are reported. "Oh but that isn't our policy" - well neither is it the policy of the Taliban to kill civilians when they carry out attacks!
Here I'll refer back to my earlier comment on disgust when I hear people claim noble intent as defence for the mistakes of their side that lead to the killing of civilians, while labelling the other side as evil for (potentially) similar actions.
I'm sorry, but if your actions repeatedly lead to the killing of civilians then you are responsible for them. Beyond a certain point, intent becomes irrelevant.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
Consider how remote control the practice of warfare is becoming. Remote control capabilities protect our troops reducing the risk to their life and limb. It would be unconscionable to have the technological capability and not provide it to the war fighter. Warfare will become increasingly remote controlled and robotic.
As technology progresses there will be waves of Skynet aerial drones and mobile Cyclons fighting wars by proxy. Imagine launching fleets of Predator Drones from aircraft carriers to patrol and monitor foreign lands. If the drones were to identify a suspected IED factory then a helicopter carrying six Cyclons can be deployed to perform an entry operation. Once the Cyclons enter the building the remote cameras video feeds can relay to our troops the situation inside. Only when the building is secure would human troops enter to investigate. The enemy will adapt and place IEDs within buildings and watch from a nearby hillside. The Cyclons will be upgraded up to the point that they can perform the entire mission. Why put lives at risk?
Perhaps a human will always be at the controls. Perhaps not but until the day that AI is sufficiently advanced, the future of warfare is increasing looking like a room full of people looking at a video feed saying, “See the gun in the hands of target one. AK-47 identified. Issue the prompt informing target one to drop the weapon. Target one is firing the AK-47 at the drone. Target one confirmed hostile. Lethal force authorized. Track weapon one to target one. Engage weapon one. Target is down.“
It is almost like a video game except it is way more serious.
well neither is it the policy of the Taliban to kill civilians when they carry out attacks!
That's blatantly incorrect. The Taliban and other Islamic militant groups frequently attack purely civilian targets, their compatriots actually. Sometimes they do it and then try to say the US did it through an agent like Blackwater. Sometimes they say they were punishing people who aided the US. But it is most definitely the policy of the Taliban to kill civilians.
Just as one recent example, did you honestly miss the news that the Taliban tried to poison a girls' school? How are you going to spin that as not showing a policy of attacking civilians?
For the cognitively challenged, you could try searching for "NATO Afghan killings" - just to get started.
"Consumed by fireball, the Afghan village devastated by Nato strike on Taliban" - The Guardian, September 4 2009
"Moeen Marastial, a member of parliament from Kunduz, said: "Local people are telling me 130 people have been killed despite all the promises of Nato to do fewer bombardments and reduce civilian casualties. There will be a reaction to this. It is a very bad day for international forces in Afghanistan."
and
"Nato strike kills 27 Afghanistan civilians" - BBC, February 22, 2010
"At least 27 civilians died in a Nato air strike in southern Afghanistan, the Afghan cabinet says, revising downwards a prior statement that 33 were killed"
and
"U.S. Admits Role in February Killing of Afghan Women" - New York Times, April 4, 2010
"After initially denying involvement or any cover-up in the deaths of three Afghan women during a badly bungled American Special Operations assault in February, the American-led military command in Kabul admitted late on Sunday that its forces had, in fact, killed the women during the nighttime raid."
and
"NATO strikes killing more Afghan civilians" - USA Today, April 16, 2010
"Deaths of Afghan civilians by NATO troops have more than doubled this year, NATO statistics show, jeopardizing a U.S. campaign to win over the local population by protecting them against insurgent attacks."
and
"NATO Investigates 3 Afghan Civilian Deaths" - New York Times, May 1, 2010
"The French military took responsibility on Friday for killing four Afghan children during a missile strike in early April, and NATO said it was investigating allegations of a military convoy gunning down two Afghan women and a girl in southeastern Afghanistan."
and
"NATO checks report of Afghan civilian deaths" - Reuters, May 1, 2010
"NATO said on Saturday it was investigating whether shots fired by its troops in southern Afghanistan had killed two women and a child traveling in car."
Of course, expending any effort whatsoever to consider the plight of those being killed in Afghanistan and finding out some facts - rather than making a false assumption and then using your error to defend killing innocent people - might have taken you almost as much time as you spent supporting the murders committed by "our guys."
No I didn't but:
- The Taliban say they havn't done anything like this, and they condemned it
- It's unclear whether any such attacks have even taken place, indeed it seems possible these were psychosomatic hysteria. Similar things happen in the West all the time (e.g. google for "Bull Ring chemical leak").
That said, girls attending school have been attacked in Afghanistan. However such attacks do not appear to be sanctioned by the Taliban at a high level. (Not dissimilarly, low-level 'mistakes' by PGF soldiers are not sanctioned either).
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
Well, what can I say then. Keep voting for the just and noble US occupation that helps protect the Afghanis from those utterly evil Taliban.
I wish the world were anywhere near as neatly ordered as you see it.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
Not fair to attack the individuals. They're regular people just doing what they're trained (and ordered) to do.
Absolutely right. I agree wholeheartedly with your defence of Muhommad Atta.
"For reasoned discussions you need objective, accurate data, of which isn't an abundance of in the battlefields"
You are absolutely right! I had a long rambling story I wanted to post about data collection and FETs but it would be mostly hearsay, so I ditch it. However, for those of you playing along at home who like reading about Better Ways to Wage War, I highly recommend you google "Female Engagement Teams". It's very fascinating.
I'm sorry, but if your actions repeatedly lead to the killing of civilians then you are responsible for them. Beyond a certain point, intent becomes irrelevant.
Thank you.
Murder is murder.
The justifications here and elsewhere are like committing second-degree murder but trying to argue that because it wasn't first-degree murder that one is innocent.
(One could also argue it's even worse than first-degree murder: the killings are both murders for hire and committed during a robbery.)
+4 "insightful". What bullshit.
"insightful" and "underrated". Hard to say which one's worse.
A better rating would be +5 "tragic."
The truth about ourselves is always hardest to see.
Looks like there's a lot of active resistance to it here today/tonight.
And as far as that other discussion goes, don't forget to include the natural end of empire, the desperate mid-life crisis of an aging nation, and after thousands of years of leaving Mesopotamia the ouroboros finally coming back to swallow its tail - in other words, collective awakening and consciousness.
Afghanistan people don't use cool technology to bury their dead, moron. That's why it's not on wired.
Very true, and the debt was repaid by accepting a giant statue of some chick, then sending soldiers to help the revolution in France.
Someone ought to remind China of what the US does to people it owes money to...
Wait! Whats a sig?
Moderation is not supposed to be used to suppress comments one finds disagreeable.
You must be old here. ;-)
Though the action is uniform: at the nation-state level and the individual level suppressing that with which they disagree.
No, I'm saying that when it's your own son or daughter that stands a chance to end up blown to pieces in some desert or jungle, it makes you think a little bit before voting to engage in unnecessary foreign entanglements.
But then, the people on top may have different ideas then you as to what defines an "unnecessary foreign entanglement"
Wait! Whats a sig?
Great point.
Another thing, I would have absolutely NO deferments from national service unless you are so disabled that you qualify for Social Security disability. And certainly no deferments just because you're daddy's rich.
Everybody serves. Even if just for a year or two, on weekends, during peacetime.
We might not have such an epidemic of obesity among young adults, too, which is a plus.
I was eligible for the draft in the last year that we had a draft. There was a lottery then, where they picked birthdays out of a hat and they started taking you based upon your ranking. This was one of the last years of the war in Viet Nam. My birthday came up 352 out of 365. I was relieved to know I wasn't going to 'Nam, but besides being a lazy undergrad, without a clear major in college, I didn't do a whole lot worthwhile besides smoke weed and try to feel-up co-eds over the next two years, while I was 18 and 19. I could have easily have been involved in some national service where I could have done everything from work on infrastructure to be a camp counselor for kids that might not have the opportunity to go to camp during the summer. I could have been part of a force of late teens who visit elderly homebound people and go grocery shopping or help around the house. I could have been doing grounds work at a national park or cleaning up along the Chicago River, which was an ecological disaster at the time.
Sure, I could have done those things anyway, but those things generally don't leap to mind for an 18 year-old smartass like me. A few pushups and mile runs wouldn't have hurt me, either.
Viet Nam was a different story, though. I'm not sure I'd have been willing to go kill North Vietnamese so Richard Nixon could feel like a tough guy.
But I wonder, if Nixon's daughters, who I think were about my age at the time, would have been required to suit up and go overseas, if he would have been so willing to bomb Laos and Cambodia for laughs.
You are welcome on my lawn.
In the last several decades the "peaceful years" could be counted on one hand. .
Throughout human history the peaceful years could be counted on two hands.
Fixed that for ya!
Wait! Whats a sig?
It was an interesting article about normal length. Are we so impatient to read more than three paragraphs?
I look forward to the day when these "people" are formally charged with Crimes Against Humanity, for arbitrary executions and murder.
These planes have been transonic for quite a long time. The sound barrier is around 640 mph at sea level.
Would those be _bungie_ straps, or large, flat _nylon_ straps?
(I'll bet it's just put in an unused access port for such things.) :>
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
My farm is highly illegal anyway, and I've seen a few state police choppers flying overhead lately
Man, don't you just hate it when that happens? Fuckin' Facebook Police. And where's that forty acres and a mule FB promised us when we joined up anyway?
(No joke, back in my misspent youth I made my living as a producer of non-approved herbal supplements up in Oregon. Fairly lucrative, enough for a comfortable if simple lifestyle, but I finally gave it up for exactly those reasons--I knew it was only a matter of time before I got caught.)
This ain't rocket surgery.
You really think oil is the only reason? You don't think it has anything to do with the fact that saddam's iraq was an ally of al qaeda going back to 1993?
I know a guy who was a professional soldier and participated in the yugoslavian wars. He can sleep only every other night.
And he sais that he deserves this hell, as does every professional soldier.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Many cases. Many, meaning, what, exactly? I'll not try to sugar coat the fact that military life is a magnet to psychopaths, or that military life might turn some people into psychopaths. But, many?
Oh - do you notice that we are prepared for such occurences with a procedure we refer to as "Court Martial"?
And, we have convicted those psychos that were caught, and for which there was evidence sufficient to get a conviction.
The other side? Their fucking LEADERS are psychos who approve of dousing little girls with acid, or pushing them back into burning school buildings, and bombing women and children in markets.
Many rapes and murders. I think you need to step back and look at the whole picture. Standing to close to examine a detail or two really distorts you view of the entire tapestry.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
that's because germany lost.
The atrocities by russian forces went unpunished.
The atrocities in vietnam went unpunished.
Make a man a fire and he will be warm for a day, set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life
You're making a case for my own position. We should have gone into Afghanistan on a punitive expedition, then got the hell out once the government was destroyed, and incapable of supporting a military.
We should do the same thing in Somalia, except there, we don't hit the government, but the pirates.
Punitive expedition. Short and sweet. Destroy the military and/or pirating capability, then go home.
You won't find me trying to justify the invasion of Iraq - I argued long and loud against that invasion. But, now that we are there, I keep arguing for withdrawal. Their military ability has long been destroyed.
The US will never build a government to their liking, and if they did, that government would be overthrown within months after we leave. Any moron can see that, IMHO. If it wasn't destroyed, we would be likely to do another Operation Ajax to destroy it ourselves.
Here's where someone says, "HUH??"
The Wikipedia has a pretty decent article on Operation Ajax - check it out before you say that I'm ignorant.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Yeah yeah, I want to be able to buy a ticket to my space station first!
Fuck you.
7 photogs slaughtered without any form of defense.
US bullies picking fights with those who can't fight back
How brave.
Can you give us a diff between the two paragraphs so we don't have to play spot the differences? Thanks.
... you lose a little of your own humanity.
Dehumanising the opposition invites your own people to carry out acts of abuse or even war crimes. We've got plenty of historical records from the last 100 years to know when fighters consider the people they oppose to be less than human very bad things happen which are later much regretted.
Both sides need to bear this in mind.
No, they were not. Saddam's government hated Al Qaeda.
That same army that was based thousands of miles away, and which was fighting a far better army than the Americas had, at the same time. Basically it was the French fighting German mercenaries on (what would eventually be) US soil.
How many soldiers are ever court martialed? It's a vanishingly small number. Even in some of the most blatant cases of murder, where there is clear cut video evidence of war crimes, military personnel have gone unpunished (e.g. the soldier filmed executing a wounded man in a building in Fallujah; the chopper crew who shot up a family providing aid to a badly wounded man - against the rules of war, including the US military's own ROE).
We can have no faith at all in a military justice system which depends so heavily on the military to police itself - starting with (typically) requiring officers to make the decision to refer incidents about their own men to the military police.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
Oops. Cut and paste problems after my /. preview/edit box became unresponsive. Chop away the 2nd paragraph starting at "If you enter a country" and finishing at "This isn't true".
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
Oh, the rest of the Bush Administration should have listened to Powell.
Or the French, or the Germans, or Hans Blix (Chief UN Weapons Inspector), or pretty much anyone with a clue ...
Instead of trying to discredit everyone that spoke out against the invasion.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
When the pilots can't tell the difference between canvas combat identification markers and "rocket launchers" and are ready to shoot first and identify later. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incident
"...going kinetic...", "If I'm doing my job, it means the shit has hit the fan,"
Wow. Truly macho. All cammed up, one in the breach, ready to kick ass, bite the bullet, chew dirt, spit fire. Yo, JDAM calling on the INSEC, level three niner, roger that big bird... for fsck sake.
I'm not anti war, but I am anti stupid.
(Cut to the office of the supreme commander. He is now nude behind his desk. A kidney bowl full of water is on desk; he is dabbing at himself with a sponge. The intercom buzzes. He switches it on.)
Voice: Still no sign of Captain Carpenter, sir... or Mr Neutron.
Commander: OK. We'll bomb Neutron out. Get me Moscow! Peking! and Shanklin, Isle of Wight!
(Cut to stock film of B52s on a bombing raid.)
Voice Over: And so the Great Powers and the people of Shanklin, Isle of Wight, drew their net in ever-tightening circles around the most dangerous threat to peace the world has ever faced. They bombed Cairo, Bangkok, Cape Town, Buenos Aires, Harrow, Hammersmith, Stephey, Wandsworth and Enfield... But always it was the wrong place.
(Cut to an area of smoking rubble. A van with the words 'US Air Force' on the side trundles through the rubble. It has a loudspeaker on the top of it.)
Loudspeaker: Sorry Enfield!... We apologize for any inconvenience caused by our bombing... sorry...
Voice Over: But what of Mr Neutron, the most fearfully dangerous man in the world! The man who could destroy entire galaxies with his wrist, the man who could tear fruit machines apart with his eyeballs... He had not been idle!
(Continued...)
You just wasted an awful lot of electrons failing to sound smart. Your sweeping sophomoric claim that "the former objective is democratic" shows you've drunk deep of the kool aid. Face it; you've earned the title of "idiot". Al Gore is merely the most recognizable face of democratic hypocrisy. You're being played like a fiddle by the libs and you wear the blinders willingly.
I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
Actually, I have been an Independent my whole life. I sound like a Democrat because the impact of the Republican policies of blocking all attempts to wean America from foreign oil, "flood-up/trickle-down" economics, deregulation, and inequitable free trade have so damaged America that I had no choice other than to recognize the fact that the Republicans are the greatest threat the American people have faced in our entire history.
Sure, the Republicans have seen to it that some few Americans have vastly increased their rate of wealth accumulation, but they've done so by taking it out of the American people's hide.
I am, in fact, a six-year Army veteran; when the right - the Republicans - began to try to transform America from a democracy into a hereditary aristocracy of a few wealthy and many, many poor (to include such abominations as naming corporations as super-citizens with the rights accorded to a real American citizen multiplied by the wealth they can bring to bear) they named themselves my enemy according to the oath that I swore.
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
"Not fair to attack the individuals. They're regular people just doing what they're trained (and ordered) to do."
The Nazis had "regular people just doing what they're trained (and ordered) to do", which was to exterminate Jews. Does that excuse what they did? Not in the least.
According to the Nuremberg Charter, "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".
The "I was just following orders" excuse wasn't good enough at the Nuremberg War Crimes trials. It shouldn't be good enough now.
Every individual should be held accountable for their acts.
"You're right that they volunteered, but they did it either out of a sense of patriotism--possibly misplaced patriotism, but patriotism none the less--or economic necessity."
How would you even know what a single person's real motivation was? Sure, they might claim they're doing it out of "patriotism", but for all you know they could be a sadist that enjoys murder, and is just using "patriotism" as an excuse. Samuel Johnson famously said that "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel".
But let's assume you know one, or two, or maybe even a dozen Iraq veterans well enough to somehow divine their true motives. There are about 2 million veterans of the current Iraq and Afghanistan wars. How would you presume to know what the motivation of every single one of them was?
Who knows what their motivation was? But let's say it was, as you say, "patriotism... or economic necessity". Is that supposed to excuse their invasion of a country that did not attack the US? And their mass murder of the Iraqi and Afghani people? The destruction of an entire societies? Of turning Iraq from a country with one of the highest standards of living in the Middle East, to one of the very worst in the world, and one of the most dangerous places on the planet?
"I guess I'm worried about the veterans of the Iraq/Afghanistan wars experiencing the same demonization that happened to Vietnam vets."
The American people are not nearly as informed about Iraq and Afghanistan today as the Americans of the 60's and 70's were informed about Vietnam. The US military have learned their lesson regarding allowing unfettered media access to their wars, so have kept a tight reign on information flowing out of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Political consciousness and radicalisation was also much greater in the 60's and 70's. So I very much doubt the well deserved indignation and outrage against the vets of Iraq and Afghanistan will be anything like that felt against the veterans of Vietnam.
While we're on the subject, it should be mentioned that stories of Vietnam vets being spat upon as they returned from the war are complete myths. See Jerry Lembcke's "The Spitting Image" for a detailed analysis.
http://www.amazon.com/Spitting-Image-Memory-Legacy-Vietnam/dp/0814751466/
"Please draw a moral distinction between: the side who goes to great pains to avoid casualties, versus the side whose stated goals are the massacre of innocents."
Who said their goal was to massacre innocents? Who specifically are you talking about?
From what I've read, the so-called "terrorists" are actually after quite different goals, such as kicking the foreign invaders out of their homelands, creating Islamic governments, etc...
The killing of innocents they tend to either outright deny and blame on their enemies, or claim that it's just unavoidable "collateral damage". Just like the Americans.
There virtually is no difference between the propaganda used to deny blame for the deaths of innocent civilians, on both sides. Except that one side gets to play powerpoint presentations for hours on end in front of CNN, NBC, CBS, and FOX cameras and in front of congress over and over and over again for the last ten years.
Nuremberg trials were a witch hunt.
There have been some studies that have shown that yes, people WILL follow orders and do horrible things. Its a dissociation of conscience and morals. Look up the Milgram experiment and the more recent French show Game of Death where people quite willingly inflict near lethal shocks on other people. Also read up on Third Wave where students willingly followed the pack into becoming perfect little fascists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave
And that would explain why democrats control senate, house, and the white house, yet nothing is changing.
Republicrats are the same party with 2 heads. Wake up.
Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
Some of the Democrats are the same as Republicans, no doubt. They typically do America the favor of naming themselves as "Blue Dogs"...and are sometimes also or otherwise identified as "neoliberals".
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
No one is innocent. Let God sort them out.
Yes, the US won the Pacific, Mediterranean and European Theaters of Operation in the Second World War. However many of the peacetime "professional" officers were tradition bound and ineffectual. Training and replacement programs were atrocious, one quote that I recall but don't have a citation for right now was along the lines of "The German High Command couldn't have designed a worse replacement program for the United States Army". Casualties in Italy for example were around 25% higher than assaults in the Pacific under the Marine Corps in early 1944, mostly because of inefficiencies caused by inexperienced or traditionalist commanders.
The United States isn't becoming a Sparta because of a professional army, US leadership largely does not have a military background, which is what is keeping the US from becoming a Sparta or late Republican Rome. Based on pay and how poor of medical service the vets get, I don't think the convenience of the military is the most important thing going on right now.
I don't know about Switzerland as I've never been there, but in Israel, at least since the end of the 1973 War, the Reserves are less effectual and easier to opt out of. I'm in favor of a 2-4 year national service in the United States. Peace Corps, Americorps, military service (national guard, reserves, regular military), Indian Health Service, some sort of CCC. Colleges and Universities shouldn't be looking to accept students until they are at least 20.
Faith-based training and service like the Mormon Missionaries, working inner-cities, etc that should count toward the national service too.
Why is this modded troll?
Follow me
"Deploy" means station in the field.
Most of the things Germans and Japanese were convicted of in war crimes trials were in fact against existing international law, including the various Hague and Geneva Conventions, and the Kellogg-Briand Pact. I'm not so sure about Japan offhand, but Germany had signed onto those treaties and had not repudiated them.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline
On that point: the photos that ran with TFA were in fact from the military publicists.
Sure, people will more readily do horrible things if told to do so. It's easier to live with it if you "had no choice" but to follow orders. The problem with that is that they do have a choice. They will always have a choice. Ultimately it is still them that pulled the trigger and thus are just as at fault as their superiors. Just because most people are mindless sheep doesn't make it right or a good excuse to not lay blame and punishment were it's deserved.
It's about personal accountability. And in a lot of these cases, these people should have known the requirements before even signing up. They're stupid before, during, and after. They should get no pity.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
No one has to show up to the draft board either...
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Clear cut evidence of war crimes. Define war crimes. If you saw war crimes in that video from wikileaks, then you are incompetent to judge what a war crime is. When competent authority finds evidence of a war crime, our soldiers are punished. Key word being competent.
Maybe you can link me up to some of those videos you mention? I don't claim to be competent authority - I was only an enlisted man. But, I'll bet that I'm more competent than most of the people posting damning statements on the internet about those soldiers.
Men are sentenced at court martial based on evidence, not on the common civilian's distaste for war.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
The only element of high risk from the US point of view in the invasion of Iraq was that people would find out that Iraq had zero connection to the WTC attacks. Otherwise the risk was purely to the Iraqi civilian population, 7000 of whom were killed in one week simply for 'shock and awe' purposes. And that is a direct, unashamed quotation from Rumsfeld.
Roz here, thanks for the food for thought. I would like to remind some of you here that the ones you condemn for their service are the same ones that play a part in defending your right to express your opinions on sites like this. As far as controlling A/C, the rover plays a small part in a very intricate flow of information between all the assets in the article. My job is to bring those assets to bear. Also, for the guys talking about direction finding capabilities, the guys on the ground don't push enough watts to be picked up by DF. Not to mention we don't stand around keying a hand mic for hours on end, so your looking at 10-15 second bursts. Good luck DF'ing that. Im going to close this one by reminding ya'll that its much easier to be a monday morning quarterback.