Two headlines:
- "Obama: No U.S. ground troops vs. ISIS"
- "US to deploy up to 3,000 military personnel to fight Ebola in West Africa"
The US military - like any military organization worthy of the name - is designed to break things and kill people. That's its raison d'être.
I'm not in favor of more US intervention in the Middle East. We've failed miserably in both Iraq and Afghanistan - not the fault of our military, but of our political leadership, who've clearly learned nothing from Vietnam. Nevertheless, the irony is cruel. We're not sending our 'kick ass and take names' people to do precisely that to our enemies . . . but we are sending them to 'fight' a disease that's so far infected a hell of a lot of those who come into contact with it, and killed well over half of those who contract it. It's likely to do precisely that to our people as well, unless we're very lucky.
I imagine ISIS is laughing its collective ass off at us right now . . .
Peter
12 comments:
I posed the question, on our Message Board, how difficult will it be for Øbama to "transition" those troops elsewhere, ie., Syria/Jordan/Egypt/etc.
Semper Fi'
DM
It started when "they" decided to bring the two infected aid worked to atlanta for treatment, against all reason.
Now this issue of sending more americans to the infectous areas.
I dont think anyone can refute the proposition that somebody is trying very hard to bring the virus to the US.
You can argue about who is behind it, or why, but there it is. When it starts spreading here you will see my shocked face. Shocked I tell you...
TOTALLY wrong use... And a HUGE safety issue for the troops. Stupidity reigns (again)...
Looks like O wants to be a lot like the Prince of Camelot. If we follow that plot line, Biden will be spinning the war up and then leaving it to Romney to finish it amid wide disapproval.
As to 3000 to the Ebola break out, this one can be air transmitted so all bets are off.
"The US military - like any military organization worthy of the name - is designed to break things and kill people. That's its raison d'être."
No. The proper raison d'être is protection from violent aggression. The means to provide such protection will certainly in many circumstances involve breaking things and killing people, but to consider that the purpose is a very dangerous misconception.
I don't expect it to happen under the current POTUS, but it's quite clear that ISIS is a good reason to bring napalm back into the U.S. weapons inventory.
I'm pretty sure that with Captain Zero at the helm, pretty much all the world is laughing at us, not just ISIS.
Well said, the logic of 'No boots on the ground but send them where the enemy is invisible' is truly beyond logic - the crazy's iz running the country and no one in Congress is stepping up to stop it. In fact the opposition is in lock step.
God Bless Our Troops.
As always
Rolf, you are quite wrong.
All the world is not laughing at you, rather, it is laughing, very nervously laughing, I might add, at that damn dangerous fool, and his hangers-on, that have been, and still are, currently desecrating the once much admired and respected house of your country's Government.
@Peter,
"We've failed miserably in both Iraq and Afghanistan - not the fault of our military, but of our political leadership, who've clearly learned nothing from Vietnam"
The old blame the politicians argument...totally fallacious.
The facts...the American military has not won a war since WW2. Not Korea, not Vietnam, not Iraq, not Afganistan, and soon to be, not Syria.
The American military is the most overrated, bloated, over equipped, under-achieving army the world has ever seen.
At the height of the Iraq War the US Army was expending 6 million rounds of ammo a month. Ridiculous. A bunch of clowns.
And all those wars were directed and micro-managed by politicians.
Post a Comment