Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gamesmistress who wrote (90919)	4/7/2003 5:01:46 PM
From: paul_philp	Respond to of 281500

Very excellent! George W. bin Hoover! Paul

To: gamesmistress who wrote (90919)	4/7/2003 9:04:19 PM
From: SirRealist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I don't doubt there is much intelligence has accomplished in this mission. We saw it in action in Afghanistan. Whether it goes as far as all that remains to be seen. Normally, I'd expect Hussein would order such records destroyed. Yet he may feel betrayed by other Arab leaders and, in exile, may get a hearty chuckle at stabbing them in the back. Very interesting article; thanks.

To: gamesmistress who wrote (90919)	4/8/2003 3:22:57 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 281500

Thanks Gina! I wondered what else he had done.. Here's an Interview with Ralph Peters, on PBS.....I don't see the date, other than the bottom note of 2000, but during the Clinton years from the content of the article... It is worth reading, especially in view of the Iraq War, which is an excellent showcase as to how and why each branch of the Service is needed....and the equipment that they use.... snip>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this a trade off between boys and girls and toys? Certainly. When we have soldiers on food stamps . . . I just came back from Fort Leavenworth and was served in a restaurant by a moonlighting soldier trying to make ends meet. Certainly no soldier expects to be paid lavishly. But it would be nice if they could feed their families. When we signed up for a married military, we should have planned for this. The medical system for active duty and for retirees is certainly in disarray. People want to take away the commissaries, because here in the United States, the major food chains don't like the fact that military people are buying on base. The commissary is essential for junior enlisted personnel to buy the foodstuffs at slightly reduced rates. Others would like to take away the PXs. It's just shameful. We want these young men and women to die for us if necessary, and then we expect them to live on food stamps? At the same time, we're going to spend $350 billion or $60 billion on new aircraft we don't need, we're going to buy more vessels we don't need. If that's not a national disgrace, what is? Air power is thought of as a silver bullet. . . . Yet it is said that the army has the special responsibility to win the nation's wars. When air force officers, active duty or retired, say we don't need ground forces, they're lying. They know better. They're fighting for budget share. It's that simple. We need the air force. We need the navy. We need the marines. And we need the army. They exist because they do different things. The army does a few things for you. One, is it's ultimately the war fighter, the big force that goes and wins the big wars. The army is also the primary special operations force--the Green Berets, the Rangers--although other services certainly make their contributions. The army provides the raw manpower for the onerous missions, the janitorial work of foreign policy, the Kosovos, the Bosnias, etc. The army does a lot for you. In many ways, it's the least glamorous service, but it is ultimately the workhorse. As far as silver bullets go, I love air power. As someone who's served in infantry and armored units, I want a lot of air power and I want it on time. But air power alone cannot do it all any more than the army alone could do it all. And in Kosovo we really saw the limits of air power. After all the ballyhoo, they couldn't even find the tanks, let alone kill them. They certainly couldn't stop massacres down in wooded ravines. You can't do police work or close-in combat from 15,000 feet. You can't stop genocide from 15,000 feet. You can't do urban warfare from 1,000 feet or even 500 feet, although once in a while a helicopter will help you out. There are still many missions; in fact they're increasing. When you to do them right, you still need boots on the ground. Peacekeeping, peacemaking, and even war. So whenever you hear anybody in any uniform saying we don't need that other service, they're lying to you. They know better. They're fighting for dollars. You know they're dialing for dollars. They're not building a national defense. <<<<<<<<<snip

To: gamesmistress who wrote (90919)	4/8/2003 3:23:58 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

And one more: The link below shows another interview with Ralph Peters, Lt Col US Army, Ret....it too is most interesting....here's a preview... The Shah Always Falls” A soldier-historian looks at how the world has changed in the past decade and finds that America is both hostage to history and likely to be saved by it An Interview With Ralph Peters by Fredric Smoler Military historians sometimes write biographies of people they call military intellectuals. Such people are interesting because they can have a vast effect on history, and also because they combine in one career two modes of life normally considered incompatible, the life of thought and the life of action. Lt. Col., Ret., Ralph Peters is a military intellectual, and his career makes surprising reading. He enlisted in the Army as a private in 1976 and served in a mechanized infantry division. He was commissioned in 1980 as a second lieutenant in military intelligence and rose to the rank of lieutenant colonel by 1998. Along the way he took a master’s degree in international relations and published eight novels, typing out the first one while still a sergeant stationed in Germany. He also published a remarkable series of essays, many of which first appeared in Parameters, the theoretical journal of the U.S. Army War College. These essays are some of the most radical writing I have ever read on the recent revolution in military affairs. They began appearing at the start of the last decade, they are beautifully written and intellectually exciting, and they have proved startlingly (and sometimes grimly) prescient. Continued at: americanheritage.com