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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (203284)	4/19/2007 2:31:25 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793914

True: <<<That's why USA military training is poor.>> I don't think you know what you're talking about here. Our military training is the best. > I don't really know what USA military training is like, but there are plenty of examples of the outcome which make me think it's not particularly good. I wondered what response I'd get. USA training seems to me to be too strong on mindless obedience and not enough on values. However, I was impressed a couple of decades ago when I read Stars and Stripes. It was far from a Pravda for the mindless automatons. But then I'm more of an individualist than a groupie; most people like to be in a herd - safety in numbers and all that. As a youngster, with military action likely, [it seemed to have been the norm], I thought I would best be a commando, out there, in front, by myself. The thought of being in a swarm of over-the-top charging in full-frontal attack always seemed rather dopey to me. USA training seems to treat opposition as gooks, slants, rag-heads and other denigrating terms which suggest the opposition is not of much consequence and generally useless. Misunderestimating opponents is generally not good for success. It's fair to say that Islamic Jihad has been wildly underestimated. Osama is still looming and threatening 6 years after his world-record success, with, possibly, an even bigger success to go [if he is to be believed and his credibility is somewhat better than that of the USA bosses from the President on down]. Winning hearts and minds is what the Iraq invasion was about [if we believe the cant]. Stamping boots on necks of some family's father/husband/brother is not the way to win hearts and minds. Neither is shooting children hiding under beds. Nor are lots of things that have happened, few of which make it to the public. Even Tillman's death was almost kept quiet - if they could keep that quiet, or even think they might be able to, or even want to, you can be sure that a LOT more is kept quiet. Maybe it really was just about revenge on Saddam, Uday and co, and the oil. We can't believe the stated motivations, which were obviously untrue. Al Q did not reside in Iraq. Saddam did not have anything to do with 911. He did not have WMDs [and that was pretty obvious beforehand]. He wasn't threatening neighbouring countries [other than funding suicide bombers in Israel and a bit of this and that]. It seems very odd that so much effort has gone into Iraq when Afghanistan, the Taleban and Al Qaeda seemed to be the main issue. Even after years, we still don't have Mq's NUN underway. Meanwhile, the USA has lost so much prestige, sympathy and wherewithal that they are less able to bring it about now anyway. More's the pity and I think they'll live to regret it. Some already are regretting it [if they are still alive]. It has certainly been an excellent live-fire training course for the USA military, and example to the likes of Libya, Syria, Iran, North Korea, China of just what the USA can do, and is likely to do. Mqurice