[N8 v2.0]

This is what the current terrorists fear most... education of the masses. Once the muslim world is educated to the same level as those in the West, the terrorist leaders will lose their power. An educated society will push for a free society... and a freely elected government where differing sides will debate their ideas instead of blowing each other up.

People want freedom. Muslims who move from the middle east to the US and other western countries do well under our society.

Of course action must be taken now to eliminate the current crop of terrorists, but education, freedom and democratic government are keys to holding it in check.

As Iraq/Afganistan moves towards an elected government and a free society, the terrorists will do anything at any cost to stop it.

Contray to what the liberal media says, the Iraq War is not producing terrorists... it is establishing the groundwork to prevent them in the long term.

 

[Westy]

I'd be all behind the GWOT if what we were doing was opening schools in places where women are not allowed to do so. (of course after properly funding our own education system) Ironically women in Iraq will probably end up losing rights after the fall of Saddam.

 

[N8 v2.0]

I'd be all behind the GWOT if what we were doing was opening schools in places where women are not allowed to do so. (of course after properly funding our own education system) Ironically women in Iraq will probably end up losing rights after the fall of Saddam.

Not only women but all kids...especially boys who are highly valued by the mulla's for terrorist brainwashing....

 

[valve bouncer]

N8- Fox News mate?????? Come on haven't you learnt anything?

 

[MikeD]

Shiny Happy Fox-People

If you destroy people's faith in Western systems, you're generally not doing well towards bringing them 'into the fold of democracy.' I don't disagree with the points you've laid out, never have, but am very concerned at the ways the US is going about it, and the ulterior economic motives involved. I don't think we're really accomplishing what we say we are, and while there are isolated upbeat notes in this neverending song, it's not really all that happy for most involved.

Hell, we didn't even really get rid of the Taliban who were making it hard for those girls to get an education...they're sneaking back in and won't make life easy for Afghans who want to progress to a non-Wahabist model of life. We sure made it look like a quick victory, but in scoring those quick points, neglected the long-term future of Afghanistan. You actually have to kill your enemy, or at least make sure he can't or won't fight you again, not just let them melt away so that they can thwart you another day, or reappear once you've turned your back to something else.

Frankly, the US hasn't generally given a rat's ass if kids are going to school or voting or self-determining, so long as their nations provided either a market or cheap labor or both, and didn't seem poised to threaten us. Now that some of them have finally discovered how to threaten us, our newfound interest in 'their welfare' seems, to them, a little thin.

We reap what we sow, and happy veneer on the past or present doesn't change the feelings people around the world are having about us. Lots of people, including the Pres, generally say, "Screw world opinion; we're right!" but, in the scenario you describe in your post, world opinion is really where you score your victories, and we are losing there. It may work out, but it'll be a long, hard road instead of a longer, easier road if it does. I sure hope it'll come through in the neat plan you describe (although of course, the messiness inherent in it will be readily admitted after the fact by those in power once the ball is rolling), but I think we've lost credibility with a lot of people we might otherwise have won over. We've lost an opportunity and created a world of cynics...that doesn't help our politics or our economics in the long run.

"Think smarter, not harder" is what many of us were taught...but we have, in my opinion, been much "harder" on ourselves and the world than we needed to be. I've nothing against hardness when needed...and, as I said above, think we've failed to be as hard as we needed when we needed it (Afghanistan) and also failed to be as smart as we needed to be (Iraq).

But maybe I'm wrong and everything's honky-dory. As someone about to get directly involved to some extent in this mess, I'll keep my fingers crossed and my eyes open.

MD

 

[N8 v2.0]

If you destroy people's faith in Western systems, you're generally not doing well towards bringing them 'into the fold of democracy.' I don't disagree with the points you've laid out, never have, but am very concerned at the ways the US is going about it, and the ulterior economic motives involved. I don't think we're really accomplishing what we say we are, and while there are isolated upbeat notes in this neverending song, it's not really all that happy for most involved.

Hell, we didn't even really get rid of the Taliban who were making it hard for those girls to get an education...they're sneaking back in and won't make life easy for Afghans who want to progress to a non-Wahabist model of life. We sure made it look like a quick victory, but in scoring those quick points, neglected the long-term future of Afghanistan. You actually have to kill your enemy, or at least make sure he can't or won't fight you again, not just let them melt away so that they can thwart you another day, or reappear once you've turned your back to something else.

Frankly, the US hasn't generally given a rat's ass if kids are going to school or voting or self-determining, so long as their nations provided either a market or cheap labor or both, and didn't seem poised to threaten us. Now that some of them have finally discovered how to threaten us, our newfound interest in 'their welfare' seems, to them, a little thin.

We reap what we sow, and happy veneer on the past or present doesn't change the feelings people around the world are having about us. Lots of people, including the Pres, generally say, "Screw world opinion; we're right!" but, in the scenario you describe in your post, world opinion is really where you score your victories, and we are losing there. It may work out, but it'll be a long, hard road instead of a longer, easier road if it does. I sure hope it'll come through in the neat plan you describe (although of course, the messiness inherent in it will be readily admitted after the fact by those in power once the ball is rolling), but I think we've lost credibility with a lot of people we might otherwise have won over. We've lost an opportunity and created a world of cynics...that doesn't help our politics or our economics in the long run.

"Think smarter, not harder" is what many of us were taught...but we have, in my opinion, been much "harder" on ourselves and the world than we needed to be. I've nothing against hardness when needed...and, as I said above, think we've failed to be as hard as we needed when we needed it (Afghanistan) and also failed to be as smart as we needed to be (Iraq).

But maybe I'm wrong and everything's honky-dory. As someone about to get directly involved to some extent in this mess, I'll keep my fingers crossed and my eyes open.

MD

I think it's a learning process for us. And it is definitely something that is going to take a long-long time and a lot of work to bring to fruition. We must do it or suffer because of it.

 

[valve bouncer]

Lot of soundbites there Mike without a lot of "what I'd do". You're about to get in the middle of it. Sound out ya plan mate.

 

[MikeD]

Lot of soundbites there Mike without a lot of "what I'd do". You're about to get in the middle of it. Sound out ya plan mate.

Me? My personal plan for being 'in the middle of it' involves a SIG 229 and an alert set of ears and eyes.

As to "what to do" in a larger sense, well, we can talk about it one of two ways:

What should America have done in the past/where should America be/what should America represent to the world?

or

What the hell should America do now, given its past and present as-is? Part of the problem is that I don't think we should have ever been put where we've put ourselves, but that's useless and counterproductive philosophy if you want to talk brass-tacks.

How you wanna play it? I'll be formulating my ideas as we go...I don't have charts on my wall or Powerpoint presentations yet...just thinking off the cuff as I write here.

MD

 

[valve bouncer]

What the hell should America do now, given its past and present as-is? Part of the problem is that I don't think we should have ever been put where we've put ourselves, but that's useless and counterproductive philosophy if you want to talk brass-tacks.

How you wanna play it? I'll be formulating my ideas as we go...I don't have charts on my wall or Powerpoint presentations yet...just thinking off the cuff as I write here.

MD

I agree with the first part to a point, but I disagree that it's useless. The US and its allies can and should make a committment absolutely that they will support democracy and not support governments that are non-democratic. It's not difficult, either they are democratic or they're not. Does the US goivernment support non-democratic regimes or do they not? Very simple question.

 

[N8 v2.0]

As Hussein Massawi, former leader of Hezbollah, neatly put it, "We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you."

Perhaps we (the West) need to be reminded of this again.

 

[Changleen]

N8, Your article is all fine and dandy, and I agree that setting up proper educational institutions is probably the most important thing you could possibly do in this situation, but your article is divorced from reality.

Great, a few kids are getting to go to school now, awesome. Great, the US is doing what it should be and putting some real cash into schools.

The article, however, utterly fails to mention the reality of the situation in Afghanistan. Headlines like "Warlords creeping back into power" - "Opium production rising" don't feature in Fox's little blinkered world.

The US chose, fro whatever reasons, to invade Afghanistan, and it now chooses to portray itself as a moderniser, spreading democracy and freedom, which of course, education is a major part of, but unfortuantley for Afghanistan, you've done a half job.

About half of the population, and 7/8s of the land of Afghanistan exists outside of the control and security provided by the 11,000 US troops deployed there (more cops in Manhattan!) and this is routinley ignored by your media. If the situation continues like this, the moment you withdraw, guess what's going to happen?

Afghanistan is no longer a hot political potato, thanks to the short attention span of America, and the US is using this to it's advantage. A few feelgood articles like this pop out now and then, and all of a sudden Afghanistan is a mark of your progress in the GWOT. Sorry, but that's BS. Currently it's a sloppy half job that's going to come back and bite you. Already, in the last couple of weeks, there have been intensified raids challenging the US puppet government's authority over the limited land it controls prompting the recent headlines about increased troop activity we have seen recently.

Until you can admit this to yourselves, and properly finish the job you started, or front up and admit you had no genuine altruistic reasons for going there in the first place, this is all some much crap.

 

[Changleen]

As Hussein Massawi, former leader of Hezbollah, neatly put it, "We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you."

Perhaps we (the West) need to be reminded of this again.

Watch out! Here comes their massive navy and airforce ready for a full ground based invasion!

Seriously N8, how are they going to eliminate you? One lucky nuke in your ill-protected ports?

This type of pronouncement by a leader of Hezbollah, taken out of context as you have used it, pointing it at the entire sphere of western civilisation, is very convenient for people of your mindset. Clearly, the only option is to wipe these people of the face of the Earth. Grow up and remember to consider reality when you make these statements.

 

[mack]

... is very convenient for people of your mindset. Clearly, the only option is to wipe these people of the face of the Earth. Grow up and remember to consider reality when you make these statements.

I agree, lets give them a reach around and a coke and call it even.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

This is what the current terrorists fear most... education of the masses. Once the muslim world is educated to the same level as those in the West, the terrorist leaders will lose their power. An educated society will push for a free society... and a freely elected government where differing sides will debate their ideas instead of blowing each other up.

People want freedom. Muslims who move from the middle east to the US and other western countries do well under our society.

Of course action must be taken now to eliminate the current crop of terrorists, but education, freedom and democratic government are keys to holding it in check.

As Iraq/Afganistan moves towards an elected government and a free society, the terrorists will do anything at any cost to stop it.

Contray to what the liberal media says, the Iraq War is not producing terrorists... it is establishing the groundwork to prevent them in the long term.

i´ve met a lot of highly educated muslims while in college.... i guess my limited experience would disprove your generalization.
that didnt made some of them that much different from the ones that want to destroy anything zionist, and it didnt made some of them want to revolt against the theocracies, the jihads or condemn terrorism.

and that happens both sides. education IMO is not enough to fight fundamentalism, as the roots/nature of fundamentalism is not something that can be refuted rationally....

plus.. being highly educated and free, doesnt mean that once they are "free" (as you suggest, whatever that means) they are going to use their freedom to choose another thing...
freedom doesnt mean "i choose to be like the US", it means "i choose to be X", even if X seems to be "not freedom" for you....

 

[Silver]

This would be nice if our stanch ally (who also happen to be big time despots, which doesn't get mentioned in any of the "freedom" speeches) in Saudi Arabia would let school girls flee a burning building without putting on the proper public attire first.

So, is this a good thing? Yes, but it won't mean **** as long as the US keeps talking about freedom and propping up dictators. Ties into what MikeD said above...as long as the oil keeps flowing, we don't care.

 

[genpowell71]

Thats about the way it goes. That Hydrogen powered car is starting to look pretty good to me.

 

[Westy]

Thats about the way it goes. That Hydrogen powered car is starting to look pretty good to me.

Figure out how to get hydrogen without oil and I'll get one to.

 

[valve bouncer]

Figure out how to get hydrogen without oil and I'll get one to.

Oil- Haliburton= Sustainable energy. How'd I do?

 

[Changleen]

Figure out how to get hydrogen without oil and I'll get one to.

The Japanese have got some pretty cool research going on in this area. Cross your fingers.

 

[MikeD]

Cross your fingers.

Totally. It'll be sooo much easier to take Japan this time around...

 

[Transcend]

This is what the current terrorists fear most... education of the masses. Once the muslim world is educated to the same level as those in the West, the terrorist leaders will lose their power. An educated society will push for a free society... and a freely elected government where differing sides will debate their ideas instead of blowing each other up.

People want freedom. Muslims who move from the middle east to the US and other western countries do well under our society.

Of course action must be taken now to eliminate the current crop of terrorists, but education, freedom and democratic government are keys to holding it in check.

As Iraq/Afganistan moves towards an elected government and a free society, the terrorists will do anything at any cost to stop it.

Contray to what the liberal media says, the Iraq War is not producing terrorists... it is establishing the groundwork to prevent them in the long term.

Really? then how do you explain the religious right in america? They have extremists too you know...they call themselves militia. Some of them have western educations I hear.

 

[H8R]

Really? then how do you explain the religious right in america? They have extremists too you know...they call themselves militia. Some of them have western educations I hear.

Education and training....

"(CNN) -- Timothy McVeigh was born April 23, 1968 in Pendleton, New York, and grew up in that rural commuity near Buffalo, Niagara and Canada. He was the middle of three children, and the only boy.

His father worked at a nearby General Motors manufacturing plant; his mother worked for a travel agency. His parents separated for a third and final time in 1984.

High school classmates remember him as small, thin and quiet. He became involved in school functions -- football, track, extra-curricular activities -- but after joining them, soon dropped out. He was shy, did not have a girlfriend and did not date. He did not belong to any clique, but seemed to exist on the margins.

McVeigh graduated from high school in June, 1986 and in the fall, entered a two-year business college. He attended only a short time. During that time McVeigh lived at home with his father, worked at a Burger King and drove dilapidated, old cars.

In 1987 he got a pistol permit from Niagara County and a job in Buffalo as a guard on an armored car. A co-worker recalls that McVeigh owned numerous firearms and had a survivalist philosophy -- a tendency to stockpile weapons and food in preparation for what he believed to be the imminent breakdown of society. In 1988 McVeigh and a friend bought 10 acres of rural land and used it as a shooting range.

McVeigh enlisted in the Army in Buffalo in May 1988, and went through basic training at Fort Benning, Georgia. After basic training, his unit was transferred to Fort Riley, Kansas, and became part of the Army's 1st Infantry Division

McVeigh became a gunner on a Bradley Fighting Vehicle. He was promoted to corporal, sergeant, then platoon leader. Fellow soldiers recalled that McVeigh was very interested in military stuff, kept his own personal collection of firearms and constantly cleaned and maintained them. Other soldiers went into town to look for entertainment or companionship but McVeigh stayed on base and cleaned his guns. During his time in the Army, he also read and recommended to others "The Turner Diaries,"-- a racist, anti-Semitic novel about a soldier in an underground army. A former roommate said that McVeigh would panic at the prospect of the government taking away peoples' guns, but that he was not a racist and was basically indifferent to racial matters.

While at Fort Riley, McVeigh reenlisted in the Army. He aspired to be a member of the Special Forces and in 1990 was accepted into a 3-week school to assess his potential for joining that elite unit. He had barely begun to prepare himself physically for Special Forces training when, in January 1991, the 1st Infantry Division was sent to participate in the Persian Gulf War. As a gunnery sergeant, McVeigh was in action during late February, 1991. Pursuing his desire of joining the Special Forces, he left the Persian Gulf theater early and went to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where he took a battery of IQ, personality and aptitude tests to qualify for Special Forces. However, his participation in the Persian Gulf War had left him no time to prepare himself physically for the demands of Special Forces training. McVeigh was unable to endure a 90-minute march with a 45-pound pack, and he withdrew from the program after two days.

This disappointing experience left him facing years of active service due to his reenlistment at Fort Riley. The Army was downsizing however, and after 3 1/2 years of service, McVeigh took the offer of an early discharge and got out of the military in the fall of 1991.

By January 1992, at age 24, McVeigh was back where he had started, living with his father in Pendleton, New York, driving an old car and working as a security guard.

In January 1993 McVeigh left Pendleton, and began to travel, moving himself and his belongings about in a series of battered old cars. He lived in cheap motels and trailer parks, but also stayed with two Army buddies, Michael Fortier in Kingman, Arizona, and Terry Nichols in Decker, Michigan.

McVeigh traveled to Waco, Texas during the March-April 1993 standoff between the Branch Davidians and federal agents, and was said to have been angry about what he saw. He sold firearms at a gun show in Arizona and was heard to remark on one weapon's ability to shoot down an ATF helicopter.

Although both Arizona and Michigan are host to militant anti-tax, anti-government, survivalist and racist groups, there is no evidence that he ever belonged to any extremist groups. He advertised to sell a weapon in what is described as a virulently anti-Semitic publication. After renting a Ryder truck that has been linked to the Oklahoma City bombing, McVeigh telephoned a religious community that preaches white supremacy, but no one there can remember knowing him or talking to him. His only known affiliations are as a registered Republican in his New York days, and as a member of the National Rifle Association while he was in the Army. "

 

[Toshi]

i hear ted kaczynski had a pretty good "western education" as well... a ph.d. in math from u of michigan after doing undergrad at harvard (math as well) for starters.

 

[Changleen]

Totally. It'll be sooo much easier to take Japan this time around...

I just got that after 2 days. I was drunk when I first read it though.

 

[genpowell71]

Education and training....

"(CNN) -- McVeigh enlisted in the Army in Buffalo in May 1988, and went through basic training at Fort Benning, Georgia. After basic training, his unit was transferred to Fort Riley, Kansas, and became part of the Army's 1st Infantry Division

McVeigh became a gunner on a Bradley Fighting Vehicle. He was promoted to corporal, sergeant, then platoon leader. Fellow soldiers recalled that McVeigh was very interested in military stuff, kept his own personal collection of firearms and constantly cleaned and maintained them. Other soldiers went into town to look for entertainment or companionship but McVeigh stayed on base and cleaned his guns. During his time in the Army, he also read and recommended to others "The Turner Diaries,"-- a racist, anti-Semitic novel about a soldier in an underground army. A former roommate said that McVeigh would panic at the prospect of the government taking away peoples' guns, but that he was not a racist and was basically indifferent to racial matters.

While at Fort Riley, McVeigh reenlisted in the Army. He aspired to be a member of the Special Forces and in 1990 was accepted into a 3-week school to assess his potential for joining that elite unit. He had barely begun to prepare himself physically for Special Forces training when, in January 1991, the 1st Infantry Division was sent to participate in the Persian Gulf War. As a gunnery sergeant, McVeigh was in action during late February, 1991. Pursuing his desire of joining the Special Forces, he left the Persian Gulf theater early and went to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where he took a battery of IQ, personality and aptitude tests to qualify for Special Forces. However, his participation in the Persian Gulf War had left him no time to prepare himself physically for the demands of Special Forces training. McVeigh was unable to endure a 90-minute march with a 45-pound pack, and he withdrew from the program after two days.

"

I love Journalism's way of making everyone that was in the military sound like he/ she was a great soldier and a hero. "he was promoted to corporal, then sergeant and eventually platoon leader". Thats a horseshiat statement. If your a platoon leader, you have to be an officer. And as far as Special Forces go, 75% of people that go thru the assessment for SF dont make the cut. Not making selection is not a big deal. I went thru it and I didnt make it either. They so love to blame the military as part of contributing factors to Mcveigh. Truth is, he had all the chances in the world to excel. he was promoted to be an sergeant, and that takes some effort on his part. Stop trying to blame the Army for making Pyschotics and look to the way they wre raised and the parents.

By the way, bartender, I'll have another Captain and Coke please.

 

[PonySoldier]

... "he was promoted to corporal, then sergeant and eventually platoon leader". Thats a horseshiat statement. If your a platoon leader, you have to be an officer....

Not totally true..in both the 2nd ACR and 1st AD in the late 80's early 90's I had and E-7 and an E-6 as "Platoon Leaders" until suitable replacement Officers were assigned..

 

[H8R]

I love Journalism's way of making everyone that was in the military sound like he/ she was a great soldier and a hero. "he was promoted to corporal, then sergeant and eventually platoon leader". Thats a horseshiat statement. If your a platoon leader, you have to be an officer. And as far as Special Forces go, 75% of people that go thru the assessment for SF dont make the cut. Not making selection is not a big deal. I went thru it and I didnt make it either. They so love to blame the military as part of contributing factors to Mcveigh. Truth is, he had all the chances in the world to excel. he was promoted to be an sergeant, and that takes some effort on his part. Stop trying to blame the Army for making Pyschotics and look to the way they wre raised and the parents.

By the way, bartender, I'll have another Captain and Coke please.

My point was that education and training of Americans or any other people in the world will not necessarily get rid of or even decrease terrorism. In some cases it just makes for a more educated and better trained terrorist. If someone has an agenda, education won't stop them. In fact it might give them brighter ideas on how to kill more people. Not blaming the army, just posting the history.

 

[Andyman_1970]

Really? then how do you explain the religious right in america? They have extremists too you know...they call themselves militia. Some of them have western educations I hear.

Mr. McVeigh I would not label a religious fundamentalist. Others however, the fundamentalist Christian right (long skirt wearing, long hair, no make up, King James version only, etc) typically have a realitively poor education background, the comment I hear regarding Biblical interpretation (for example) is "the Bible is the best commentary on the Bible".............right brought to you by the same people who don't think Jesus was Jewish..........

Although a relative moderate fundamentalist, my pastoral staff all hail from the same SBC seminary which has a reputation as not being terrible scholarly. Interestingly my pastoral staff regualrly ridicule more scholarly seminaries as "liberal" and "watered down" (with regards to their attitudes towards Jesus). Even with moderate fundamentalist education and scholarship seems to be discouraged.

 

[genpowell71]

Not totally true..in both the 2nd ACR and 1st AD in the late 80's early 90's I had and E-7 and an E-6 as "Platoon Leaders" until suitable replacement Officers were assigned..

Sorry, I've been light infantry all my career. I didnt know thats how they did things over in Mech land...

 

[MikeD]

Sorry, I've been light infantry all my career. I didnt know thats how they did things over in Mech land...

Seen a lot of Marine infantry units with temporary enlisted platoon commanders, too...

 

[PonySoldier]

Sorry, I've been light infantry all my career. I didnt know thats how they did things over in Mech land...

No need to apologize, generally we preferred Senior NCO's as Platoon Leaders to brand new 2 Lt's. Most of them were not Armor Officers but mostly Intel guys waiting for a billet to open up at Fort Huachuaca (sp?)

 

[genpowell71]

Seen a lot of Marine infantry units with temporary enlisted platoon commanders, too...

Yeah but I figure thats the marines. They do things bassackwards over there. And I would know, my brother in law is marine infantry.

 

[MikeD]

No need to apologize, generally we preferred Senior NCO's as Platoon Leaders to brand new 2 Lt's. Most of them were not Armor Officers but mostly Intel guys waiting for a billet to open up at Fort Huachuaca (sp?)

The Army's Cav leader's course ran an MTT with us... (Marine light armor) and in my limited experience with the Army, their 2nd Lts were 1) not expected to perform at all, and 2) treated like dirt by both seniors and subordinates. It was really too bad to see.

MD

 

[MikeD]

Yeah but I figure thats the marines. They do things bassackwards over there. And I would know, my brother in law is marine infantry.

But who's going to do the job when there's literally no officer around to do it? Likewise, when there's an officer around, but his vital signs aren't? Gotta have at least one enlisted man stepping up to do the job...

Maybe that means the Platoon "Leader" position just isn't that important...?
Or, simply, that it's a matter of terminology...your platoon sergeants simply take over the job of platoon leader in his absence, without taking on the title?


MD

 

[PonySoldier]

The Army's Cav leader's course ran an MTT with us... (Marine light armor) and in my limited experience with the Army, their 2nd Lts were 1) not expected to perform at all, and 2) treated like dirt by both seniors and subordinates. It was really too bad to see.

MD

I felt bad for most of them since they were expecting one thing and got another. They Intel guys had no clue nor did anyone really expect anything from them, alot of "Just stay out of the way Sir and we will get you through this".. Supposedly it was to give them some leadership seasoning. Nobody treats a 2Lt worse than a Senior Army NCO..

 

[genpowell71]

But who's going to do the job when there's literally no officer around to do it? Likewise, when there's an officer around, but his vital signs aren't? Gotta have at least one enlisted man stepping up to do the job...

Maybe that means the Platoon "Leader" position just isn't that important...?
Or, simply, that it's a matter of terminology...your platoon sergeants simply take over the job of platoon leader in his absence, without taking on the title?


MD

I'll be the first person in line behind the PSG to treat them like shiat. I dont like officers at all. I think the majority of them are a waste of space and air. I was just making a point that the press will glorify anything to make a story seem more plausible.

 

[PonySoldier]

..I think the majority of them are a waste of space and air. I was just making a point that the press will glorify anything to make a story seem more plausible.

Agreed..most of them (Non-Armor) were smart enough to stay out of the way leave the platoon to the NCO's

 

[genpowell71]

Agreed..most of them (Non-Armor) were smart enough to stay out of the way leave the platoon to the NCO's

I think the biggest problem was the west pointers that thought they knew it all. I had to slap my PL when we were in Iraq and he told us that this was a textbook mission like he did in ranger school. All of us squad leaders pulled him off to the side and told him not to get in the way or he might get shot. After that, we never had a problem with him till he caught some shrapnel trying to take a picture of a firefight.

 

[PonySoldier]

I think the biggest problem was the west pointers that thought they knew it all.....trying to take a picture of a firefight.

Speaks volumes about some of them..

 

[Changleen]

Army army army guns guns guns.

Sorry, carry on.