Military bros (or non), what say you

[redshirt27se]

He makes a point...you can't clear every ied...and their war is a hell of a lot cheaper than ours. Iraq and Afghanistan are costing massive amounts of resources and failing. By all accounts the upcoming Afghan election will be as much of a fraud as the last, funded by narco trafficking and their head of state. Obama is waiting for a positive report from Afghanistan to turn tail and run and Iraq is on its own...

perhaps, but he's just trolling to incite emotions.

 

[javaguru]

perhaps, but he's just trolling to incite emotions.

Afghanistan is the point. We can argue about Iraq until the cows come home....of the two it's the most likely to have the successful outcome and it is neither here nor there. Afghanistan is the 9/11 war and it's failing for the same reasons every attempt to occupy Afghanistan has failed. Any student of military history knows that providing a stable and LEGITIMATE government is the way to win a counter insurgency...in a decade we haven't been able to do either in Afghanistan. I supported the limited engagement after 9/11 but it has evolved into some ridiculous charade.....This election will be the Diem moment for the Obama Administration...I no longer serve but I still take my duty to my brothers and sisters in arms seriously and actively work for veterans issues....

 

[Tblock1]

Then explain Afghanistan...The citizens have been indoctrinated to support the war as equivalent to supporting the troops because of Vietnam. Beaker makes a point...I can take an illiterate twelve year old and give him a third hand $150.00 AK-47 and if he stands in the right place, I won't point it out, he takes out the first marine breaching the building but he does die to the second but nobody cares about a third world illiterate...This country cares a lot about dead soldiers.They're half a penny a dozen...and they hate America...

Those are all good points. Before we dropped the bomb on japan they were prepared to sacrifice 20 million japanese civilians of all ages. They said that they could win the war if they were prepared to make the sacrifice. Other cultures have a different value on human life for sure.... And $150 for an ak is way too much they go for like $5-$20 at most

 

[javaguru]

Those are all good points. Before we dropped the bomb on japan they were prepared to sacrifice 20 million japanese civilians of all ages. They said that they could win the war if they were prepared to make the sacrifice. Other cultures have a different value on human life for sure.... And $150 for an ak is way too much they go for like $5-$20 at most

They were going for $150.00 apiece in Mogadishu back in the day. I'm not really up on the price of third world weapons these days but my point is that it's cheaper to pay third world people to kill one another than to send a modern army into the fray and pay the price in blood, disability checks and other entitlements.

 

[bakemeacookie]

you're a fucking idiot. what point does your post have other than just to stir up shit you know nothing about?


you do know that engineers constantly clear roads where IEDs are placed, right? god forbid a few go off and people die. but lets just make light of that so you can make an uninformed point.

Well have fun letting the enemy figure this shit out then. You should thank god the military hires smart people who think like the enemy to do this thinking for you. Way to ignore my points and focus on certain words.

It's lazy thinkers like you that thought terrorists only do car bombs that a bunch of smart little fuckers took advantage of that and flew a couples planes in NYC. Backwards thinking politicians in control got owned.

Yeah, who needs to think like the terrorists in order to stop them. How stoopid a concept! Warfare has changed sir. This ain't your grandpa's war.

c

 

[Mr. dB]

Instead of dumbing down basic training for everyone, the unfit recruits should be sent to a special remedial program to bring them up to speed, then be sent to traditional basic training.

 

[Tblock1]

Instead of dumbing down basic training for everyone, the unfit recruits should be sent to a special remedial program to bring them up to speed, then be sent to traditional basic training.

yeah that is what they usually do. That is standard practice for all branches to send them to remedial pt. However it seems the quality of recruits is so low that more people would be in remedial than regular !

 

[shirlene29]

Instead of dumbing down basic training for everyone, the unfit recruits should be sent to a special remedial program to bring them up to speed, then be sent to traditional basic training.

yeah, its fatty camp pt...they've been doing this for years

my other half was an engineer...so did a lot of ied clearing...bad stuff
now he works for a company that works on ideas for making that safer

but back on topic, I think the changes in pt were also brought about to prevent injuries that are 100% preventable...
the military has a lot of basic injuries...thats lost money too, training care and feeding plus pay for untrained injured "soldiers"

 

[javaguru]

As other have stated, we had hold overs and recycles back in the 90's. They would sit in reception until they met the basic physical requirements which included weight. Recycling has been a military tradition for a long time, a friend of mine recycled three times before he made it through ranger school, three injuries. A chick in my PLDC platoon had to recycle due to an injury she received right before the final field problem.

 

[javaguru]

This scene always reminds me of Marines...