Open thread: Sunday morning talking heads

posted at 8:01 am on February 23, 2014 by Allahpundit

Set those DVRs: It’s always a capital-e Event when Susan Rice hits the Sunday shows to push some misleading White House spin. She’ll be on “Meet the Press” this morning to warn Viktor Yanukovych and his pal Vladimir that they’d better not cross Obama’s red line in Ukraine or else we’ll … just have to look the other way and pretend that they haven’t.

If you’d rather wait and watch the Rice segment in a week or two after some new fact’s emerged to prove that she lied, flip to “This Week” and watch Dubya chat with Stephanopoulos about his presidency in retrospect. An obvious question at the moment: What exactly did Bush see in Putin’s “soul” the first time they met? (Actually, Bush has already explained that.)

Meanwhile, Scott Walker will be on “Fox News Sunday” to patiently remind the media yet again that the big scandal they’re babbling about this week is a juicy, if stale, nothingburger. The full line-up is at Politico.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:03 AM

I’m sorry if it is off-putting. I suppose it’s the FPSer in me. While I have to answer your question with a “no,” I’d like to qualify that. I have a medical condition that renders me inelligible for enlistment in the military, though I am an avid (in the amateur academic sense) scholar of Klausewitz, Sun Tzu, Musashi, and Patton.

I don’t know what a FPSer is. I do know what an SA7 and an SA8 are though.

I know war’s not easy. But I also know that there are deskbound personnel in The Pentagon who would sell the people in their command up the creek in a heartbeat for political expediency. The whole civilian command thing is a double-edged sword.

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 10:10 AM

Do you know how few are left that have no combat experience now? Except for new recruits, nearly everyone of the period of these wars has deployed. Even if you found and express your obvious utter contempt to that particular non-deployed military member, working on on real world GWOT strategies from the pentagon, you think your war novel research trumps their particular basic officer qualification discipline, War College or CAS3 training?

But this is the bottom line of why I detest trying to make any reasoned exchange with you. You throw out some idiotic point like your plan of attack for Afghanistan above. It being so utterly ridiculous in scope, I try to ignore it. You badger me until I address it and then try to move on to something else while you accuse me of being all per the place.

You wanted to drop leaflets and carpet bomb Afghanistan. You read that’s effective in a book somewhere. I think I covered pretty reasonably how asinine doing that would have been. Was there some other point you wanted to address specifically, because this gets tiring.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM

Bush was Islams greatest protector and booster. They all miss him for sure.

BL@KBIRD on February 23, 2014 at 10:12 AM

For better and for worse, I think you are quite right here.

Jaibones on February 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM

I was a little worried you weren’t going to show. I had to run the better half a few mountains over from here. Funny. I’m a creature of habit. On my return not seeing your post was a disappointment. Then, magically, it appeared. Lolz! ; )

Bmore on February 23, 2014 at 10:27 AM

It’s obvious we are at least lucky yours was not the road to war plan we used.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:19 AM

Bush’s prosecution of the war on terror al qaeda is the scenario that made Obama’s RoE change possible. But whatevs.

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 10:22 AM

Idiotic assertion. But I’ll come back to that if you address what I stated about your original plan of attack for Afghanistan. If you can.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:27 AM

It’s obvious we are at least lucky yours was not the road to war plan we used.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:19 AM

Bush’s prosecution of the war on terror al qaeda is the scenario that made Obama’s RoE change possible. But whatevs.

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 10:22 AM

So gryphon, are you of the Curtis Lemay school of thought? Or along the line of nuke ‘em first ask questions later?

On a serious note, with many nations now having nuke’s it changed how we do war.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:28 AM

Andrew Wilcow talked about this on his Sirius/XM show just before the new law went into effect on Jan. 1. Basically, Pemex doesn’t have the skills to exploit the Mexican portion of Eagle Ford shale play, and needs U.S. help. The problem is the American oil companies have to be be assured that their workers won’t be kidnapped or their oil and equipment won’t be stolen by the cartels, and that the next Mexican government won’t simply renationalize the oilfields once some type of in-nation fracking infrastructure is in place.

On the other hand — the only way you’re going to stop illegal immigration from Mexico to the U.S. is to give them a reason not to go over the border. You can go into the Eagle Ford or Permian Basin oilfields every day and see illegal immigrant workers being hired by subcontractors, due to both the worker shortage and the fact that hiring U.S. workers means paying the going rates of $40,000-$100,000 a year, depending on the level of the job. Develop Eagle Ford in Mexico — even if the jobs over there pay only half as much — and the illegals will stay on their side of the border to get the money.

jon1979 on February 23, 2014 at 10:01 AM

When Gov. Perry was running way back when…He spoke about a New Monroe Doctrine Policy directed toward our southern neighbors.

Last Nov. He talked about US-MX joint co-operation on expanding border security on both of Mexico’s borders…all the way to Guatemala.

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/americas/middleamerica.jpg

This comment was in relation to the upcoming vote for foreign investment and denationalizing PEMEX.

It’s gonna happen if we are to build up our economy,energy independence and secure our energy interests and the Gulf. China is funding Cuban drilling.

I for one would rather have a conservative Texan calling the shots…It’s one reason I supported Perry when he ran.

workingclass artist on February 23, 2014 at 10:28 AM

Are you abandoning your assertion we should have dropped leaflets for 72 hours warning the populace where we were going to bomb and then carpet bomb Al Qaeda in Afghanistan?

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:30 AM

Lolz! ; )

Bmore on February 23, 2014 at 10:27 AM

Truly. I effed up my laptop a week ago and did the last two weeks on my wife’s iPad. Not ideal, but the show must go on! Hope to have the PC back up this week.

Jaibones on February 23, 2014 at 10:32 AM

I don’t miss his big government ways at all. I do miss his class and honesty. This sickening administration makes Bush look like Calvin Coolidge.

Jaibones on February 23, 2014 at 10:23 AM

My father-in-law, God rest his soul, had direct dealings with President Clinton and President Bush and after the stories he told me my respect for President Clinton went down and my respect for President Bush went up.

My FIL used to appear ever so often back when CNN was the only player. Typing this reminds me of what a great man he was and what a good stick he was.

Never a time we went fishing that he would not remind me to check six. Darn, I am a little sad.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:34 AM

Are you abandoning your assertion we should have dropped leaflets for 72 hours warning the populace where we were going to bomb and then carpet bomb Al Qaeda in Afghanistan?

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:30 AM

I said nothing about carpet bombing Afghanistan. The war on terror Al Qaeda was not a war on Afghanistan.

I am abandoning this thread. This conversation is going nowhere.

So gryphon, are you of the Curtis Lemay school of thought? Or along the line of nuke ‘em first ask questions later?

On a serious note, with many nations now having nuke’s it changed how we do war.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:28 AM

I am of the “we should fear no one and nothing with any possible military tactic, up to and including nukes, at our disposal” school of thought. The ability to fire SLBM’s from less than 100 miles off the coast of virtually any non-landlocked nation on earth renders the question of MAD destruction practically moot, much as the establishment of ICBM stocks rendered the question of CONELRAD moot back in the day.

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 10:38 AM

Never a time we went fishing that he would not remind me to check six. Darn, I am a little sad.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:34 AM

Nice. Always remember the great ones to our kids. This sickening media is incapable of honoring character in the honorable.

Jaibones on February 23, 2014 at 10:40 AM

Are you abandoning your assertion we should have dropped leaflets for 72 hours warning the populace where we were going to bomb and then carpet bomb Al Qaeda in Afghanistan?

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:30 AM

I said nothing about carpet bombing Afghanistan. The war on terror Al Qaeda was not a war on Afghanistan.

I am abandoning this thread. This conversation is going nowhere.

Translated. “I’ve had my ass handed to me “again” and can’t defend my original assertions. I tried to expand the conversation into a different point, but wasn’t allowed to and cannot see anyway out off this exchange except running like a scalded dog.”

Good use of retrograde operations though. Now you’re thinking like a military man.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:46 AM

Is anyone else watching MTP.

Seems like Susan Rice is full of it.

22044 on February 23, 2014 at 10:48 AM

gryphon202, not talking about MAD just to let you know. The military carries out its mission based on “ROE” signed off by civilian leaders. Civilians ultimately decide when and how to go to war. Society changed after WWII and you could see the change in the forgotten war (Korea) and Vietnam.

We, the citizens, have a powerful indirect way in how war is waged. What HD is saying is that there is a lot of leeway a President has in crafting reasonable ROE. Him, being a boot on the ground, thought President Bush’s ROEs were more effective. I trust his judgment on that issue….and others.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Good use of retrograde operations though. Now you’re thinking like a military man.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:46 AM

Ouch, that will leave a mark! Chuckle!!

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:56 AM

Soory, no way of telling who I was addressing. Let me try that again.

I said nothing about carpet bombing Afghanistan. The war on terror Al Qaeda was not a war on Afghanistan.

I am abandoning this thread. This conversation is going nowhere.

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 10:38 AM</blockquote

Translated. “I’ve had my ass handed to me “again” and can’t defend my original assertions. I tried to expand the conversation into a different point, but wasn’t allowed to and cannot see anyway out off this exchange except running like a scalded dog.”

Good use of retrograde operations though. Now you’re thinking like a military man.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:46 AM

Sorry about that.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:58 AM

Bush also scared Putin a little.

Bush invited him to the Oval Office. He wanted the majesty of the room, IMO, as Putin had never been inside. When Putin walked in, the sun was pouring in the from windows lighting up the whole room. Putin gasped at the beauty.

Nicely played, W.

PattyJ on February 23, 2014 at 11:00 AM

gryphon202, not talking about MAD just to let you know. The military carries out its mission based on “ROE” signed off by civilian leaders. Civilians ultimately decide when and how to go to war. Society changed after WWII and you could see the change in the forgotten war (Korea) and Vietnam.

We, the citizens, have a powerful indirect way in how war is waged. What HD is saying is that there is a lot of leeway a President has in crafting reasonable ROE. Him, being a boot on the ground, thought President Bush’s ROEs were more effective. I trust his judgment on that issue….and others.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Nukes have changed the way we wage war largely because of MAD. I know what you mean about South Korea and Vietnam, but the way those engagements turned out just tells me that not only have we not learned anything from WWII, but militarily, we’ve regressed.

As for Bush’s RoE’s, they were more effective, simply cause Bush gave a shit. That doesn’t necessarily mean that Bush didn’t needlessly cost lives. One doesn’t have to be an anti-colonial Marxist to be a progressive. And as I said upthread, I think Bush’s most important and most egregious failings were domestic. Government expanded under his watch largely unabated. He eroded my freedoms just like every FedGov politician has throughout my lifetime.

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 11:01 AM

gryphon202, not talking about MAD just to let you know. The military carries out its mission based on “ROE” signed off by civilian leaders. Civilians ultimately decide when and how to go to war. Society changed after WWII and you could see the change in the forgotten war (Korea) and Vietnam.

He doesn’t understand ROE.

We, the citizens, have a powerful indirect way in how war is waged. What HD is saying is that there is a lot of leeway a President has in crafting reasonable ROE. Him, being a boot on the ground, thought President Bush’s ROEs were more effective. I trust his judgment on that issue….and others.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Thank you. That and there were specific changes that obama implemented that had nothing to do with President Bush. Those changes quite dramatically changed the manner in which we were allowed to engage the enemy. Gyphoons claim that obama had to somehow changed the ROE because of something President Bush did is baffling to say the least.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:01 AM

Is anyone else watching MTP.

Seems like Susan Rice is full of it.

22044 on February 23, 2014 at 10:48 AM

You post made me think of a conversation between two of my employees. The conservative asked the liberal to name one positive thing Ms. Clinton has done.

Before my liberal friend could answer, I interjected that I can’t even name one good democrat that Obama has chosen. Being a liberal myself, the discussion ended. Come on….Susan Rice…another no nothing pick. I will say it out loud….our bench is mostly made up of folks with no common sense or usable real world experience.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 11:02 AM

Dropping carpet on our enemies doesn’t seem like it would be all that effective.

Bishop on February 23, 2014 at 11:04 AM

As for Bush’s RoE’s, they were more effective, simply cause Bush gave a shit.

The question here is not why President Bush’s were more effective. What did obama do to make them less effective in your opinion?

That doesn’t necessarily mean that Bush didn’t needlessly cost lives. One doesn’t have to be an anti-colonial Marxist to be a progressive.

Address the ROE with some specificity. How did he needlessly cost lives, specifically?

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:06 AM

We, the citizens, have a powerful indirect way in how war is waged.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:53 AM

And this statement alone, might I add, is an indictment of the American people. We have no stomach for war. We’re a nation of wimps.

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 11:06 AM

Dropping carpet on our enemies doesn’t seem like it would be all that effective.

Bishop on February 23, 2014 at 11:04 AM

…………

Oh, Bish, you silly silly goose.

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 11:07 AM

Bush also scared Putin a little.
Bush invited him to the Oval Office. He wanted the majesty of the room, IMO, as Putin had never been inside. When Putin walked in, the sun was pouring in the from windows lighting up the whole room. Putin gasped at the beauty.
Nicely played, W.
PattyJ on February 23, 2014 at 11:00 AM

I would say more than a little. Having the missile shield in Poland put pressure on Putin. He knew we weren’t to be played with. In this regime, we have jug ears unconditional surrender, and enemies laugh in his face

Brock Robamney on February 23, 2014 at 11:11 AM

Just trying to lighten the mood, can’t we all get along, I’m a peacemaker, blah blah blah.

Bishop on February 23, 2014 at 11:17 AM

We, the citizens, have a powerful indirect way in how war is waged. What HD is saying is that there is a lot of leeway a President has in crafting reasonable ROE. Him, being a boot on the ground, thought President Bush’s ROEs were more effective. I trust his judgment on that issue….and others.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Neither BUSH’s nor Zero’s ROE are any good. We started down the wrong path in 2002, if memory serves. Zero has made things impossible.

We need to completely flatten our enemies and their infrastructure. War is ugly. If you want to win, you have to kill your enemy. It’s not complex.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:17 AM

Dropping carpet on our enemies doesn’t seem like it would be all that effective.

Bishop on February 23, 2014 at 11:04 AM

Since DADT was repealed there a been a been a need for more interior designers don’t you know.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 11:17 AM

Have a nice day, everyone! Time for me to head out!

blueballs on February 23, 2014 at 9:03 AM

…as always!…when the heat gets turned up…

KOOLAID2 on February 23, 2014 at 11:22 AM

We need to completely flatten our enemies and their infrastructure. War is ugly. If you want to win, you have to kill your enemy. It’s not complex.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:17 AM

oh Jeebus! Look! it’s another one of my sockpuppets!

HAWK!

/ROFLMMFAO

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 11:23 AM

oh Jeebus! Look! it’s another one of my sockpuppets!

HAWK!

/ROFLMMFAO

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Oh, now it’s safe to address me? um … obligatory rofl?

Care to cover your original points then?

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:31 AM

Oh, now it’s safe to address me? um … obligatory rofl?

Care to cover your original points then?

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:31 AM

GFY. :)

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Enjoy!

Jaibones on February 23, 2014 at 10:16 AM

…thanks Jai!…now I can look for some of the re-runs (:->)

KOOLAID2 on February 23, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Do you know how few are left that have no combat experience now? Except for new recruits, nearly everyone of the period of these wars has deployed.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM

The only POSSIBLE gain from going into that place, but think of the moral implications of making your war making policy on that basis. Let’s kill a few hundred thousand indigents so that our military can have some combat experience.

I’m not saying that was Bush’s or the Pentagon’s rationale for our misadventures in the Middle East but it would probably have been superior to what WERE their rationales.

Cleombrotus on February 23, 2014 at 11:33 AM

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:31 AM

GFY. :)

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Classy, as always.

gryphon202, I made it clear above your exchanges were normally pointless to engage in because of your predictable antics. I was polite in not pointing your timestamps out directly in trying to beg off getting into another exchange where you’d embarrass yourself or lose your temper as customary. So please, in the future do me several favors. Please don’t enter into a conversation you’re not willing to see through to the end with at least your original points. Don’t accuse me of doing something, like changing the subject or being all over the place, when it is in fact “you” doing that. Most of all, try not to let allow your temper to consistently reduce your exchanges to vulgarities toward me.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:35 AM

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:17 AM

You’ve confused ROE with strategic or tactical objectives.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:37 AM

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Were you guys arguing?

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:42 AM

You’ve confused ROE with strategic or tactical objectives.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:37 AM

No, not really. One employs tactics to achieve strategic objectives. Killing all of one’s enemies gets you there. Not killing them achieves nothing.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:45 AM

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:31 AM

GFY. :)

gryphon202 on February 23, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Really, one last thing you might want to consider. If you really are bent on discussing things outside your knowledge base and comfort zone, google it and read up a bit before you “again” demonstrate your innate and consistent inability to discuss it.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:46 AM

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:45 AM

Yes really.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 11:48 AM

Were you guys arguing?

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:42 AM

I have eliminated the movie and you are to young to have fought in the Indians Plains wars, thus I am down to four more possibilities of the meaning of your nic.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 11:49 AM

while the leaflets tactic (as used in WW2) wasn’t a good option the leaflets strategy (modified to fit current needs) was something I thought should have been explored.
find a way to let the villages know that if they ignored/housed/supported al queda in any manner they were to be considered valid targets.
give them a timeframe to react then take action.
use any weapon needed to achieve the mission with the least loss of life to OUR citizens.

dmacleo on February 23, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Dropping carpet on our enemies doesn’t seem like it would be all that effective.

Bishop on February 23, 2014 at 11:04 AM

Heh. How about if we included wet blankets with the carpet bombing?

By the way, the civilian leadership at the DOD is what has screwed the troops engaged in combat everywhere. Believe me, the guys in Vietnam hated the civilian interference and ROE.

Vince on February 23, 2014 at 11:54 AM

I have eliminated the movie and you are to young to have fought in the Indians Plains wars, thus I am down to four more possibilities of the meaning of your nic.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 11:49 AM

I could have saved you the guessing. I am a Vietnam veteran. some of us called each other dogsoldiers, some in deference to the Cheyenne of which we had read. That’s all it is.

Hawk, I still disagree with you.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:54 AM

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Oh, and I’m older than you think.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:55 AM

Hawk, I still disagree with you.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Thanks for you service and it’s your right, but your original statement is not correct.

Neither BUSH’s nor Zero’s ROE are any good.

Okay, specify the particulars of each you disagreed with.

We need to completely flatten our enemies and their infrastructure. War is ugly. If you want to win, you have to kill your enemy. It’s not complex.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 11:17 AM

What’s boldened is a strategic objective. Your ROE might dictate how you can achieve that, but it isn’t the ROE.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 12:00 PM

find a way to let the villages know that if they ignored/housed/supported al queda in any manner they were to be considered valid targets.
dmacleo on February 23, 2014 at 11:49 AM

That was actually done and the prime purpose of every Shura conducted. Have you had a chance to watch “Restrepo?” Several examples of how they were conducted.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 12:04 PM

I’ll take your non reply as, “But I don’t want to go for a ride.” *whine* Giddy Up!!!!

Bmore on February 23, 2014 at 12:05 PM

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 12:00 PM

Ok, I will concede the point. Specifically how one neutralizes a target is tactical, the reason for doing it are strategic.

Okay, specify the particulars of each you disagreed with.

Yes, in 2002 (if memory serves.I read the doc, it made me sick) Bush decided to adopt COIN and our guys could not fire on Taliban or AQ without permission, especially in the presence of “non hostiles.”

New Zero changed the ROW that if our guys are attached and the enemy withdraws, our guys can’t pursue and kill the enemy. Also we should be bombing the sheep dip out of their strongholds and we are not, for fear of killing “civilians.”

I argue there are no civilians present.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 12:11 PM

Sorry ROW should read ROE

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 12:12 PM

Boogity! Boogity! Boogity!!!!!

Perfect excuse to crack a beer at 10am. I can’t control time zones.

wolly4321 on February 23, 2014 at 12:20 PM

And this statement alone, might I add, is an indictment of the American people. We have no stomach for war. We’re a nation of wimps.

This from the battle hardened “FPSer” who is such an ardent student of history he can’t spell Clausewitz correctly.

F X Muldoon on February 23, 2014 at 12:25 PM

Counterinsurgency started in Iraq actually in 2004 and it was drawn out but pretty successful by 2007. One of the things that made it successful was opening main supply routes MSRs or highways. What opened up the MSRs was my Apache battalion 1-82 to prosecute the war against IED employers to the point where they were afraid to do it. If you were conducting any of the required tasks to emplace, the”ROE” allowed you to be attacked.

1. Prepping roadways for digging.
2. Digging in roadways.
3. Emplacing charges.
4. Wiring the charge or setting denotation devices.
5. Observing an IED site in defilade.

In Iraq during the lead up to the Anbar Awakening under Petraeus and Iraq COIN, this would get you killed as an Insurgent and they pretty much stopped and the road where navigable and Coalition Forces were able to interact with the populace and travel to engage the enemy.

That’s also the difference between a strategic objective and ROE. COIN was strategic and metrics like I’ve listed, were allowance in the ROE that allowed you to execute the strategy.

And not sure what you’re remembering, but COIN wasn’t really adopted in Afghanistan until Gen McChrystal after success in Iraq. But again, the difference is in the ROE. Under obama and McChrystal, the ability to engage someone placing an IED was severely restricted. You essentially had to see every element of the operation before you were allowed to pull any trigger. Considering a lot of times, several teams conducted different steps to execute an IED attack. Under obama, it became near impossible. More troops have now died in Afghanistan under obama and the majority are IED and indirect fire related. The problem with indirect fire is you have to see the attacker to shoot or it is considered, “Unobserved Indirect Fire”.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 12:32 PM

Lots of typos, sorry.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 12:33 PM

New Zero changed the ROW that if our guys are attached and the enemy withdraws, our guys can’t pursue and kill the enemy. Also we should be bombing the sheep dip out of their strongholds and we are not, for fear of killing “civilians.”

Looking again, this is also true. It would probably fall under the Unobserved Indirect Fire rule.

I argue there are no civilians present.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 12:11 PM

That wasn’t true in your war and it’s not true in an GWOT endeavor.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 12:37 PM

Depends on the definition of civilian. If you are a male of military age within a certain distant of the target and it is a drone attack under the fire command of the CIA…you are not a civilian under any circumstance and any kills will not be listed as a civilian casualty. Legal issues with the CIA conducting military engagement are part of the reason for this ROE. Not commenting on the use of drones and this ROE, just pointing out the term civilian has different definitions. Also, makes it easier for the press to ignore these types of casualties under President Obama’s watch.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 1:12 PM

That wasn’t true in your war and it’s not true in an GWOT endeavor.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 12:37 PM

You’re correct about my war, the current engagement in Afghanistan is not the same. There we have people who are ardently openly hostile and helpful to the enemy.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 1:16 PM

That was actually done and the prime purpose of every Shura conducted. Have you had a chance to watch “Restrepo?” Several examples of how they were conducted.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 12:04 PM

no, I may check it out.
I’m one of the types that has no problems using tactical nukes when needed too so my views are considered skewed.
spent years guarding lance units in the field and figured may as well use them.

dmacleo on February 23, 2014 at 1:19 PM

There we have people who are ardently openly hostile and helpful to the enemy …

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 1:16 PM

… standing next, riding in cars with, in the same building as … Afghani children.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:20 PM

… standing next, riding in cars with, in the same building as … Afghani children.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:20 PM

Yeah you can talk to me about that after you look at the victims of the Boston Marathon and many others.

We flattened Germany in WWII and many cities in Japan, further, we unleashed two atomic weapons to avoid the bloodbath we knew would come. It was reasonable for us to do it then and now. I do not care about children who will grow up to be terrorists.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 1:24 PM

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 1:12 PM

As always, your comments are balanced and reasoned. I’m going to fall right in and say not much to disagree with in your comment. By opinion and in basic compliance with ROE under Bush.

Came very close to shooting you a throwaway email address the other day.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:25 PM

… standing next, riding in cars with, in the same building as … Afghani children.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:20 PM

and that is a problem, but…and this is why I am called a bloodthirsty ahole often…I don’t care. I consider the life/safety of one of our soldiers to be worth more to me than everyone in that village.
but at the same time I recognize these issues and trust the on scene commanders judgements.
its not a cut and dried issue.

dmacleo on February 23, 2014 at 1:27 PM

Yeah you can talk to me about that after you look at the victims of the Boston Marathon and many others.

We flattened Germany in WWII and many cities in Japan, further, we unleashed two atomic weapons to avoid the bloodbath we knew would come. It was reasonable for us to do it then and now. I do not care about children who will grow up to be terrorists.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 1:24 PM

Or, you can talk with me now after having to look at their lifeless little bodies in the back of my helicopter.

Bombing with reckless abandon in either OEF or OIF wouldn’t have prevented Boston.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:28 PM

Bombing with reckless abandon in either OEF or OIF wouldn’t have prevented Boston.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:28 PM

True, but it proves the intention of the enemy. They mean to kill all of us and every one of them is a warrior prepared to kill us. We must insure it’s them, not us.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 1:35 PM

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:28 PM

True, but it proves the intention of the enemy. They mean to kill all of us and every one of them is a warrior prepared to kill us. We must insure it’s them, not us.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 1:35 PM

Yeah like you said above, we’ll just disagree. A dead 3 year old wasn’t anyone’s warrior yet.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:39 PM

As always, your comments are balanced and reasoned. I’m going to fall right in and say not much to disagree with in your comment. By opinion and in basic compliance with ROE under Bush.

Came very close to shooting you a throwaway email address the other day.

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:25 PM

Problem with some of my comments is that they sound too harsh. When I used to post on hobby sites I hated smilies. When I became a moderator on one site I liked them, no matter how silly they look, because my dark dry humour would be better understood. Also, I am old and stubborn.

I debated using tango or target for some strange reason.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 1:46 PM

Dropping carpet on our enemies doesn’t seem like it would be all that effective.

Bishop on February 23, 2014 at 11:04 AM

We’ll no, not if it was a nice broadloom or a plush, or even a high quality Berber. But they were dropping purple and lime green shags, and one of those vinyl porch carpets. It was devastating.

Jaibones on February 23, 2014 at 2:04 PM

True, but it proves the intention of the enemy. They mean to kill all of us and every one of them is a warrior prepared to kill us. We must insure it’s them, not us.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 1:35 PM

The ME is a mess, has been for about forever, and it depends what part of the ME you are talking about. I know a bit of the Sunni culture and actually have been accepted. Not so much with the Shia or Persian culture. Culture is not the right word, but the subject matter is complicated. I understand where both you and Hawk are coming from and I have mixed emotions on the issue at hand.

Islam is way more than a religion and hard for us from the West to understand. Way too heavy a subject and I ain’t no expert anyway. I do like goat I must admit.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 2:05 PM

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 2:05 PM

Yes the ME is a mess. I had mixed feelings until I listened to muslim mothers of suicide bombers and observed many pictures of five year old dressed in black bandanas and fake explosive vests screaming death to America, along with their older siblings, uncles and mothers.

At a certain point, one has to see the writing, whether they like it or not.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 2:24 PM

Can Rupert Murdoch, and Roger Ailes, destroy the Left?
Having Juan Williams and Jane Harmon explaining Obama’s foreign policy (and most everything else) is a step in that direction.

Another Drew on February 23, 2014 at 2:38 PM

Yes the ME is a mess. I had mixed feelings until I listened to muslim mothers of suicide bombers and observed many pictures of five year old dressed in black bandanas and fake explosive vests screaming death to America, along with their older siblings, uncles and mothers.

At a certain point, one has to see the writing, whether they like it or not.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2014 at 2:24 PM

Understand your viewpoint and not in the position to argue. Most likely those you speak of follow Wahhabism (not the correct term, but one used in the West) and why do the majority of followers of Islam not publicly denounce them? I have no short answer, but I will say this…..we will never solve the problems that you speak of. It has to come from within Islam.

Will that happen? History is a good predictor. Heck, I can’t get fellow Liberals to understand how the economy works. Sheesh, this old Git ain’t much use to anybody!

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 2:43 PM

Sheesh, this old Git ain’t much use to anybody!

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 2:43 PM

from what I read I would bet you actually are worth something to people.

dmacleo on February 23, 2014 at 2:51 PM

Problem with some of my comments is that they sound too harsh. When I used to post on hobby sites I hated smilies. When I became a moderator on one site I liked them, no matter how silly they look, because my dark dry humour would be better understood. Also, I am old and stubborn.

I debated using tango or target for some strange reason.

HonestLib on February 23, 2014 at 1:46 PM

Imma likin’ you more with each comment.

katy the mean old lady on February 23, 2014 at 5:29 PM

hawkdriver on February 23, 2014 at 1:28 PM

It depends on who is president. Barack Osama or George Bush

Brock Robamney on February 24, 2014 at 6:46 AM

Comment pages: 1 2