still denying them.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Johnson
You've got to admit not everybody understands that is the risk when they sign
up for National Guard training. (Which is where most of the soldiers in Iraq and
Afghanistan are drawn from.) They do learn pretty quick once the "machine" gets
ahold of them during and after Basic though.
I have no problem with our guys and gals being put in harms way. That is part
of the job. The same is true for policemen and firemen and crab fishermen and
sponge divers and cab drivers.
But we as a nation owe it to them to do everything we can to keep that risk to
a minimum. They should not be thought of as expendable. Heck, if for no other
reason it costs too darn much to train a new one.
We also owe it to them to speak up when we think they are being used badly, or
aren't getting the help and support they need and deserve. They (by law) cannot
speak for themselves, so we have to do our part and speak for them.
Did we need to go to war at all?
Should we have had a better plan for the post-war occupation?
Should we have had more troops on the ground from day 1?
Should the humvees have had kevlar armor from the first day?
Should we have guarded the siezed weapons depots, rather than hire local
guards to watch them? (From which much ordinance continues to disappear to this
day.)
Should we have had better equipment for the troops? More support? Better
meals? Less graft?
Should we have our soldiers doing policing at all?
This last is a very significant question. As I heard one Army general say "The
army is good at two things, killing people and breaking things" Which at the
moment they are not doing very much of. We should have had electricians and
engineers and dam builders and policemen and a host of support to FIX Iraq after
we "won" the war. I think it is this lack, more than anything else, that is
costing our soldiers their lives.
Jerry Johnson
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
