Thats why I think we should adapt the Airborne into a Direct Action / Unconventional Warfare force. Have the 82nd, 101st, and 10th Mountain work with Special Forces and USACAPOC to Judiciously end conflicts. We don't need 1st Marines or 2nd CAV steamrolling through some places anymore. We need to end the insurgency in the mind of the At-risk population in the Afpak, and that means using SF, Civil Affairs/PsyOps, along with their guards... Airborne.
If a country came to USA, blew things up, killed civilians, etc, we would protect ourselves from the invaders and we would call ourselves freedom fighters, not guerrillas, insurgents or terrorists. What's the difference? There is none! How did we get to be such hypocrites?
Exactly, I love to hear americans talking with sense and humanity, reminds me that there's still real people out there that aren't completely brainwashed. Today's empire is tomorrow's ashes, it's gonna suck when justice hits, but that's the way it is.
@connielane Actually I think there is a difference. If invaders were in America, and Americans took up arms against them, they may be labeled terrorists, sure, but it's unlikely that any morally credible person, including an American, would slaughter innocent civilians including their own kind, to "win" a war. Also, many Islamic insurgencies occur amongst Muslims or people of single nationalities, being like a civil war of sorts. It is also notable that many terrorists are acting in foreign
Thats why I think we should adapt the Airborne into a Direct Action / Unconventional Warfare force. Have the 82nd, 101st, and 10th Mountain work with Special Forces and USACAPOC to Judiciously end conflicts. We don't need 1st Marines or 2nd CAV steamrolling through some places anymore. We need to end the insurgency in the mind of the At-risk population in the Afpak, and that means using SF, Civil Affairs/PsyOps, along with their guards... Airborne.
lamesurfer101 6 months ago
Everyone read the book "The accidental guerilla"
I was blind to the Guerilla tactics, but now i see
themgoodpancakes 2 years ago
I don't like this road on which we're treading...
SamuraiStony 3 years ago
If a country came to USA, blew things up, killed civilians, etc, we would protect ourselves from the invaders and we would call ourselves freedom fighters, not guerrillas, insurgents or terrorists. What's the difference? There is none! How did we get to be such hypocrites?
connielane 3 years ago
Exactly, I love to hear americans talking with sense and humanity, reminds me that there's still real people out there that aren't completely brainwashed. Today's empire is tomorrow's ashes, it's gonna suck when justice hits, but that's the way it is.
QueSeraSera23 2 years ago
@connielane that isn't what the Lion of Panjshir said.... we were helping him fight a common enemy.
StrengthFromAbove83 1 year ago
@connielane Actually I think there is a difference. If invaders were in America, and Americans took up arms against them, they may be labeled terrorists, sure, but it's unlikely that any morally credible person, including an American, would slaughter innocent civilians including their own kind, to "win" a war. Also, many Islamic insurgencies occur amongst Muslims or people of single nationalities, being like a civil war of sorts. It is also notable that many terrorists are acting in foreign
Tripo1iSamson 4 months ago
@connielane countries, such as a zealot Saudi Arabian fighting a conflict against Russians alongside Chechnyan Muslims. So there is a difference.
Tripo1iSamson 4 months ago