Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Wolfstan wrote:@gorgon - You're right, there is more to Afghanistan than just waging war, however McCrystal is the one on the ground, so therefore he should be the one who knows best what the situation is. Whether the politicians are happy with that situation or want to it to change it is another thing. I can't see what you're problem is with Karzi, the US is only continuing it's grand tradition of backing scum. If they are prepared to fight on your side you are happy to be friends with them, even if they are corrupt b******s.

They only way we can win this conflict is for the population to trust their leaders and be looked after. Will this happen? I doubt it. There is a slim chance with the announcement of all that mineral wealth being found, but this relies on the government not lining their own pockets and the big multinationals not ripping them off the country.

Civilian leadership is a key principle. Letting generals have free reign to casually dismiss the civilians they are hired by, paid by, and once were, is a slippery slope that often leads to bad things. You can't just put billions of dollars, soldiers, and high tech weapons in a guys hands and then just hoping that he is doing the right thing without keeping an eye on him is just ridiculous. We don't live in a military junta, we don't just give the military a free pass, they work for us, not the other way around. Forgoing all that, respecting the chain of command is serious business and you don't broadcast things like this to the world. Not just because you shouldn't insult your boss publicly, but it is bad for morale. You can't have soldiers picking and choosing which supreme commander they would like to follow based on what his political affiliation is.

Wolfstan wrote:@gorgon - You're right, there is more to Afghanistan than just waging war, however McCrystal is the one on the ground, so therefore he should be the one who knows best what the situation is. Whether the politicians are happy with that situation or want to it to change it is another thing.

That doesn't matter. You don't challenge the chain of command in public, especially at such a high level, its really that simple.

Wolfstan wrote:
I can't see what you're problem is with Karzi, the US is only continuing it's grand tradition of backing scum. If they are prepared to fight on your side you are happy to be friends with them, even if they are corrupt b******s.

The US didn't back Karzai in the last election; primarily because he isn't really fighting on our side.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:
There is a whole bunch of guys over in Afghanistan sat at the top of that pyramid. And "KILL or ...capture" was always our orders with regards to them. So this guy isnt quite as wrong as many of you seem to think.

Yeah, clearly. I think the general objection to the comment was based on it being a derivation of the "just nuke them all" philosophy.

mattyrm wrote:
Well.. except for the fire part, sadly flamethrowers and napalm are banned these days.

Only against civilian targets, and, for that matter, only napalm is banned. Napalm-like chemicals are perfectly legal, at least to the extent that international law turns on the letter; which isn't a very significant extent.