Petraeus apologizes again

[malaise]

after NATO slaughters some more innocents.

Eng these illegal drone attacks. I can't take much more of this shit.

[sarge43]

1. Way to win hearts and minds, General.

Worked so well the last time.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

2. I saw that on the news yesterday and couldn't believe that it only merited

a 30 second tape.

How many times is this BS going to be allowed to happen with no more than a cursory mea culpa? Why do we insist on attacking people simply because there is a "group" of people gathered?

[malaise]

3. Joe Scum et al had a long discussion

on Afghanistan this morning.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

5. Someday I have to get rid of basic cable.

If I didn't have DU as a news source, I'd really be in the dark about the real news stories. I can't remember if the story was on CBS or NBC last night, but it was treatd so nonchalantly that it was ridiculous.

I'm glad to see that it's being covered in more detail today.

[KharmaTrain]

4. Just A Thought...

Would people be upset if we sent drones to Libya to take out Ghadaffi's goon squads? Just curious if anyone would wanna bite on this one?

:hi:

[sarge43]

7. No, even if (big freaking if) only the goons would be nailed.

That can not be guaranteed. Further, when was the last time we were sucked into someone else's shit slinging ended well for us?

[KharmaTrain]

10. Just Curious...

I'm more neutral about Libya than maybe I should be as I hope the "rebels" can do the job on their own without any outside influence. But I'm also too much of a cynic to believe that with all the oil involved here that the US along with other NATO countries wouldn't want a quick resolution to this situation and if that meant some kind of military action, then to what extent is this justified? And if we're going to play "policeman" here then if technology can do the job over boots on the ground, would that be preferable? I'll bet some of these questions are (or should) be bantering around the White House.

As I'm sure you well know, nothing is guaranteed in war...the ultimate insanity. The shit sandwich here is that if Ghadaffi is able to put down this uprising, while I would think its a short-term and hollow one, I also see tremendous retribution among those who took up arms against him. So, if you think you have the shot...do you take it?

[sarge43]

12. Figuring a war tactical is playing three dimensional chess in a hurricane.

1. Our ground forces are stretched to the breaking point.

2. With a couple of exceptions, air power doesn't win fights. Sure helps, but in most cases the ground pounders have go in, win or minimum bring a cease fire. See above.

3. Let's say with our 'help' the rebels run Leather Face and his gang out of town, how long do we sit on the place. See above.

4. As for the retribution, no matter who comes out on top, there will be blood in the streets. This has gone way beyond an Egyptian sit down and make nice.

5. I'm realistic in a cynical situation. The oil will flow; it's Libya's only resource. We'll no doubt pay through the nose, but that's a given in every scenario.

So I'd say no. I don't think it's a realistic shot. I'd rather pay money than lives. As one general once said, "You win by making one less mistake than the other guy." Getting involved in this one has all the signs of another cluster fuck waiting to happen.

War may or may not be insane; it is always a crap shoot.

[KharmaTrain]

14. Point One Is The Salient One...

...but seems to be very ignored these days...especially among the myopic corporate media that feels the US is central to any and every international story. What jarred me a bit was Senator Kerry coming out in favor of a no-fly zone and he's not alone. So what does that mean? Fly F-16s overhead or come in with helicopters and drones? Then, the whatif one of these planes is shot down...I'm sure you know where this goes. I'm against any kind of unilateral action for certain and a limited role in any international effort to stop any genocide...but that kind of action would be too late for too many.

Your point about the military being over-stretched is the important one that I hope plays a big part in any decissions that are made. As you point out, once you're on the ground it's always easier to get in than to get out and our recent history says a stay would be long.

Thank you for your very thoughful and insightful post...

Salute and Cheers...

:salute:

[sarge43]

15. No fly as I understand it

We can use the air space; the other side can't. No matter who is shot down, it'll start to go ugly early.

I'm surprised and disappoint Kerry waded in on this. If anyone should understand how quickly and easily this can circle the drain, he more than many.

You're welcome.

[malaise]

9. Interesting thought

The hypocrisy would be breath-taking.

[Hubert Flottz]

6. Bush operates that fucker by remote control.

[Lint Head]

8. When you're in uniform you apologize. When your an average

citizen you go to prison for life or you're put to death.

[Ichingcarpenter]

11. Collateral Damage from Asymmetric warfare

we will send in a Critical Incident Stress Management Unit
set up by our Information Operations





From: http://www.vizettes.com/kt/ae/pages/euphemisms-glossary.htm

[hobbit709]

13. Apologies are worthless if you keep repeating the behavior you're apologizing for.

[DCKit]

16. +1 nt

[ladjf]

17. He said that he was "sorry". Big damn deal! If my child had been

slaughtered senselessly, I would have been again outraged that those behind that act were "sorry".

Is he telling us that nine children appeared to be nine soldiers? They needed to zoom in with their binoculars before they start shooting rockets at people.

[Ichingcarpenter]

18. Australian News is reporting the copters shot them one at a time

Deadly strike on Afghan children unacceptable: Rudd

One survivor of the attack, an 11-year-old boy, is reported as saying the helicopters hovered over the boys, rose up, fired rockets and then shot the boys one after the other using their canons.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/04/3154763.htm