Right back into the Obama years already.Trump admin blows up Soliemani. Biden admin blows up an aid worker.
Right back into the Obama years already.
Remember when he droned a Yemeni wedding?
This isnt good. We knew who the bomber was, where he was going to strike, and even had a drone lock on him, but the brass refused to authorize the shot. Now 13 soldiers are dead because of that inaction. like that is why we didnt win this war.
So something I am honestly curious about. So they say we hit the wrong car now. So was the original report of a secondary explosion indicating they had the right car, a lie? I distinctly remember the presser saying that they suspected it was the guy, but after the missle set off explosives in the car, they knew it was the correct one. So was that a lie? Or was that family carrying explosives because....? Is carrying explosives in your car normal over there? (assuming you arent a terrorist) So does that mean it wasnt the right target, but another bad guy? I mean who carries explosives around in the family truckster with the whole family on board?Well...this didn't age well. Sounds like that denied permission was the right call if the current reports it was the wrong dude are true.
I did remark that I thought it odd we didn't know who the guy was in time to stop anything but did know who he was so quickly afterward for a retaliatory strike. Not that I've got a crystal ball or anything and there certainly are plausible scenarios were that version was true. Just given our history in Afghanistan of taking someone's word that "that guy is your enemy" I was skeptical.
But you can't complain both ways. If you want "unrestricted war" you're going to kill more non-combatants. If you want 100% verification of targets you're going to have very restrictive RoE.
I mean who carries explosives around in the family truckster with the whole family on board?
Confused. ( goes without saying but you know)Well...this didn't age well. Sounds like that denied permission was the right call if the current reports it was the wrong dude are true.
I did remark that I thought it odd we didn't know who the guy was in time to stop anything but did know who he was so quickly afterward for a retaliatory strike. Not that I've got a crystal ball or anything and there certainly are plausible scenarios were that version was true. Just given our history in Afghanistan of taking someone's word that "that guy is your enemy" I was skeptical.
But you can't complain both ways. If you want "unrestricted war" you're going to kill more non-combatants. If you want 100% verification of targets you're going to have very restrictive RoE.
So something I am honestly curious about. So they say we hit the wrong car now. So was the original report of a secondary explosion indicating they had the right car, a lie? I distinctly remember the presser saying that they suspected it was the guy, but after the missle set off explosives in the car, they knew it was the correct one. So was that a lie?
Confused. ( goes without saying but you know)
So is the aid worker with the water bottles in the Camry the one that the brass wanted to hold off on hitting but then did?
Or is this unrelated, earlier?
Obama was the worst of the bunch when it came to collateral damage and the use of attack drones. Trump wasn't without sin, especially in Somalia.
I find drones to be abhorrent, except in cases of an active battle field where the beligerents face each other.
I don't support Biden's decision here, but the entire military-industrial complex needs to be kicked in the ass for the widespread escalation of drone warfare.
How so? It seems like they've proved the opposite. Their guerilla tactics have brought down the most powerful militaries in the world in both cases.It seems the Taliban (and Viet Cong) have proved that asymmetric warfare doesn't work forever. Political will in America is about as flighty as a 5 year old with ADD.
It seems the Taliban (and Viet Cong) have proved that asymmetric warfare doesn't work forever. Political will in America is about as flighty as a 5 year old with ADD.
POV. I was looking at it from the US side. See the last sentence.How so? It seems like they've proved the opposite. Their guerilla tactics have brought down the most powerful militaries in the world in both cases.
I agree with your first paragraph.It never started with any significant goal in mind that was remotely achievable.
Vietnam is an example of a war that could have been won, with goals that could have been met. Trying to make Afghanistan into a democratic, US allied state was completely insane, and I'm certain that everyone at the top of the decision making process knew that from day 1.
I don't know that it's flighty. It's been consistent in that they allow politicians to control the ROE, which is to say, "don't kill too many people" "Be as nice as you can to your enemy", etc..POV. I was looking at it from the US side. See the last sentence.