Protect Assets Strategy

Is Afghanistan Becoming a Vast My Lai Situation?
And are our servicemen being placed in the position of Lt. Calley?

Now that the Taliban know that US trrops are prohibited from firing upon a building that contains civilians, will they ever fire any shot again from any position that does not contain civilians.

Will US trrops be faced with a choice between being non-responsive ducks in a shooting gallery or violating General Stanley McCrystal’s order that no shot can be fired at any position that contains civilians.

All offensive enemy positions will contain civilians. We might as well go home. If we can’t shoot back, then the only function the US troops are serving is being moving targets for target practice.

The enemy is shameless — they are cockroaches — they have the same respect for the law of armed conflict that a cockroach would have, or a shark, or a bug-eyed monster.

Their women and children mean nothing to them except that they are now useful as human shields.

OK Dolphin314etc we get the fact that you don’t like the current setup — so how should the war be done?

A few revisions:

(1) The US mission in Afghanistan cannot possibly be to protect the civilian population — that is a completely crazy idea which leads directly to the My Lai/Lt. Calley situation we are now in.

(2) The only legitimate mission in the vast badlands of Afghanistan is to smash Taliban and Al Qaeda training camps and to smash Taliban and Al Qada safehouses — just training camps and safehouses.

(3) This mission can best be done by Predators. So most of the groundforces can just come home.

(4) We have no role to play clearing territory, holding territory, building hospitals and schools, winning the hearts and minds of the people, or protecting Karzai’s constituents. Those activities are not related in any meaningful way to the national security of USA if we can smash all training camps and all safehouses by other means (Predators).

(5) The manpower required to do the revised mission: (1) 5000 at Bahgram to re-fuel and re-arm Predators (2) 15,000 in the fleet at sea to fly recon and to do support for Delta Force and Baghram forces and (3) 50,000 at NSA, NRO, and Cheyenne Colorado — Battle Mountain to do intelligence analysis and target identification work 24/7/365 in real-time, and (4) 10,000 in the Space Command to keep our Keyhole assets in the most productive positions for target ID support in real time.

Now is the time when twitty ones start with their abusive comments — Why does this guy think he knows better than our leaders? We just follow orders here — we don’t think about policy or strategy or tactics — we just do what we’re told — who does this guy think he is — why doesn’t he take his comments to the Politics section — anything other than just following orders is pure politics — so I’m gonna get 3 or 4 abusive answers like that — it can’t be helped. My choice is to go forward anyway — there are people who are not stupid about this subject, Biden is one, George Will is one, Barry MacCaffrey is one. I’m trying to reach the non-stupid people. Hopefully my title question will provide a bit of narrow-casting, but clowns abound, so one just has to wade through them, pay them no mind.

Not really,no.

First, the LOAC applies to armed conflicts between nations, or between government and opposition forces in a civil war. Taliban and Al Quaida forces have been characterized by the President as "Criminals", so the laws that apply are those of police action, not of military action.

The LOAC requires military forces to perform their actions is such a way as to minimize civilian casualties to the maximum extent compatible with completing the military mission. A certain amount of civilian "collateral damage" is unavoidable in war.
In law enforcement, however, the avoidance of harm to persons other than the criminal takes precedence over preventing the criminal action. As the old saw goes, "Better that ten guilty men go free than that one innocent be punished unjustly." In an action being treated, as Obama is treating this one, as a law enforcement matter, it is thus unacceptable to kill a single innocent bystander in the process of killing a whole bunch of Taliban "Criminals".

It’s also worth noting that McCrystal’s order is a foolish reaction anyway – the rocket strike yesterday was NOT fired at a civilian position. It was fired at a strong-point from which the Taliban was shooting at the US troops – they just missed. No-one, especially in combat, "bats 1000". Everyone misses sometimes.

Richard

Is Afghanistan Becoming a Vast My Lai Situation?
And are our servicemen being placed in the position of Lt. Calley?

Now that the Taliban know that US trrops are prohibited from firing upon a building that contains civilians, will they ever fire any shot again from any position that does not contain civilians.

Will US trrops be faced with a choice between being non-responsive ducks in a shooting gallery or violating General Stanley McCrystal’s order that no shot can be fired at any position that contains civilians.

All offensive enemy positions will contain civilians. We might as well go home. If we can’t shoot back, then the only function the US troops are serving is being moving targets for target practice.

The enemy is shameless — they are cockroaches — they have the same respect for the law of armed conflict that a cockroach would have, or a shark, or a bug-eyed monster.

Their women and children mean nothing to them except that they are now useful as human shields.

OK Dolphin314etc we get the fact that you don’t like the current setup — so how should the war be done?

A few revisions:

(1) The US mission in Afghanistan cannot possibly be to protect the civilian population — that is a completely crazy idea which leads directly to the My Lai/Lt. Calley situation we are now in.

(2) The only legitimate mission in the vast badlands of Afghanistan is to smash Taliban and Al Qaeda training camps and to smash Taliban and Al Qada safehouses — just training camps and safehouses.

(3) This mission can best be done by Predators. So most of the groundforces can just come home.

(4) We have no role to play clearing territory, holding territory, building hospitals and schools, winning the hearts and minds of the people, or protecting Karzai’s constituents. Those activities are not related in any meaningful way to the national security of USA if we can smash all training camps and all safehouses by other means (Predators).

(5) The manpower required to do the revised mission: (1) 5000 at Bahgram to re-fuel and re-arm Predators (2) 15,000 in the fleet at sea to fly recon and to do support for Delta Force and Baghram forces and (3) 50,000 at NSA, NRO, and Cheyenne Colorado — Battle Mountain to do intelligence analysis and target identification work 24/7/365 in real-time, and (4) 10,000 in the Space Command to keep our Keyhole assets in the most productive positions for target ID support in real time.

Now is the time when twitty ones start with their abusive comments — Why does this guy think he knows better than our leaders? We just follow orders here — we don’t think about policy or strategy or tactics — we just do what we’re told — who does this guy think he is — why doesn’t he take his comments to the Politics section — anything other than just following orders is pure politics — so I’m gonna get 3 or 4 abusive answers like that — it can’t be helped. My choice is to go forward anyway — there are people who are not stupid about this subject, Biden is one, George Will is one, Barry MacCaffrey is one. I’m trying to reach the non-stupid people. Hopefully my title question will provide a bit of narrow-casting, but clowns abound, so one just has to wade through them, pay them no mind.

Not really,no.

First, the LOAC applies to armed conflicts between nations, or between government and opposition forces in a civil war. Taliban and Al Quaida forces have been characterized by the President as "Criminals", so the laws that apply are those of police action, not of military action.

The LOAC requires military forces to perform their actions is such a way as to minimize civilian casualties to the maximum extent compatible with completing the military mission. A certain amount of civilian "collateral damage" is unavoidable in war.
In law enforcement, however, the avoidance of harm to persons other than the criminal takes precedence over preventing the criminal action. As the old saw goes, "Better that ten guilty men go free than that one innocent be punished unjustly." In an action being treated, as Obama is treating this one, as a law enforcement matter, it is thus unacceptable to kill a single innocent bystander in the process of killing a whole bunch of Taliban "Criminals".

It’s also worth noting that McCrystal’s order is a foolish reaction anyway – the rocket strike yesterday was NOT fired at a civilian position. It was fired at a strong-point from which the Taliban was shooting at the US troops – they just missed. No-one, especially in combat, "bats 1000". Everyone misses sometimes.

Richard

Does the Law of Armed Conflict Apply in Afghanistan?
Is Afghanistan Becoming a Vast My Lai Situation?
And are our servicemen being placed in the position of Lt. Calley?

Now that the Taliban know that US trrops are prohibited from firing upon a building that contains civilians, will they ever fire any shot again from any position that does not contain civilians?

Will US trrops be faced with a choice between being non-responsive ducks in a shooting gallery or violating General Stanley McCrystal’s order that no shot can be fired at any position that contains civilians?

All offensive enemy positions will contain civilians. We might as well go home. If we can’t shoot back, then the only function the US troops are serving is being moving targets for target practice.

The enemy is shameless — they are cockroaches — they have the same respect for the law of armed conflict that a cockroach would have, or a shark, or a bug-eyed monster.

Their women and children mean nothing to them except that they are now useful as human shields.

OK Dolphin314etc we get the fact that you don’t like the current setup — so how should the war be done?

A few revisions:

(1) The US mission in Afghanistan cannot possibly be to protect the civilian population — that is a completely crazy idea which leads directly to the My Lai/Lt. Calley situation we are now in.

(2) The only legitimate mission in the vast badlands of Afghanistan is to smash Taliban and Al Qaeda training camps and to smash Taliban and Al Qada safehouses — just training camps and safehouses.

(3) This mission can best be done by Predators. So most of the groundforces can just come home.

(4) We have no role to play clearing territory, holding territory, building hospitals and schools, winning the hearts and minds of the people, or protecting Karzai’s constituents. Those activities are not related in any meaningful way to the national security of USA if we can smash all training camps and all safehouses by other means (Predators).

(5) The manpower required to do the revised mission: (1) 5000 at Bahgram to re-fuel and re-arm Predators (2) 15,000 in the fleet at sea to fly recon and to do support for Delta Force and Baghram forces and (3) 50,000 at NSA, NRO, and Cheyenne Colorado — Battle Mountain to do intelligence analysis and target identification work 24/7/365 in real-time, and (4) 10,000 in the Space Command to keep our Keyhole assets in the most productive positions for target ID support in real time.

Now is the time when twitty ones start with their abusive comments — Why does this guy think he knows better than our leaders? We just follow orders here — we don’t think about policy or strategy or tactics — we just do what we’re told — who does this guy think he is — why doesn’t he take his comments to the Politics section — anything other than just following orders is pure politics — so I’m gonna get 3 or 4 abusive answers like that — it can’t be helped. My choice is to go forward anyway — there are people who are not stupid about this subject, Biden is one, George Will is one, Barry MacCaffrey is one. I’m trying to reach the non-stupid people. Hopefully my title question will provide a bit of narrow-casting, but clowns abound, so one just has to wade through them, pay them no mind.
To nostrada:

Your point is well thought out and it contains a lot of truth.

Here’s some more truth. Waterboarding should have been used on the Christmas Day underpants bomber within minutes of his capture. He should not have been mirandized and given an opportunity to ask for a lawyer. We lost a huge opportunity to break open his secrets and to learn a lot about Al Qaida in Nigeria and in Yemen. I think waterboarding is bordering on torture. In a ticking bomb situation one either sacrifices the lives of innocent fellow citizens or one sacrifices the comfort of an enemy combatant. To me this is not a close call. On Christmas Day 2009 we had no way of knowing about other possible plots that might be in progress. The High Value Detainee Team was ready to go and get the data from the enemy combatant. Instead our new Cream Puff in Chief, said, no get him a lawyer, find him a nice cell and a hot meal, poor dear. Thanks Barack HUSSEIN Obama. You got us so much goodwill in the world.

Having had three direct relatives who served in Viet Nam and Thailand,
2 were SOCOM members 1 was a Thud Pilot, I can recall many a vocal
outburst Re: Robert S, McNamara, Micro Management in Viet Nam
set the stage for its over all failure, Our Military members were pawns
in a very deadly game. Korea was a similar political action (police action),

It seems to me that we had no heart for fighting after the two great world
wars, Not that we lacked in Spirit or individual fortitude, But our Government
and its leaders lost sight and vision over what winning was supposed to be
all about.

I have had three combat tours in the mideastern regions. From the moment
I stepped off the Aircraft at Kabul, I could smell the death not of decaying
carcass but of failure, It was the same smell as described by my Father
and my two uncles. When you go into a fighting mode, Your instincts whirl
from self Preservation to command responsibility, My Mission requirement
in Afghanistan was basically the same I had in Iraq, Supply Host commands
with Military Police units, Train and set up Afghan National Police units,
Contain Combatants for transportation to US holding facility’s. What was
entirely different between the two operations was the lack of government
structure in Afghan and the Illiteracy rate of the Afghan people whom were
being drafted into the various police units, I see no way in hell we can have
have a divided responsibility of Afghan Police and Military before a 10 year
period of time. I am saying 2020 will be a missed target date,

What McCrystal implemented as far as his ground and Air policy are nothing
more than throw backs to the Viet Nam era. Any and all air operations units
have NO TARGET of OPPORTUNITY. Which means if Primary and Secondary
are socked in. You bring the bombs home and dump them in the bomb dump.

Predator Drones should be the action piece of this fight, SOCOM can act as
forward target Intelliegence folks. That MOS is 97z. Remove all combat units
from Afghan and Iraq, and Germany. Leave a cadry in Nato if you want,. But
get everyone else the hell home. Just a thought.

Is this just another chance to lose 5000 men and $5 Trillion, like Iraq?

What could we possibly be thinking with the strategy we have created for ourselves?

Now that the Taliban know that US trrops are prohibited from firing upon a building that contains civilians, will they ever fire any shot again from any position that does not contain civilians?

Will US trrops be faced with a choice between being non-responsive ducks in a shooting gallery or violating General Stanley McCrystal’s order that no shot can be fired at any position that contains civilians?

All offensive enemy positions will contain civilians. We might as well go home. If we can’t shoot back, then the only function the US troops are serving is being moving targets for target practice.

The enemy is shameless — they are cockroaches — they have the same respect for the law of armed conflict that a cockroach would have, or a shark, or a bug-eyed monster.

Their women and children mean nothing to them except that they are now useful as human shields.

OK Dolphin314etc we get the fact that you don’t like the current setup — so how should the war be done?

A few revisions:

(1) The US mission in Afghanistan cannot possibly be to protect the civilian population — that is a completely crazy idea which leads directly to the My Lai/Lt. Calley situation we are now in.

(2) The only legitimate mission in the vast badlands of Afghanistan is to smash Taliban and Al Qaeda training camps and to smash Taliban and Al Qada safehouses — just training camps and safehouses.

(3) This mission can best be done by Predators. So most of the groundforces can just come home.

(4) We have no role to play clearing territory, holding territory, building hospitals and schools, winning the hearts and minds of the people, or protecting Karzai’s constituents. Those activities are not related in any meaningful way to the national security of USA if we can smash all training camps and all safehouses by other means (Predators).

(5) The manpower required to do the revised mission: (1) 5000 at Bahgram to re-fuel and re-arm Predators (2) 15,000 in the fleet at sea to fly recon and to do support for Delta Force and Baghram forces and (3) 50,000 at NSA, NRO, and Cheyenne Colorado — Battle Mountain to do intelligence analysis and target identification work 24/7/365 in real-time, and (4) 10,000 in the Space Command to keep our Keyhole assets in the most productive positions for target ID support in real time.

Now is the time when twitty ones start with their abusive comments — Why does this guy think he knows better than our leaders? We just follow orders here — we don’t think about policy or strategy or tactics — we just do what we’re told — who does this guy think he is — why doesn’t he take his comments to the Politics section — anything other than just following orders is pure politics — so I’m gonna get 3 or 4 abusive answers like that — it can’t be helped. My choice is to go forward anyway — there are people who are not stupid about this subject, Biden is one, George Will is one, Barry MacCaffrey is one. I’m trying to reach the non-stupid people. Hopefully my title question will provide a bit of narrow-casting, but clowns abound, so one just has to wade through them, pay them no mind
To Prays:

Yes, that’s it you have it! Politicians should keep their pigsticking fingers off of military actions in progress. Ideally, they just get to declare war — that’s all. Tell us who needs to be killed and where they are located. We will do the rest, and let you know when the job is done. Actually the U.S. Constitution provides for something pretty close to that. Congress has the power to make rules for the Armed services in terms of military discipline, but not to frame tactics and strategy for warfare. Our first and best President had been a General and had created USA as a separate nation. So the Commander in Chief title and function was entirely reasonable when George Washington held those powers. But Barry Cream Puff Hussein Obama the community organizer from southside Chicago is no George Washington, or Dwight Eisenhower. He is a Politically Correct Mush-mind that channels Jimmy Carter’s feminine side, on a day of universal love and global understanding, oh yes, sweet!

the best way to defeat the muslims is to keep them OUT of civilized countries – no immigration allowed from their hateful countries. Let the filthy, inbred, barbarian TURD balls rot in their own filth and keep them out of civilized societies until they abandon their idiotic religion and get with the program.

Do people incorporate a start up business to protect their assets from their relatives and/or former spouses? This idea has crossed my mind, even though I really don’t have anything more to incorporate than a domain name.

Is this a good or bad idea? Is it different than asset management?

That’s a great idea. Incorporate, put all of your assets into the corporation, and no one can ever claim it because it’s protected by the corporation.

They are willing to finance me but is this a scam?

no but i do doubt. not so easy nowadays to call it clean and real.

They are willing to finance me but is this a scam?

no but i do doubt. not so easy nowadays to call it clean and real.