3
3
0
From "World News"
I chanced across this footage and thought that it might be of interest.
http://wn.com/stunning_footage!_russian_mi-24_helicopters_from_syrian_army_targeting_isis
I chanced across this footage and thought that it might be of interest.
http://wn.com/stunning_footage!_russian_mi-24_helicopters_from_syrian_army_targeting_isis
ISIS
Helicopters
Terrorism
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 8
1
1
0
The Russians are serious about Syria. We don't seem to be. When we compare air assets and ground forces in country, who do we expect to win the "hearts and minds" of the Syrians?
(1)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
MCPO Roger Collins - Master Chief; I suspect that some of the difference in approach is that "our side" is trying to figure out which bunch of "bad guys" (our definition) to support (based on the fact that maybe they really aren't "bad guys" [our definition] and are actually "good guys" [our definition]) before starting to play to win, while "their side" has simply picked a side and is already playing to win (based on the fact that if the "winner" turns out to be a "bad guy" [their definition] then they can always be replaced after their sudden demise).
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
COL Ted Mc - Reminds me of a sign one of my XOs used to have on his desk, "He who makes no decisions, makes no mistakes." We make no decisions while Putin is and gaining ground and, in all probability, will replace us as a leader in the Middle East.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I suppose it looks impressive to someone who has never seen the firepower and precision of an Apache helicopter in the attack, but there don't seem to be any of those around fighting ISIS, are there?
(1)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
CPT Jack Durish - Captain; I couldn't find any comparable video (AH-64 firing Hydra 70s with either XM245 or M261 warheads) do you have some?
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
Capt Seid Waddell - Captain; Thank you. Now people can have some appreciation of relative firepower using the same types of weapons.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
CPO Andy Carrillo, MS
The White House Disinformation Campaign on Benghazi, Libya
An Incriminating Timeline: http://herit.ag/WMfTr6 | New evidence shows there were security threats in Benghazi, Libya, in the months prior to the deadly Sept...
Capt Seid Waddell - That embedded video clip was choice...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFf0dUH3OtU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFf0dUH3OtU
(1)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
CPO Andy Carrillo, MS & Capt Seid Waddell - Gentlemen; I don't say that the theory isn't POSSIBLY true, there isn't actually enough information (factual and not speculative information that is) currently available to jump one way or the other.
On top of that, other than the theory of "Ministerial Responsibility" (which never did gain much traction in the US) there isn't anything to tie Ms. Clinton DIRECTLY to the Benghazi debacle.
As I understand it, her position is "I left security arrangements in the hands of the career civil servants who were the experts in the field and didn't micromanage their work. Yes, in retrospect, there were definite signs that we should have spotted and taken steps in response to but, in retrospect, there were definite signs that we should have spotted and taken steps in response to before 9/11.".
There is, of course, absolutely no possibility that al-Qa'eda picked up on Admiral Lyons' speculation and decided that spreading American disunity by agreeing with his speculation would be a "Good Thing" and wouldn't cost a dime.
On top of that, other than the theory of "Ministerial Responsibility" (which never did gain much traction in the US) there isn't anything to tie Ms. Clinton DIRECTLY to the Benghazi debacle.
As I understand it, her position is "I left security arrangements in the hands of the career civil servants who were the experts in the field and didn't micromanage their work. Yes, in retrospect, there were definite signs that we should have spotted and taken steps in response to but, in retrospect, there were definite signs that we should have spotted and taken steps in response to before 9/11.".
There is, of course, absolutely no possibility that al-Qa'eda picked up on Admiral Lyons' speculation and decided that spreading American disunity by agreeing with his speculation would be a "Good Thing" and wouldn't cost a dime.
(0)
(0)
Capt Seid Waddell
COL Ted Mc, CPO Andy Carrillo, MS, the career civil servants do not make policy, they carry out policy. There was clearly direction from the Secretary to pull security teams and support aircraft from Libya and to not increase security for the Benghazi facility despite strong recommendations and even pleading by the diplomatic and security personnel in the area.
In testimony before congress the woman in the State Department that pulled those security resources said that neither funding nor needs elsewhere entered into the decision to pull those security assets.
This policy can have only come from the top - perhaps even from the POTUS - presumably for political reasons in the run up to the elections.
In testimony before congress the woman in the State Department that pulled those security resources said that neither funding nor needs elsewhere entered into the decision to pull those security assets.
This policy can have only come from the top - perhaps even from the POTUS - presumably for political reasons in the run up to the elections.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
Capt Seid Waddell - You are, of course, aware that it was "career civil servants" who implemented the total embargo on oil to Japan (contrary to the directions from the President of the United States of America) which resulted in the Japanese concluding that they had no choice but to attack America and secure their own position (even though they knew that they had no realistic chance of defeating America militarily) before they starved - aren't you?
In her testimony before Congress, did "the woman in the State Department" say where the orders came from? Did the Congressional committee ask? Was the person who gave the orders called to testify? Would there have been a benefit to the Republicans to have someone testify to the effect that they were the person responsible for the decisions and made them without reference to "higher authority" because it was their job to make them? Would there have been a benefit to the Republicans not to have testimony like that produced?
The ACTUAL level of security at any installation is NOT "policy" it is "operations".
POLICY is "If A then B.".
OPERATIONS is "Is this A or not?".
If you get the "Is this A or not?" bit wrong then you certainly aren't going to do "B".
In her testimony before Congress, did "the woman in the State Department" say where the orders came from? Did the Congressional committee ask? Was the person who gave the orders called to testify? Would there have been a benefit to the Republicans to have someone testify to the effect that they were the person responsible for the decisions and made them without reference to "higher authority" because it was their job to make them? Would there have been a benefit to the Republicans not to have testimony like that produced?
The ACTUAL level of security at any installation is NOT "policy" it is "operations".
POLICY is "If A then B.".
OPERATIONS is "Is this A or not?".
If you get the "Is this A or not?" bit wrong then you certainly aren't going to do "B".
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google