More scalps...

Another decent piece by Ralph Peters. I don't usually agree with him, but often times he makes some good (but often over the top) points. Here is an excerpt:

Yet, in Afghanistan, we've put the bulk of our efforts into turning a vast flophouse into the Four Seasons -- instead of focusing ruthlessly on our terrorist enemies. It's politically correct madness.

What we really need is just a compact, lethal force of special operators, intelligence resources and air assets, along with sufficient conventional forces for protection and punitive raids. More troops just mean more blood and frustration...

Our hunter-killer task forces should be deployed on a limited number of strategically positioned bases supported by air. Don't worry about the Afghan government -- Afghans don't.

The other alternative -- sending still more troops to die for Washington's fantasy of a Disney-World Afghanistan -- is disgraceful. Stop building sewage systems. Take scalps...

In Afghanistan, we're asking Hutus to fight for Tutsis and Hatfields to guard McCoys...

The Soviets and their Afghan cronies lost because their enemies were willing to sacrifice more -- to give their lives for their heritage, however backward and cruel.

Afghans are willing to fight. They're just not willing to fight for us.

John Kerry: Darfur's "A Wild-Ass Place, But There's An Opening.''

Sadly, this man was not elected president in 2004... great article about Sen. Kerry.

Echoes of Vietnam in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing Room

This is a fascinating article. Of most importance though is COL(R)Andrew Bacevich's comments stating that today's youth are disengaged from the war; they just don't care. Why? I postulate that it is because there isn't a draft and they aren't in danger. Why would the youth of this nation care about wars in which only one half of one percent of this nation have fought in Iraq/Afghanistan? They think it isn't their problem... "No draft?! No problem with me!" they think to themselves while texting each other about happy hour.

Kerry was quick to resist analogies between Vietnam and Afghanistan on Thursday, but said some commonalities between the conflicts exist.

“Once again, we are fighting an insurgency in a rural country with a weak central government. Our enemy blends in with the local population and easily crosses a long border to find sanctuary in a neighboring country. We ignore these similarities at our peril,” he said.

The importance of veterans’ perspective is another lesson from the Vietnam War, Kerry said.

Three of the four veterans at the witness table spoke in support of a continuing combat presence in Afghanistan – although they also stressed the need for an expansion of its civilian commitment, in line with the Kerry-Lugar proposal.

However, one corporal from California called U.S. operations in the country an “occupation” and opposed Obama’s decision to boost troop levels by 17,000.

“Sending more troops will not make the U.S. safer, it will only build more opposition against us,” said Rick Reyes, who served with the Marines in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Reyes’ statements were most similar to Kerry’s when he spoke on behalf of Vietnam Veterans Against the War as a 27-year-old recently returned soldier.

Boston University professor and a retired Army Col. Andrew Bacevich observed that the starkest difference between the hearing Thursday and the one in 1971 is public disengagement.

“When the young John Kerry spoke, many of his contemporaries had angrily turned against their generation’s war. Today, most of the contemporaries of those fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan have simply tuned out the Long War,” Bacevich said. “The predominant mood of the country is not one of anger or anxiety, but of dull acceptance.”

On a happier note, Johns Hopkins University may increase veterans' benefits. You don't even have to have gone to Iraq/Afghanistan to get these benefits, you just need to have served in the military.