Holy Smokes!

I admit, I pretty much completely forgot this blog existed. But, when you rediscover your own blog by clicking on a link in someone else's...
In case you're curious, I found it on gottagetdrunkfirst. Good read, they don't do political correctness over there.

Well, my time as the crusty old sergeant of the UAS platoon is almost up. I've all but been handed my papers, and I honestly can't say that I much mind. The military is being thoroughly neutered into this toothless, pansy-assed organization that confuses itself for anything but what it is. That, of course, is the military defenders of American freedom. We kill people and break things for freedom. I think it might depress you to realize how few troops realize that, and how many actively argue against that statement. I know it's got me scratching my head. You see, my commander-in-chief is looking at engaging us in yet another war - despite cutting troop strength and funding and basically rooting out and hunting down combat troops to give us the boot.

Now, don't get me wrong. Chemical weapons are a bad thing. There's just too many questions around this for me to agree with the deployment of US troops and materiel against ol' Assad. For starters, there's some noise that the nerve gas might have actually come from the rebels themselves. One of their own mis-handling the gas. As Leonidas of Fighting in the Shade goes into in greater depth and detail than I care to on his blog, it simply does not make sense for Assad to be gassing his enemies when he's already winning the war. If, however, you take the approach that the US government's desire is to support the Al Qaeda-backed Muslim Brotherhood, then suddenly it makes perfect sense to manufacture a reason for us to attack the Syrian regime in support of the rebels.

After all, the Syrian rebellion is the Muslim Brotherhood... much like in Egypt. This Arab Spring thing isn't turning out so hot, is it? We've got our enemies killing our enemies in Syria, and the only thing we can think to do is to start bombing everyone? As if that will somehow not make them both realize that they hate us more than they hate each other?

Like I said. Too many questions, and unlike with Iraq and Afghanistan there's neither a clear-cut goal of liberation nor a defined enemy with a present and plausible threat to America, her citizens, and her allies. I simply don't trust the Administration that gave us Fast and Furious, Benghazi, Obamacare, the IRS targeting conservatives, and so many other scandals and bald-faced lies. If lawfully ordered, I will go... but personally, this whole deal stinks worse than the porta-johns after a week in the Iraqi heat.

It's Not the First Time I've Said This...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/22/AR2010062200813_pf.html

Now, I'm not the good General's biggest fan. I have serious doubts as to whether or not he's actually had boots on the ground at any point in the recent past, as he seems hell-bent on reducing the lethality of our engagements... for our enemies. He's the guy who handed out the order about not going into areas where they could reasonably expect to take contact. That kinda defeats the purpose, doesn't it? General Petraeus he is not, and it's made even worse by his civilian commander. General McChrystal is trying to apply a strategy that worked in Iraq to a whole different ballgame. Petraeus's strategy in Iraq worked because we had the insurgents whupped. We haven't whupped the Afghani resistance yet, so we haven't established in their minds that we're Big Billy Badass. Until we do that, any peaceful overtures will be seen as attempts at surrender.

But this Administration? Holy heavenly God, America, what were you thinking? These people seem to be even more dedicated to losing Afghanistan than the Taliban is to winning it! They shouldn't be demanding apologies, they should be straightening up their acts. Like I say whenever someone complains about me going on about one of my many triggers, "I'll quit saying it when it quits being true." How long did Obama sit on McChrystal's request for more troops? How many men died because Obama couldn't make a decision recommended him by the expert *he* appointed? How many men have died because the American civilians - that's you, every damn one of you who voted for the Dhimmicrats - demanded that we fight this war like civilized men and not kill any of those precious, precious civilians?

Here's a little secret I'm going to let you all in on. There is no such thing as an "Innocent Civilian" in Afghanistan, Iraq, or any other Middle Eastern pisshole. Honest. There's only degrees of guilt. You say how horrible it is for children to die, and it is. Even so, the little ones grow up to be the big ones - that is, if they aren't used as suicide bombs first - and the big ones kill Westerners whenever they get it in their heads to do so. I say it's horrible that American children die because of these people. We Westerners respect discipline and restraint. Middle Easterners respect strength. By restraining ourselves so unnecessarily, we're actually working against our goals. We are not fighting civilized men. We're fighting barbarians. It's long past time for us to take the kid gloves off and go after them with the full might of the American military.