W started such a policy with Afghanistan and Iraq. Obama just kept it going. After the success of the Surge in Iraq, there was obviously talk of doing the same thing in Afghanistan. There was a huge debate from Afghanistan veterans as to whether Afghanis would care about improved infrastructure, cars, etc. since they’ve been living like cavemen since the beginning of time. Bush gave the go-ahead, Obama let the inertia do its thing, then Obama’s handpicked 4-star made the whole situation vastly worse. Now, here we are.
My point is, elections have consequences. The military handles missions within the framework of commander’s intent, and that goes all the way up the chain to POTUS. You can’t complain about a girly military when 12 years of POTUS direction have required such restraint.
Having said that, this article wants us to think that the military is little more than a series of Boy Scout troops, that the fundamental mindsets have changed, and that’s just BS. I’ve no doubt some of the higher-ups are well pansified, but they’re not out there getting it done. A general’s order to “respect the culture” isn’t worth the oxygen he used giving it when a Fire Team sees a man raping a boy in a backwater village or if a Rifle Platoon comes under enemy fire while on patrol.
I enjoy your comments Snake Eater... You have an insiders view of what's happening - and an insightful one that that... Our military leaders are following the Constitution - accepting a civilian's in charge and for now that's President Obama. They're doing what they're suppose to do - but so are we in critiquing Obama's choices.
You seem optimistic the good people in the military won't be drummed out - and that when the will of the people changes in a few years the military can go back to protecting the country. I like that ... it offers hope.