Posted on 07/04/2016 11:36:36 PM PDT by EinNYC
I just finished watching "Eye in the Sky" starring Helen Mirren, the late Alan Rickman, and some other excellent actors. The movie is notable because it clearly illustrates how the military of countries like the U.S. and Britain have to wage war with their hands tied due to political fallout. I was flabbergasted as I watched to see that every single darn move the military wanted to make on some high value, long-sought Muzzie baddies had to be cleared by ever-higher political nabobs, even when mini drone cameras showed them suiting up in suicide vests and likely to leave the house they were in any minute. I know it was a movie, but by piecing together many news stories about our military's (and apparently Britain's) inability to wage efficient and effective war against America's enemies due to their hands being tied by legal hairsplitting and P.C. considerations, the movie rang very very true.
I just wonder (can any of you military FReepers enlighten me?) to what extent our success in wiping out America's enemies has been compromised by having to get every single darn operation cleared at every single darn level before being able to carry it out, while enemies get away. This is to say nothing of the dilution of our fighting force effectiveness by ridiculous P.C. insanity such as allowing transgenders into the military, allowing obvious gays, the drastic cutback in military budgets, forbidding naming the enemy, letting go jailed terrorists to go back into the game against our soldiers, handing out leaflets to targeted bad guys warning them to get out of the way of our bombs, etc.
Your description reminded me of that laughable requirement at California universities that consent must be given in every stage of making out.
This seems to be some sort of fetish amongst the libs.
Liberal PC is going to get us killed.
I may have to see this one. Thanks for the heads-up.
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/eye_in_the_sky/
The movie is both very good, and very accurate in terms of the PC nature of military decisions in the “war on terror” (a ludicrous concept to begin with). However, it depicts US leaders as ready to launch in a cavalier manner - when in fact, the politicians are just as PC in the US as in the UK.
Because the governments of the West do not accept the reality of this conflict, that the enemy is those who adhere to Salafist interpretations of Islam, we cannot win. It is the ideology that must be refuted, and its active followers and passive supporters that must be punished.
I just saw that Saturday. I was screaming at the screen.
It is depressing that this is how we wage war and why we will never win a war with the idiots in charge of the military.
To me it is a very simple choice. Things become quite simple when the possibility of a terrorist strike is largely real rather than largely academic (as it is in the US). And please do not get me wrong. I know the US is a prime target for terror attack, but the static possibility of an attack at any given time is very low. In places like Nairobi, one of the largest cities in Africa with a large Western population and many Western and Israeli interests, it is considerably more 'immediately real.'
There is little room for PC thought in such a case.
I have friends in our local version of the FBI HRT (the Recce Squad, which is US and Israeli trained), and even train with them (yes, one can own a firearm here - it just requires an exhaustive vetting system, and yearly license renewal), and those guys have stopped attacks before they have happened by fortuitously nipping them in the bud. It is a constant job and I have to say I am very proud of them, but I am cognizant of the fact that it is something they always have to work at and there is a chance they may miss something.
Anyway, when it comes to winning or losing the answer is simple. Winning.
When it comes to losing big or losing small the answer is just as simple. Winning will always beat losing, but if one has to lose then losing small beats losing big.
The decision would not take a second. I doubt it would even be a 'decision.'
(In my best Donald Trump imitation)
Strangely enough an Arabian proverb states:
"An army of sheep led by a lion would defeat an army of lions led by a sheep."
Our leaders follow the Koran better than most natural-born Muzzies.
Back in the late ‘80’s the company I worked for bid on a project that would allow the Pentagon to select individual targets while bombers were minutes away from the drop zone. Although that would be an ideal capability it would add a layer of delay while increasingly more important people weighed in. Some of those people wouldn’t be able to make up their minds and the bombers would probably be told to loiter while their minds were made up.
Increasing communications is being used to take the decisions out of the hands of the people on the firing line and moving it to desk jockeys with no skin in the game and no consequences for their actions. One problem soviet pilots had was the huge level of ground control while American pilots were the captains of their own ship and could make decisions then and there.
The best boss I ever had was too remote in interfere with what I did.
So glad to read your review of EITS! I saw it several times in the theater (and now own it) and it’s tense to watch every time. The director, who also played the highest ranking American soldier, did a fantastic job.
As an Alan Rickman fan I “watched from afar” when he traveled to South Africa to make the film a couple weeks after I first saw him in person. No one could have known - especially not Alan - that by the time the film was released, he would be gone. His final speech is a treasure.
Think Bin Laden...
He was in the sights of our military and they had to ask Bill Clinton if they could take him down...
Clinton said NO...
Thus we got 9/11...
The intrusive ROEs and the marriage of liberal ‘journalists’ embedded with our troops cost the lives of many in Iraq and Afghanistan, due primarily because the troops were second-guessing their actions. Recall the Marine that was prosecuted for shooting an enemy that was still alive as the Marines were clearing houses. Look also at the actions of LtCol West. During WWII actions like these would have been considered no-brainers but now are cause for courts-martial and career ending.
The modern west wants a sterile war but that is akin to wanting an omelet without breaking an egg.
I was struck by the different responses of those who make the decisions and those who implement them.
The politicians are high fiving with gleeful shouts while the military members leave their bases somberly, several with tears streaming down their faces.
save
Excellent movie. Frustrating content
To imagine you would allow terrorists to get away with mass killing for fear of killing a child is frightening. The terrorists know this and why they put innocents next to their targets.
Pray America wakes
“No one could have known - especially not Alan - that by the time the film was released, he would be gone.”
It was fairly quick: diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in August, and died January 14th. Evidently, he deliberately kept it quiet except from his closest friends and family. RIP
Watching it as I type. Watching all the tears shed in the aftermath of the strikes. I prefer the now prohibted, good, old War Porn.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.