_______________________________________
Well, it's a perfectly legitimate question that under normal circumstances would readily prompt immediate and matter-of-fact answers.
98% of any fighting we do is directed by our military commanders in the field and for the most part is overwhelmingly successful.
Herein lies the problem: The 98% military victories are made to become null and void by the major screwups - FUBAR - made by the 2% political elite who keep putting our boys in harms way and pulling them back just when they have all but wiped out the enemy in any given battle (e.g., Fallujah).
That kind of PC-FUBAR-B$ didn't work in Viet Nam and it sure won't work in Iraq.
(Now, I see we are pushing to fund $600 million (to be taken out of our own scarce annual defense budget already being quabbled over) and build a STANDING UNITED NATIONS ARMY.)
Back to the question of allowing the enemy into our Intel operations . .
The answer to that is that we have to. We wouldn't know what the Muslim terrorists were saying to each other (about us) if we didn't. The problem with THAT is that more often than not, the Muslim brought in to harvest intel to save our troop's lives is turned around (because of Muslims fierce loyalty to each other and deep hatred towards "infidels").
This has happened at least five times that I know of and I'm not sure if thre is anyway to turn that around - When can you really trust a Muslim when it comes down to him saving other Muslime lives or the lives of "infidels?"
That's why we need Arabic Christian or Jewish translators.
Oh, but that's not "diversity". Remember, Jewish applicants were turned down for translator jobs at State Dept., IIRC.
When their family's safety and security and prosperity depends upon it!! What the Radical Muslims are trying to sell their brethren is a pretty dark and dismal future, while Americans are selling them FReedom, Hope and Self-determination!! What would YOU pick?!
FReegards...MUD