Look up Allen West speech in New York about the iran deal

[whitepug6]

You are damn right he is a true leader. I will take him over your leader any day.
A real leader does not succumb to political correctness on the battlefield. The politicians make the rules of warfare from their thrones in D.C. far from the danger. These rules not only endanger our soldiers, but embolden the enemy by tying our soldiers hands in combat while the enemy can use whatever method they choose.. Mr. West broke the rules in a situation he saw fit to use such action to win.
He is a hero, period! let our politicians send their sons unto battle with the restrictions our soldiers are facing and things would change for sure.

You don't know what you are talking about. It's not political correctness, it is the Geneva Convention, Army Regulations, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

I will quote General George Washington on how he expected American Army officers to treat prisoners: "Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [prisoner]. . . I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause… for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country.”

Allen West brought shame, disgrace and ruin on himself and the United States. He needs to go sit down somewhere.

 

[whitepug6]

I didn't say I believe everything he said, but in this case he is dead on the money. After all, this thread is about a particular speech, not Allen West's military service or anything else he has said or written. He could say he believes in aliens and little green men and it doesn't make a difference to me. Stay on the subject.

Allen West's background and his public statements go to the subject of his credibility to speak on the subject of diplomacy. He is an admitted war criminal.

 

[1966septemberdawg]

You don't know what you are talking about. It's not political correctness, it is the Geneva Convention, Army Regulations, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

I will quote General George Washington on how he expected American Army officers to treat prisoners: "Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [prisoner]. . . I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause… for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country.”

Allen West brought shame, disgrace and ruin on himself and the United States. He needs to go sit down somewhere.

This is a war for the very fabric of humanity. Our enemies are not following any rules of engagement so we must fight fire with fire.
If we are not willing to fight to win we should just pull out and wait for our enemy to bring the fight here and just accept we are to be exterminated.
Oh wait that is already happening. You do not bring a sword to a gun/homicide bomb fight. This is not a gentleman's war.

 

[socialcircledawg]

This is a war for the very fabric of humanity. Our enemies are not following any rules of engagement so we must fight fire with fire.
If we are not willing to fight to win we should just pull out and wait for our enemy to bring the fight here and just accept we are to be exterminated.
Oh wait that is already happening. You do not bring a sword to a gun/homicide bomb fight. This is not a gentleman's war.

A gun/homicide bomb fight ? What's that?

 

[kdsdawg]

Allen West's background and his public statements go to the subject of his credibility to speak on the subject of diplomacy. He is an admitted war criminal.

You just don't get it. I don't care who said it. A person doesn't need credibility when what comes out of their mouth is painfully obvious.

 

[StoneColdKillerDawg]

West has been on record saying that eighty members of Congress are card-carrying members of the Communist Party USA. He's as dangerous to this country as his spiritual predecessor, Joe McCarthy. It wouldn't matter what I said to refute West, he said it, you believe it, that settles it..."Every word truth."

Given the direction of the Democratic Party, I wouldn't doubt it. Clinton was as socialist as any Soviet leader, and Obama is carrying on the tradition - but then again, I'm sure you're blindly falling in line aren't you, comrade?

 

[1966septemberdawg]

Wrong that's what makes us better then them.

It makes us weaker than them, to be restricted to rules that endanger our troops.

 

[whitepug6]

This is a war for the very fabric of humanity. Our enemies are not following any rules of engagement so we must fight fire with fire.
If we are not willing to fight to win we should just pull out and wait for our enemy to bring the fight here and just accept we are to be exterminated.
Oh wait that is already happening. You do not bring a sword to a gun/homicide bomb fight. This is not a gentleman's war.

Iraq was and is a counterinsurgency war. Read Army FM 3-24 and educate yourself. http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/Repository/Materials/COIN-FM3-24.pdf

This is US Army and Marine Corps Doctrine.

LIMITS ON INTERROGATION

7-42. Abuse of detained persons is immoral, illegal, and unprofessional. Those who engage in cruel or inhuman treatment of prisoners betray the standards of the profession of arms and U.S. laws. They are subject to punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The Geneva Conventions, as well as the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, agree on unacceptable interrogating techniques. Torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment is never a morally permissible option, even if lives depend on gaining information. No exceptional circumstances permit the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Only personnel trained and certified to interrogate can conduct interrogations. They use legal, approved methods of convincing enemy prisoners of war and detainees to give their cooperation. Interrogation sources are detainees, including enemy prisoners of war. (FM 2-22.3 provides the authoritative doctrine and policy for interrogation. Chapter 3 and appendix D of this manual also address this subject.)

7-43. The ethical challenges posed in COIN operations require commanders’ attention and action. Proactive commanders establish procedures and checks to ensure proper handling of detainees. Commanders verify that subordinate leaders do not allow apparent urgent requirements to result in violations of these procedures. Prohibitions against mistreatment may sometimes clash with leaders’ moral imperative to accomplish their mission with minimum losses. Such situations place leaders in difficult situations, where they must choose between obedience to the law and the lives of their Soldiers and Marines. U.S. law and professional values compel commanders to forbid mistreatment of noncombatants, including captured enemies. Senior commanders clearly define the limits of acceptable behavior to their subordinates and take positive measures to ensure their standards are met.

7-44. To the extent that the work of interrogators is indispensable to fulfilling the state’s obligation to secure its citizens’ lives and liberties, conducting interrogations is a moral obligation. The methods used, however, must reflect the Nation’s commitment to human dignity and international humanitarian law. A commander’s need for information remains valid and can be met while observing relevant regulations and ethical standards. Acting morally does not necessarily mean that leaders give up obtaining critical information. Acting morally does mean that leaders must relinquish certain methods of obtaining information, even if that decision requires Soldiers and Marines to take greater risk.
-

 

[whitepug6]

It makes us weaker than them, to be restricted to rules that endanger our troops.

You do not understand the concept of counterinsurgency.

 

[whitepug6]

Given the direction of the Democratic Party, I wouldn't doubt it. Clinton was as socialist as any Soviet leader, and Obama is carrying on the tradition - but then again, I'm sure you're blindly falling in line aren't you, comrade?

You consume way too much lunatic fringe propaganda.

 

[shonuff253]

There's an old saying that "the definition of insanity is repeating the same action, and expecting a different result." Everyone on this board wantd the U.S. to repeat the same mistakes that we have since the 1953 in Iran when the CIA helped overthrow a democratic leader so Britain could get cheaper oil. Think about where we could possibly be as a WORLD has this not happened. This is a pivotal point in the radicalization of the middle east due to western influence.

 

[StoneColdKillerDawg]

There's an old saying that "the definition of insanity is repeating the same action, and expecting a different result." Everyone on this board wantd the U.S. to repeat the same mistakes that we have since the 1953 in Iran when the CIA helped overthrow a democratic leader so Britain could get cheaper oil. Think about where we could possibly be as a WORLD has this not happened. This is a pivotal point in the radicalization of the middle east due to western influence.

Actually, the mistake during the timeframe you referenced was allowing the media and public opinion away military policy. Ever since WWII, we've seen more hand-tying of our military by the leadership in Washington, leading to longer, ineffective conflicts and higher casualties. It's high time we get in, do it right and be done with it - and stop pandering to all the outside influences. Let's start caring more about our own troops and getting the job done.

 

[shonuff253]

Actually, the mistake during the timeframe you referenced was allowing the media and public opinion away military policy. Ever since WWII, we've seen more hand-tying of our military by the leadership in Washington, leading to longer, ineffective conflicts and higher casualties. It's high time we get in, do it right and be done with it - and stop pandering to all the outside influences. Let's start caring more about our own troops and getting the job done.

WHAT????????? Absolutely nothing that you just said speaks to anything that I just said. Nothing at all! What media do you speak of in 1953 prevented our military from doing their jobs.

 

[StoneColdKillerDawg]

WHAT????????? Absolutely nothing that you just said speaks to anything that I just said. Nothing at all! What media do you speak of in 1953 prevented our military from doing their jobs.

It's a correlation. Public opinion, media involvement, and leadership that care more about politics and sentiment began their uptick during that point in time and has continued to march towards its crescendo. We went from being whole-heartedly behind the war effort in the 40's to spitting on soldiers and denouncing military members in a very short period of time. Simply an observation - don't get your thong in a twist.

 

[1966septemberdawg]

Iraq was and is a counterinsurgency war. Read Army FM 3-24 and educate yourself. http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/Repository/Materials/COIN-FM3-24.pdf

This is US Army and Marine Corps Doctrine.

LIMITS ON INTERROGATION

7-42. Abuse of detained persons is immoral, illegal, and unprofessional. Those who engage in cruel or inhuman treatment of prisoners betray the standards of the profession of arms and U.S. laws. They are subject to punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The Geneva Conventions, as well as the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, agree on unacceptable interrogating techniques. Torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment is never a morally permissible option, even if lives depend on gaining information. No exceptional circumstances permit the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Only personnel trained and certified to interrogate can conduct interrogations. They use legal, approved methods of convincing enemy prisoners of war and detainees to give their cooperation. Interrogation sources are detainees, including enemy prisoners of war. (FM 2-22.3 provides the authoritative doctrine and policy for interrogation. Chapter 3 and appendix D of this manual also address this subject.)

7-43. The ethical challenges posed in COIN operations require commanders’ attention and action. Proactive commanders establish procedures and checks to ensure proper handling of detainees. Commanders verify that subordinate leaders do not allow apparent urgent requirements to result in violations of these procedures. Prohibitions against mistreatment may sometimes clash with leaders’ moral imperative to accomplish their mission with minimum losses. Such situations place leaders in difficult situations, where they must choose between obedience to the law and the lives of their Soldiers and Marines. U.S. law and professional values compel commanders to forbid mistreatment of noncombatants, including captured enemies. Senior commanders clearly define the limits of acceptable behavior to their subordinates and take positive measures to ensure their standards are met.

7-44. To the extent that the work of interrogators is indispensable to fulfilling the state’s obligation to secure its citizens’ lives and liberties, conducting interrogations is a moral obligation. The methods used, however, must reflect the Nation’s commitment to human dignity and international humanitarian law. A commander’s need for information remains valid and can be met while observing relevant regulations and ethical standards. Acting morally does not necessarily mean that leaders give up obtaining critical information. Acting morally does mean that leaders must relinquish certain methods of obtaining information, even if that decision requires Soldiers and Marines to take greater risk.
-

I understand your need to follow the rules laid out for a reason. Discipline , structure and the ability to follow orders under duress.
We are getting our asses handed to us because we fight a group that is not part of a nation that will subscribe to the laws of war.
We must overcome the political correctness and kill these terrorist by all means to win this fight. Do you think their side is clamoring for them
to follow the rules we are held to? Beheading teenage boys and girls? They do not give one shit about human life, much less the rules.
It would be easier to nuke the whole region of the middle east except Isreal , and call it a day.

 

[whitepug6]

I understand your need to follow the rules laid out for a reason. Discipline , structure and the ability to follow orders under duress.
We are getting our asses handed to us because we fight a group that is not part of a nation that will subscribe to the laws of war.
We must overcome the political correctness and kill these terrorist by all means to win this fight. Do you think their side is clamoring for them
to follow the rules we are held to? Beheading teenage boys and girls? They do not give one shit about human life, much less the rules.
It would be easier to nuke the whole region of the middle east except Isreal , and call it a day.

That is a very uninformed comment. In 2004 and 2005, we were getting our asses handed to us because we tried to fight an insurgent force with conventional tactics---the way you suggest we should fight. We turned the corner in 2006 because FINALLY it dawned on the brass and civilian leadership that you cannot fight insurgents with the tactics of World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. We should have learned that lesson fifty years ago.

From 1965 to 1968, the US Army used conventional tactics to fight an insurgent force operating in South Vietnam---and failed. That 1965-1968 US Army was FIVE times the size of the 2003-2008 forces operating in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Counterinsurgency, if applied correctly, can isolate and defeat insurgent forces. I saw it happen in Mosul during 2003-2004.

And I hope you are not seriously suggesting the United States employ nuclear weapons against the entire region of the Middle East.

 

[whitepug6]

Actually, the mistake during the timeframe you referenced was allowing the media and public opinion away military policy. Ever since WWII, we've seen more hand-tying of our military by the leadership in Washington, leading to longer, ineffective conflicts and higher casualties. It's high time we get in, do it right and be done with it - and stop pandering to all the outside influences. Let's start caring more about our own troops and getting the job done.

Another uninformed opinion. Who do you think elects the "leadership in Washington"? The American people. So you want to go to war the way the United States did from 1941-1945? Okay, if you can tolerate a complete takeover of the American economy by the federal government, confiscatory taxation (during World War II, the top 1% of wage earners paid 94% tax), gas and oil rationing, shortages of consumer goods, and revival of a military draft, then I'm with you. Unfortunately, the American people don't want to pay the price necessary to fight a total war.

 

[1966septemberdawg]

That is a very uninformed comment. In 2004 and 2005, we were getting our asses handed to us because we tried to fight an insurgent force with conventional tactics---the way you suggest we should fight. We turned the corner in 2006 because FINALLY it dawned on the brass and civilian leadership that you cannot fight insurgents with the tactics of World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. We should have learned that lesson fifty years ago.

From 1965 to 1968, the US Army used conventional tactics to fight an insurgent force operating in South Vietnam---and failed. That 1965-1968 US Army was FIVE times the size of the 2003-2008 forces operating in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Counterinsurgency, if applied correctly, can isolate and defeat insurgent forces. I saw it happen in Mosul during 2003-2004.

And I hope you are not seriously suggesting the United States employ nuclear weapons against the entire region of the Middle East.

We were getting our asses handed to us because the enemy knows the majority of the US citizens and politicians grow tired of the fighting and will outlast the resolve and will of those to continue the fight. We proved that using Guerrilla tactics in Vietnam led to more success, but the nva knew they would outlast the resolve of the US public and politicians. I did not say the whole middle east, I excluded Isreal.

 

[StoneColdKillerDawg]

Another uninformed opinion. Who do you think elects the "leadership in Washington"? The American people. So you want to go to war the way the United States did from 1941-1945? Okay, if you can tolerate a complete takeover of the American economy by the federal government, confiscatory taxation (during World War II, the top 1% of wage earners paid 94% tax), gas and oil rationing, shortages of consumer goods, and revival of a military draft, then I'm with you. Unfortunately, the American people don't want to pay the price necessary to fight a total war.

Another uninformed opinion. Who do you think elects the "leadership in Washington"? The American people. So you want to go to war the way the United States did from 1941-1945? Okay, if you can tolerate a complete takeover of the American economy by the federal government, confiscatory taxation (during World War II, the top 1% of wage earners paid 94% tax), gas and oil rationing, shortages of consumer goods, and revival of a military draft, then I'm with you. Unfortunately, the American people don't want to pay the price necessary to fight a total war.

You're responses become dumber by the day, Dennis. I'm done with responding to your ignorant, out-of-touch responses. Try using all the facts instead of the ones that piece together your fractured view of historical events. I really wonder how people like you function in real life and hold down jobs...

 

[whitepug6]

We were getting our asses handed to us because the enemy knows the majority of the US citizens and politicians grow tired of the fighting and will outlast the resolve and will of those to continue the fight. We proved that using Guerrilla tactics in Vietnam led to more success, but the nva knew they would outlast the resolve of the US public and politicians. I did not say the whole middle east, I excluded Isreal.

How did using "guerrilla tactics" in Vietnam lead to more success? Can you cite even one operation between 1965 and 1972 which provides support for your opinion?

You have no moral reservations about killing or maiming innocent people with the use of nuclear weapons in the Arab world?

 

[whitepug6]

You're responses become dumber by the day, Dennis. I'm done with responding to your ignorant, out-of-touch responses. Try using all the facts instead of the ones that piece together your fractured view of historical events. I really wonder how people like you function in real life and hold down jobs...

I did use all the facts. Unfortunately, the facts don't fit your cloud-cuckoo-land version of history.

I don't blame you for being done responding to me. It must be frustrating for you to have your ill-informed opinions popped like a cheap balloon. Educate yourself. Read some real history instead of right wing lunatic fringe propaganda.

 

[1966septemberdawg]

How did using "guerrilla tactics" in Vietnam lead to more success? Can you cite even one operation between 1965 and 1972 which provides support for your opinion?

You have no moral reservations about killing or maiming innocent people with the use of nuclear weapons in the Arab world?

Sure how about the LRRP units that would take the fight to charlie, Navy Seal units, Green Berets they were very successful in a non traditional combat model against the vietcong. Killed more rice eaters than pol pot. I have no reservations exterminating the muslim devils, you are correct in that assumption.

 

[1966septemberdawg]

Kill yourself.

I concur. He is part of the reason our nation has turned to shit. People who think big government is always the answer.

 

[whitepug6]

Sure how about the LRRP units that would take the fight to charlie, Navy Seal units, Green Berets they were very successful in a non traditional combat model against the vietcong. Killed more rice eaters than pol pot. I have no reservations exterminating the muslim devils, you are correct in that assumption.

Really? Care to cite a particular operation (for example, Operation Benning II, or Operation Thang Phong III) in which special forces succeeded against the Viet Cong or NVA? It's easy to just give your opinion that they were successful. The Vietnam War is my field of expertise in military history, so I am curious to see if you know what you are talking about.

 

[whitepug6]

I concur. He is part of the reason our nation has turned to shit. People who think big government is always the answer.

Translation: "whitepug6 is destroying our weak arguments and unsupported opinions. I just want to go back to complaining about how hard it is to be a white man these days."

 

[1966septemberdawg]

Really? Care to cite a particular operation (for example, Operation Benning II, or Operation Thang Phong III) in which special forces succeeded against the Viet Cong or NVA? It's easy to just give your opinion that they were successful. The Vietnam War is my field of expertise in military history, so I am curious to see if you know what you are talking about.

I will honestly state that you are much more knowledgeable in this area than I am. I was not in the war due to my age (around 9 years old when the war ended). I read a lot on the subject due to my interest in all things US military, Most of the counter-insurgent insertions were done on a regular basis and I do not know of specific operations where that could be proven, just the recounts I have read on the subject. Also stories from my relatives that were in the war. I honestly would love to hear more about the information you could provide on this subject. I still feel that the politicians lost that war for the US. We are facing the same situation today, with Washington armchair quarterbacks hemming our soldiers on the battlefield. We have enabled isis to start after broadcasting our dates to pullout of Iraq. We once again did not have the resolve as a nation to finish the drill and that vacuum was filled a larger and more dangerous threat to the free world.

 

[1966septemberdawg]

Translation: "whitepug6 is destroying our weak arguments and unsupported opinions. I just want to go back to complaining about how hard it is to be a white man these days."

I do not think you or Me believe that is the case. You are coming in with missing facts and a leftest view that will never see the truth based on FACTS not EMOTIONS. It is hard to be any kind of man in this wicked world where libs have destroyed the Family, love of country, individualism, freedom of religion,and capitalism.

 

[SeaDawgs76]

A real leader does not let soldiers under his command beat a detainee.

A real leader does not order soldiers under his command to put the detainee's head in a sand-filled barrel ordinarily used for clearing weapons. A real leader does not fire his weapon into the barrel.

A real leader is not relieved of his command by his division commander.

A real leader is not judged a failure and a disgrace by the United States Army.

A real leader is not forced to retire in order to avoid facing a court-martial on two felony counts.

But if Allen West is your idea of what a real leader is, and what a real man sounds like, that says a lot about you.

Compared to Obama, Kerry and Clinton......he would be a better alternative.

 

[Rolodawg2011]

Iraq was and is a counterinsurgency war. Read Army FM 3-24 and educate yourself. http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/Repository/Materials/COIN-FM3-24.pdf

This is US Army and Marine Corps Doctrine.

LIMITS ON INTERROGATION

7-42. Abuse of detained persons is immoral, illegal, and unprofessional. Those who engage in cruel or inhuman treatment of prisoners betray the standards of the profession of arms and U.S. laws. They are subject to punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The Geneva Conventions, as well as the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, agree on unacceptable interrogating techniques. Torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment is never a morally permissible option, even if lives depend on gaining information. No exceptional circumstances permit the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Only personnel trained and certified to interrogate can conduct interrogations. They use legal, approved methods of convincing enemy prisoners of war and detainees to give their cooperation. Interrogation sources are detainees, including enemy prisoners of war. (FM 2-22.3 provides the authoritative doctrine and policy for interrogation. Chapter 3 and appendix D of this manual also address this subject.)

7-43. The ethical challenges posed in COIN operations require commanders’ attention and action. Proactive commanders establish procedures and checks to ensure proper handling of detainees. Commanders verify that subordinate leaders do not allow apparent urgent requirements to result in violations of these procedures. Prohibitions against mistreatment may sometimes clash with leaders’ moral imperative to accomplish their mission with minimum losses. Such situations place leaders in difficult situations, where they must choose between obedience to the law and the lives of their Soldiers and Marines. U.S. law and professional values compel commanders to forbid mistreatment of noncombatants, including captured enemies. Senior commanders clearly define the limits of acceptable behavior to their subordinates and take positive measures to ensure their standards are met.

7-44. To the extent that the work of interrogators is indispensable to fulfilling the state’s obligation to secure its citizens’ lives and liberties, conducting interrogations is a moral obligation. The methods used, however, must reflect the Nation’s commitment to human dignity and international humanitarian law. A commander’s need for information remains valid and can be met while observing relevant regulations and ethical standards. Acting morally does not necessarily mean that leaders give up obtaining critical information. Acting morally does mean that leaders must relinquish certain methods of obtaining information, even if that decision requires Soldiers and Marines to take greater risk.
-

Written by staff desk jockey's

 

[whitepug6]

Written by staff desk jockey's

LOL. You mean this desk jockey?

or did you mean this desk jockey?

 

[whitepug6]

Compared to Obama, Kerry and Clinton......he would be a better alternative.

You think you know better than the United States Army? They decided West wasn't fit to command a battalion, much less wear its uniform. And you would let him have the codes to our nuclear arsenal. Good Lord.

 

[whitepug6]

I will honestly state that you are much more knowledgeable in this area than I am. I was not in the war due to my age (around 9 years old when the war ended). I read a lot on the subject due to my interest in all things US military, Most of the counter-insurgent insertions were done on a regular basis and I do not know of specific operations where that could be proven, just the recounts I have read on the subject. Also stories from my relatives that were in the war. I honestly would love to hear more about the information you could provide on this subject. I still feel that the politicians lost that war for the US. We are facing the same situation today, with Washington armchair quarterbacks hemming our soldiers on the battlefield. We have enabled isis to start after broadcasting our dates to pullout of Iraq. We once again did not have the resolve as a nation to finish the drill and that vacuum was filled a larger and more dangerous threat to the free world.

If you are interested in unconventional warfare operations during the Vietnam War, there are several good books detailing the history of MACV-SOG (Military Assistance Command, Vietnam-Special Operations Group). It was a joint military command comprising elements of US Army Special Forces, US Navy SEALs, US Marine Corps Force Recon units, US Air Force personnel, and CIA agents.

MACV-SOG was involved in Operation 34A, the August 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, Operation Shining Brass (1965), Operation Daniel Boone (1967). and Operation Lam Son 719 (1971).

 

[Rolodawg2011]

You think you know better than the United States Army? They decided West wasn't fit to command a battalion, much less wear its uniform. And you would let him have the codes to our nuclear arsenal. Good Lord.

Simple question. Did you help put POSOTUS in office?

 

[1966septemberdawg]

If you are interested in unconventional warfare operations during the Vietnam War, there are several good books detailing the history of MACV-SOG (Military Assistance Command, Vietnam-Special Operations Group). It was a joint military command comprising elements of US Army Special Forces, US Navy SEALs, US Marine Corps Force Recon units, US Air Force personnel, and CIA agents.

MACV-SOG was involved in Operation 34A, the August 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, Operation Shining Brass (1965), Operation Daniel Boone (1967). and Operation Lam Son 719 (1971).

I sincerely thank you for providing that information and I will try to find those books and dive into some good reading.

 

[dawgshiz]

West has been on record saying that eighty members of Congress are card-carrying members of the Communist Party USA. He's as dangerous to this country as his spiritual predecessor, Joe McCarthy. It wouldn't matter what I said to refute West, he said it, you believe it, that settles it..."Every word truth."

History says that McCarthy was right and there is no doubt that there are currently at least 80 members of Congress that are card-carrying Communist Party members.

 

[Rolodawg2011]

History says that McCarthy was right and there is no doubt that there are currently at least 80 members of Congress that are card-carrying Communist Party members.

You know liberals aren't interested in the facts....they're just emotional liars who prey on the downtrodden

 

[whitepug6]

Simple question. Did you help put POSOTUS in office?

I voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012.

 

[1966septemberdawg]

I voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012.

How do you feel about the way obama is dismantling the military and weakening it's power?
This happened under carter as well and Reagan had to correct his mistakes and rebuild the military to
normal standards.

 

[jenkinscreekdawg]

I voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012.

how does it feel to have voted TWICE for a" fake" who has had numerous names ?

 

[Rolodawg2011]

I voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012.

Well there ya go. You voted for an unqualified empty suit rabble rouser. I think that tells us everything need to know about your intellect and judgement