My impression of Turse is that he is quite good at running down big sets of raw data, but that his analysis of it can be less than nuanced. http://www.npr.org/2013/01/28/169076...he-vietnam-war
My impression of Turse is that he is quite good at running down big sets of raw data, but that his analysis of it can be less than nuanced. http://www.npr.org/2013/01/28/169076...he-vietnam-war
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
What does AFRICOM hope to achieve in Africa?
Unlike France that "gets their hands dirty", what is the US end game? Sit on the sidelines until it gradually gets sucked into some African crisis?
What is the strategy behind US engagement in Africa?
I've briefly mentioned Turse - without going into his veracity. Here's Nick -
Nick Turse (born in 1975, 7 years after My Lai; Wiki), who has made himself a career in "war crimes" from the time of his 2005 Columbia University Ph.D dissertation, "Kill Anything That Moves: United States War Crimes and Atrocities in Vietnam, 1965-1973", to the present - his 2013 Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam.
The Amazon readers' reviews of KATM are interesting; especially this one and the comments to it (the review tried to be middle of the road and gave the book 3 stars):
Whether Turse's agitprop about Vietnam is black, white or gray is not going to be an issue for me here.This book is polarizing and graphic; read at your own risk
...
This book seems to bring out the worst in a lot of reviewers. Either they give it 5 stars because it finally "reveals the truth" about the evil U.S. involvement in Vietnam, or they give it 1-star because it ignores the evil North Vietnamese involvement in Vietnam and slams U.S. soldiers. At the risk of sounding wishy-washy, I give it 3 stars.
Mr. Turse documents the abuses of SOME units and the emphasis on body counts that encouraged such abuses. It appears to me that his documentation is MOSTLY limited to areas near the DMZ and parts of the Delta, where a lot of the population did in fact support the North. (Please note the limitations mostly and some; I don't want a lot of comment posts telling me I said something more or less than I actually said). Other units in other places and times faced different challenges, and when soldiers say Mr. Turse doesn't reflect their experience, I accept their statements. ...
Of some infamy is Turse's 2000 article, New Morning, Changing Weather: Radical Youth of the Millennial Age:
His March 2014 article Back to the future: America's new model for expeditionary warfare seems relatively restrained stylistically. The reader's basic problem is how much of it to believe without checking each and every source - not a bad idea with any article, but especially where the author typically has an agenda. That includes my work - gentle reader.On April 20, 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold engaged in a shooting and bombing spree in Columbine High School that left fifteen students, including the alleged gunmen, dead. ...
...
When a youngster decides to make war on his school and classmates, the media leaps to vilify him, his alleged influences, his weaponry, and his parents. Politicians are keen to do the same, and capitalize on the shootings by pushing for new firearm regulations and stiff penalties. And why not? Don’t we punish psychotics bent on threatening life and property, set upon destroying the "American" way of life? Shouldn’t we condemn those who take the lives of others through "senseless" violence? Or should we try to make sense of it? Preferring the latter option, I propose that kids killing kids may be the radical protest of our age, and that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold may be the Mark Rudd and Abbie Hoffman figures of today.
...
While these young boys may have no Port Huron statement, no manifesto, and no coordinated actions (that we know of), they are a legitimate radical faction that may have one-upped the violent Weather Underground and the revolutionary Abbie Hoffman. These boys have truly embraced "revolution for the hell of it," maybe better than Abbie ever did. The randomness of their "non-campaign" may be the ultimate expression of "rage against the machine," ripping into the system, as it were, at its most vulnerable and fundamental level, perhaps more so than Weatherman’s bombing of the U.S. Capitol.
...
The violence unleashed by these juveniles also acts as a call to action for like-minded individuals. Their ability to gain recognition and exert power grows with each like incident, forcing us to look for connections and search for scapegoats. Maybe they have no pithy slogans, no unifying symbol, maybe Marilyn Manson is no Bob Dylan, and maybe their Woodstock ’99 is a poor rip-off of the original (which "ripped off" Monterey), but no one can deny the radicalism of their murderous behavior. Who would not concede that terrorizing the American machine, at the very site where it exerts its most powerful influence, is a truly revolutionary task? To be inarticulate about your goals, even to not understand them, does not negate their existence. Approve or disapprove of their methods, vilify them as miscreants, but don’t dare disregard these modern radicals as anything less than the latest incarnation of disaffected insurgents waging the ongoing American revolution.
Regards
Mike
Last edited by jmm99; 03-15-2014 at 10:57 PM.
Here you go - from the horse's mouth:
and its political bosses are:Cornerstones
Deter and Defeat Transnational Threats
... by engaging with partners to deter the threat posed by al-Qa'ida and other extremist organizations, deny them safe haven, and disrupt their destabilizing activities.
Protect U.S. Security Interests
...by ensuring the safety of Americans and American interests from transnational threats, and by strengthening the defense capabilities of African states and regional organizations.
Prevent Future Conflicts
...by working with African militaries and regional partners to address security concerns and increase stability on the continent.
Support Humanitarian and Disaster Relief
... by providing military assistance, when directed, in response to human and natural crises.
That should cheer you up.
Regards
Mike
Last edited by jmm99; 03-15-2014 at 10:55 PM.
Well it will not be in Africa, instead a quiet corner of an English county; RAF Croughton is the official name for a USAF support facility, in south-west Northamptonshire close to Oxfordshire:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Croughton
The Independent reports the DIA's hub for AFRICOM will be built there:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...n-9391406.html
davidbfpo
A 35 page report from the Oxford Research Group and the New Remote Control Report: 'The new frontier of counter-terrorism in the Sahel':http://oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/si...hel-Sahara.pdf
It is based on open sources, so much is familiar, except for the logistic aspects e.g. deliveries of jet fuel to selected African airports. Non-US contributions are covered, notably France.
davidbfpo
David,
What is happening in the Sahel (and across Africa) is the failure of post-colonial states. America needs to focus on that, not the "terrorist boogeyman".
There's a lot happening in my native Nigeria (not Boko Haram) that doesn't result in international media attention but has the same roots - state failure.
Just like the Middle East, the problem is not "terrorism" per se, but state failure.
Bookmarks