Quote Originally Posted by 82redleg View Post
In general, yes. In the specific case of high-end SOF, I'm not sure that most here would agree with your contention. I've never been around Aussie SOF, so I can't speak intelligently about them, but they have a good reputation.
Was "my contention" limited to high-end SOF? So lets stick with your "in general" agreement with my overall contention shall we?

Care to explain this? I don't understand why we should be sending 40 or so guys home every week under arrest.
Do try to be accurate. I said "...either under close arrest or just thrown out of the op area?".

The under arrest number would comprise those held for murder, assault, sexual assault, drug offenses, theft etc etc and given the 100,000 plus soldiers out there and the odd report that makes the news this amount should be reasonably substantial.

Then you need to add to that those soldiers who are sent home for operational offenses from cowardice to refusing to follow a legal command (probably also under close arrest).

Than the last category would be those who just flat out fail to perform operationally or develop (real or contrived) emotional problems while in theatre.

I am aware that the Brits have sent officers and senior NCOs home where they have failed to perform operationally. I am assuming the same has applied to troopies who just don't cut it.

I am not aware of the scale of the problem among US troops and have heard that there is (or was) the tendency to keep supposed PTSD cases in theatre so I would then qualify this comment by saying those soldiers who should be sent home.

... or is everything just fine and dandy over there?