posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 05:29 AM
The B1 crew obviously did have the equipment necessary to detect the signal from the US pods, as they stated they did not detect a signal from the
ridgeline where the saw muzzle flashes originating. If they detected them in the valley, where the main group of US and Afghan fighters were located,
which is likely, then obviously they would assume that the insurgents had taken up positions above US forces to gain a positional advantage. That
makes sense to a certain degree. However, like was cited in the report, there was gross negligence where communications were concerned. There are many
things like this that go on in the military, believe it or not, and I have often wondered just how well the US would do in a war against another
I'm sure that US forces would be fine in such a conflict, but I think that there would be a learning curve that will take some time, and certain
things that would have to be fixed. Communications are just one of those things. I mean look at major wars, such as Vietnam or WWII. Modern soldiers
are not used to seeing friendly casualties in large numbers, and most of the time in the modern conflicts the US has participated in, the casualties
are treated or evacuated relatively quickly. This was not the case in large wars that US soldiers took part in. Casualties laid there for long periods
of time in many instances. The psychological impact of such a thing is in itself partly why soldiers detach themselves to a certain degree. There is
not so much detachment of this nature in the conflicts the US has taken part in in the Middle East. It is a detachment from the reality of death
itself in a way. But it is necessary for individual survival emotionally, and possibly physically, speaking.
But I suppose that even in major wars US troops did not start off so hot. The US had a difficult time when first fighting on the ground in Africa for
instance. It takes experience and then building on that experience. But what really irks me is the fact that the high command, the military leaders,
are the ones who are supposed to learn from military history. They are the ones who establish the protocols and institute the necessities, things to
help soldiers function and keep them alive while eliminating the enemy. I do not have much faith in modern US commanders to a great extent. Even
during Vietnam the grand strategy was basically just "kill the enemy." That is a horrible strategy for fighting what was basically guerilla forces
in larger groups, and is definitely why we lost the war. Other bad decisions made during war cost countless lives, but Vietnam stands out, especially
when who knows how many Americans died recapturing a location that had already been captured one or more times, only to be abandoned to the enemy.
My point is that I have seen this trend in most modern conflicts to a certain extent. And despite the fact that politics always plays a role in
warfare, it seems to me that politicians have been partly responsible for interfering in military matters they know nothing about. Commanders and
strategic planners are hemmed in by the politicians, and hopefully that is the cause of what appears to be ineptitude in many instances. Because I
would hate for everyone to find out the hard way that their military leaders cannot get the job done when it counts, ie during a war with another
superpower. Technology only goes so far when the opposing force outnumbers you considerably, say a country like China, especially when they themselves
are relatively advanced.
The only reason I bring any of this up is because the communications failures mentioned in the article are things that should not happen, and could
have even more dire consequences if they happen during a war against a much more formidable enemy. This is something of monumental importance, on the
off chance we go to war with a superpower, but these problems should be fixed even if there is not a threat of war with such a power. The good news is
that it does not look like war with a superpower is on the horizon for the near future. It is easier to fix the things that need fixing before you
have to use them. And even though US soldiers are dying from such mistakes now, it pales in comparison to the consequences of such failures against a
much more formidable foe.