I know I have my whims. ... And the army is one. Since my presence in a school and a U.S. university and have worked alongside Black Death of classes that are being fought in the war who lost a brother, sister, friends in the war. ... I realized that whatever the one thinks of the war, especially when one is fiercely opposed, always fully support the soldiers fighting. I thought to my brief history on the ceremonies and the reactions of the local press of the city of Naperville where I lived for over a year that has already lost more than ten of his children in Iraq and Afghanistan. Then I did not dare.
As the years pass sentence ... the older I get filled with clear ... When I was 18-19 years I thought that soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan was now at my age ... almost 23 years some are much younger than me. One soldier died at the front has just turned 20, he had less than a year of training. It is always better than the British or American soldiers who commit to 17 ½ years and that the day of their 18 years find themselves on the field.
We often talk about the U.S. military, referring to the fat that the vast majority of soldiers are Hispanic or black and often very poor ... only so they can pay for access to Universite themselves and their children, so they only have to finance their health care costs and premiums in recent years with the commitment range from 25 000 to 50 000 dollars . Except that quite often they come back dead or wounded for life (amputation) without mentioning the psychological (completely ignored by the army).
The situation in France is no different except that it was not a "GI Bill" equivalent to that of the USA which fully supports the university fees for soldiers and their families ... The situation is same here as it takes to watch the social composition of the French army ... You have much more chance of having military recruiters in a vocational school in a general high school or preparatory classes there. The military is often a choice for young socially conditioned by lack of reference, without leading professional and some of which have failed at school. In this regard it should be recognized that the French army has a real social role in our country. Another aspect to be well in mind is that those who send soldiers to the fronts are not the same social strata as the soldiers. I do not remember since General De Gaulle as a politician who could worry about a son or relative who was at the front.
I still have that fear that men and women, especially young people left on the left express a deep distrust of the military ... especially because they can not argue with us in political organizations. A pacifist can almost lead to a hatred of the soldier. I've always tended to enroll more in the mainstream of the left who accuse the first politicians who vote means the army and decide to send into battle, and then blame the generals. The basic soldiering, I already said does not necessarily have a choice and although he had no reason not to be secured to one who sees his comrade pierced by a bullet.
Following these terrible battles in Afghanistan we expect answers. Why are our soldiers were not above an aerial reconnaissance. Why is the air support he was so slow to intervene. Why do our soldiers have mounted the neck of the hill on foot or visibility is less then they had vehicles. It seems that the version differ substantially between what is declared by the command and what the soldiers reported wounded. Including whether our soldiers are dead in the first minutes of combat or have been slaughtered son hours. One thing is for sure in all cases, whether you are for or against the war and I am against it, if power is sending our soldiers to the front it is essential to give all necessary means to protect our soldiers. Again the powers that be and all those who refuse to vote censorship are responsible for the poor equipment of our troops and the weakness of our air support.
Responsibility policy is twofold. Responsible for sending our soldiers in a mission or goals are extremely vague and or definition of what constitutes a victory is not even established. Responsibility of political spending that prefers high technology (aircraft carrier or missile hight tech) in capital spending for our military, strengthening the armor our vehicles and the increase in air support unit (drome , helicopter ...). It is outrageous that France has no drome in Afghanistan because there is too much risk of losing them. A soldier is worth more than drome!
I can understand that the time should not be to increase the defense budget in these times of budgetary restraint. If budget cuts must be first must be repatriated when our soldiers because we can not leave behind if we do not give their all means to protect themselves and fulfill their missions. If like Sarkozy, Fillion, Kouchner, Bayrou they want to keep soldiers in Afghanistan while not increasing the defense budget and although they have blood on their hands.
Peace and Respect for the soldiers.
As the years pass sentence ... the older I get filled with clear ... When I was 18-19 years I thought that soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan was now at my age ... almost 23 years some are much younger than me. One soldier died at the front has just turned 20, he had less than a year of training. It is always better than the British or American soldiers who commit to 17 ½ years and that the day of their 18 years find themselves on the field.
We often talk about the U.S. military, referring to the fat that the vast majority of soldiers are Hispanic or black and often very poor ... only so they can pay for access to Universite themselves and their children, so they only have to finance their health care costs and premiums in recent years with the commitment range from 25 000 to 50 000 dollars . Except that quite often they come back dead or wounded for life (amputation) without mentioning the psychological (completely ignored by the army).
The situation in France is no different except that it was not a "GI Bill" equivalent to that of the USA which fully supports the university fees for soldiers and their families ... The situation is same here as it takes to watch the social composition of the French army ... You have much more chance of having military recruiters in a vocational school in a general high school or preparatory classes there. The military is often a choice for young socially conditioned by lack of reference, without leading professional and some of which have failed at school. In this regard it should be recognized that the French army has a real social role in our country. Another aspect to be well in mind is that those who send soldiers to the fronts are not the same social strata as the soldiers. I do not remember since General De Gaulle as a politician who could worry about a son or relative who was at the front.
I still have that fear that men and women, especially young people left on the left express a deep distrust of the military ... especially because they can not argue with us in political organizations. A pacifist can almost lead to a hatred of the soldier. I've always tended to enroll more in the mainstream of the left who accuse the first politicians who vote means the army and decide to send into battle, and then blame the generals. The basic soldiering, I already said does not necessarily have a choice and although he had no reason not to be secured to one who sees his comrade pierced by a bullet.
Following these terrible battles in Afghanistan we expect answers. Why are our soldiers were not above an aerial reconnaissance. Why is the air support he was so slow to intervene. Why do our soldiers have mounted the neck of the hill on foot or visibility is less then they had vehicles. It seems that the version differ substantially between what is declared by the command and what the soldiers reported wounded. Including whether our soldiers are dead in the first minutes of combat or have been slaughtered son hours. One thing is for sure in all cases, whether you are for or against the war and I am against it, if power is sending our soldiers to the front it is essential to give all necessary means to protect our soldiers. Again the powers that be and all those who refuse to vote censorship are responsible for the poor equipment of our troops and the weakness of our air support.
Responsibility policy is twofold. Responsible for sending our soldiers in a mission or goals are extremely vague and or definition of what constitutes a victory is not even established. Responsibility of political spending that prefers high technology (aircraft carrier or missile hight tech) in capital spending for our military, strengthening the armor our vehicles and the increase in air support unit (drome , helicopter ...). It is outrageous that France has no drome in Afghanistan because there is too much risk of losing them. A soldier is worth more than drome!
I can understand that the time should not be to increase the defense budget in these times of budgetary restraint. If budget cuts must be first must be repatriated when our soldiers because we can not leave behind if we do not give their all means to protect themselves and fulfill their missions. If like Sarkozy, Fillion, Kouchner, Bayrou they want to keep soldiers in Afghanistan while not increasing the defense budget and although they have blood on their hands.
Peace and Respect for the soldiers.
