Re: Yemen's army battles rebels in north; dozens dead

[Guest guest]

Now, if we weren't bogged down in Iraq and not so much in Afghanistan, we would have special operations troops available to send to help the Yemenis. Maybe this could be limited intelligence gathering and tactical planning, but possibly also training and direct combat support by small clandestine units. That's actually what I would have preferred: doing Afghanistan right and staying out of Iraq and using the troops against the terrorists in places like Yemen and other nations that would accept our help as outlined above. Those nations that don't or that are too dangerous to work in, could be watched closely from without and bases hit with airstrikes, etc. At the same time, the moneymen could be hunted and taken out one by one, banks shut down, etc. All of this would push the terrorists off to the side making them less effective. They'd still be a danger, just less of one.

In a message dated 7/26/2010 10:01:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, no_reply writes:

Yemen's army battles rebels in north; dozens dead

[Guest guest]

Actually, we do have such troops already serving in Yemen. Read the following

article from the US Defense Department...

Administrator

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=60116

" If you look at the counterinsurgency of the future, " he said, " we want to be

able to send small units inside countries to work with governments. "

The specialized teams of U.S. troops serving in Yemen are an example of that

concept, Odierno said.

" Now, if we weren't bogged down in Iraq and not so much in Afghanistan, we would

have special operations troops available to send to help the Yemenis. Maybe this

could be limited intelligence gathering and tactical planning, but possibly also

training and direct combat support by small clandestine units. That's actually

what I would have preferred: doing Afghanistan right and staying out of Iraq and

using the troops against the terrorists in places like Yemen and other nations

that would accept our help as outlined above. Those nations that don't or that

are too dangerous to work in, could be watched closely from without and bases

hit with airstrikes, etc. At the same time, the moneymen could be hunted and

taken out one by one, banks shut down, etc. All of this would push the

terrorists off to the side making them less effective. They'd still be a danger,

just less of one. "