Not dinners for generals inside the Beltway. That isn't going to cut any beef anywhere. [That means that the beef you where showelling down your gullible throats that night, is the only beef this event will ever have cut]

Here is a video from July 2007 showing just what high-tech terror looks like in the 21. century. More than 20 people , among them two Reuters journalists murdered with cold blood. And when one of the wounded journalists tries to crawl away, you hear the stupid Americans in the helicopter say: "Yes, just go ahead an show your weapon". Eventually he is being picked up by a car, in which two kids on the front seat iare clearly visible. But not so under American rules of engagement: You are not allowed to pick up wounded -- journalists as iut were - so the Americans request permission to "take out" the car, which happens. Later, they laugh when a Bradley arrives at the scene and rund over a corpse.

One is beginning to understand why the US military has held this video back. It is a discrace to the whole US military and a shame to the entire American people, which can only further damage America's standing in the Muslim world.

As the old American saying goes: "What goes 'round comes 'round." If this happened in my country I would of course be furious and wanting to "take out" as many Americans as possible. And this is presumably also the effect it will have for the ones directly concerned.

http://wikileaks.org/

With regards to:

He indicated he believes that President Obama is going to be a war president, like it or not. "We believe this is a long-term ideological struggle," that "this enemy is not going to quit," and that existing global trends are "like to exacerbate" the situation. "We are in for a decade or more of persistent conflict."

It is inevitable that an army man should say such a thing. after all these wars means employment and funds. He doesn't seem to have a clue that these people are angry about something (mostly that US forces are in their lands) and instead of mentioning the example of Lebanon, he would have done better in deriding Israel's conduct, as the chief motivator for 75 % of all terror after 1945, including the mother of all terror-attacks, the ones against the Twin Towers and the Pentagon on 9/11. If he -- and you -- wants to mention the second biggest motivating factor behind 9/11, by all means go ahead: It was US troops continued stay on holu Saudi soil after Saddam was thrown out from Kuwait in 1991. And Israel had a hand in this decision as well, because the man who pretty much took the decision was Martin Indyk, an aAstralian raised Jew, American citizen from 1993 and a prominent member of The Israel lobby. He was later US ambassador to Israel

Where does Gen Casey think the funds for this new Hundred Years War will come from? It's all well and good to go on a turkey shoot when the yard is mowed, the bills are paid, the kids have been fed, and the roof doesn't need mending. This "long war" is like getting mugged, and then using the fear of being mugged again to completely destroy your life. Max out the credit cards on guns and ammo, starting hanging out with drug dealers because they know where the muggers are, lock your kids in their room if they say "hey dad, you're a little nuts", and scream at your wife that she doesn't love you enough if she dares to criticize. Oh and did I mention, your household economics are already shot because grandma and your deadbeat cousin are sucking you dry?

This is why, with a few exceptions, military leaders as politicians terrify me. Particularly if they are lifers. These guys are part of a system that has taken care of them since their youth, and like a teenager don't really put much thought into where the cash comes from. War is a force that evidently gives Gen Casey some meaning. Some might say that Casey is being sober and mature. I'd disagree heartily, he sounds ideological. And his contempt for NATO means he is contemptous of other nations whose citizenry has a bit of say in their own foreign policy. Not that the NeoCarolingian club doesn't have it's own lack of proper representation.
I find it interesting the only nation he chose to praise was the U.K., the sick man of Western Europe, who tried, unsuccessfully to bully little Iceland into an illegal. But hey, at least they can field a division. The nation might be falling apart but at least they are committed to the fight. That's it kids, raise them taxes, man up, we gots some nation building to do.
Threats to a nation are not only external or the internal results of violent dissidents. Leaders who have abandoned sound economic policies are more dangerous than any terrorist.

Well, its nice to see Gen. Casey not lump the British Army into the usual pattern of ‘snarky’ comments made by Americans about the NATO. The British Army fields probably the most highly mobile and thoroughly trained infantry of the NATO alliance and yet the Prime Minister cannot get Obama to return his calls. I understand that the ‘special relationship’ is no longer what it used to be since the decline of the Soviet Union removed the larger threat to Western Europe. But if the USA wants technically proficient and professionally competent allies to work with in the more complex security environment of the future it would be nice if Obama would set aside his lack of cultural affinity for the Anglo-Saxon world and dispose of his chippy indifference to our traditional partners with whom we have shared values and history.

and hat tip to Tom for the reportage. Good luck to big Army as we wait to reset the infantry with our noncoms over-deployed for year 8 of this war.

Gen Casey's in a different job under a different boss now, but HE seems to have some things on his mind that he thinks Americans need to think about. The possible relationships between soft recruiting/training standards, TBI, PTSD, 'keep em on the firing line' mood-meds and service suicide, for one.

I hope the tight-jawed general's memoir eventually unwraps what MNFI operating instructions he received, and what 'stand-up' conditions had been set for any prospect of his success.

The coming decade of conflict doesn't have to mean a decade of mainforce occupations and mass troop deployments. BTW the Euros have demographic problems in their homelands that might send us spiraling down a fascist path. Imagine widespread urban riots of MAM moslem immigrants, such as France experienced...

The term ‘shared values’ is often used as a public relations gesture to elevate the perception of our relations with some countries, which we in fact have few if any shared values. However, with Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc., while less so than in the past because of changing demographics we still do have very real and tangible historical shared values of language, law, democracy and common history. Some Anglophobes may dislike this and they are welcome to their point of view but it is true nonetheless.

Casey is the losing-ist officer in the US military, yet, he runs the Army. He is the quintessential personnel manager rather than a leader. "Not executing to standard" and "this is something we need to talk about as an Army?" Thats got to be gigantic conversation.

...someone had pushed the Army Chief on three related topics: 1.) the quality of generalship in recent years, 2.) the need for wholesale reform in the US Army, and 3.) which side he's on in the heavy-vs-light/mainforce-vs COIN battle raging in his Army. 'Versatility' might tip his hand on the last question, but how does he translate that into the POM etc.?

Which war mongrel company paid fro the dinner? Boeing? General Dynamics? Black Water? The list goes on and on. Mr. Ricks former reporter turned stenographer is running info ops for the Army flag cabal.

I´m sure all the typical fatso district of coruption club menbers enjoyed stuffing their fat faces and guzzling booze while our brave enlisted people suffer. Casey does not give a rats ass fuc about his soldiers let alone their families. When was the last time Casey could touch his toes or see his pee pee. LOL.

"By this I take it that he means we have to prove we are going to live up to the SOFA before Iraqi politicians can dare to begin talks about a long term military presence. Which I think there will be, and which I think is a good idea, despite invading Iraq being a terrible idea. "

Love the last line. Pure DC Rickian double speak. If it feels good, loot it.

The latest copy of the USNI ‘Proceedings’ arrived in my mail today and the focus of this months issue is China. The article covers wide-ranging areas of concern in a non-alarmist but very sober manner. The paradox here is the vast squandering of American national wealth, military and naval power at the same time in the sinkholes of Iraq and Afghanistan. This is being done while the capabilities of this new Asian regional super power are growing by leaps and bounds in all the dimensions of a potential future battle space. China quantitatively but more importantly qualitatively is building its naval and space power into a sophisticated network of lethal capabilities which are even now confounding American strategic dispositions in the western Pacific. China is taking its new power seriously as is exemplified by developing first rate technically proficient and highly disciplined personnel. No baby booms on PLAN combat vessels or crews incapable of mastering simple arithmetic. No obese sailors barely able to manage their way through a hatchway or befuddled with personal problems at home. Thankfully, some people in the USN are growing more concerned but my question is are those concerns being downed out by the need to fixate on these asinine wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Rubber Ducky might have some thoughts on this issue?

From my friend Professor Roger Thompson in Korea: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/03/31/navy-changes-or-us-power-fades/#axzz0jr7m6kO7 As Woody Allen put it, "Down one road lies disaster, down the other utter catastrophe. Let us hope we have the wisdom to choose wisely."

why the Army continues to hold onto the "Warrior's Ethos"...Collateral Murder appears to comply with the ethos but neither with a code of conduct for an American nor ethics for a non brigand.

War forever, a general's dream, and if things don't go well then junior officers are 'not executing to standard'.

But before you all start enrolling your grandkids in the Marine Corps remember that what he is talking about is fantasy. However much he might want eternal warfare it can't happen.

Primo: The US armed forces will be crippled by running large armies in two or more theatres for another ten years. On the surface it might look alright but if all the experienced NCOs and specialists are nervous wrecks with broken marriages the army is screwed.

Secundo: The American economy will be crippled by running large armies in two or more theatres for another ten years. The national infrastructure and means of reliable energy supplies need to be fixed before anything else and this will bite you in the ass sooner or later. You can't run a modern state on infrastructure that's fifty or sixty years old.

Tertio: The world won't stand still. 'He thinks future warfare will resemble the fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon in 2006.' I'm sure that the British and French general staffs were telling themselves the same kind of thing in the early Thirties before reality intruded.

Hopefully the civilian administration in the US will wake up to these realities before it is too late.

I hope he means versatility as in (using State Department speak- "managing your...") expectations. As in for the all the training we put down be prepared for little in return or even worse, little political will to commit them at all.

The non-state actor must also have external funding and physical sanctuary so it remains as "instruments of state power." Hezbollah would not enjoy its current influence in Lebanon without such powerful sponsors.

"It's nice to have another country that can put a division into the field" is a strange comment from a man who is speaking about the equivalent of the American experience against the Great Plains Indians during the 19th century or the British experience in Southwest Asia and Africa during the same period. Casey doesn't need division headquarters, although it clearly makes him feel comfortable. He needs battalions, lots of them. Casey's problem is that he expects to spend a lot more than we did during the era of the Buffalo Soldier to provide a defense on the frontier. He needs to learn that the Cold War did end and that his is the enterprise which is going to need to learn to economize. Why, I bet he never thought about the fact that during the last Great Depression even Defense was forced to tighten its belt rather than spending the nation into a sinkhole as he has managed to do.

I would wager that what makes Casey really comfortable with the British is that they are a professional army intended for expeditionary actions. Our NATO allies armies are not structured like that and haven't been for some time. They were intended for home defense, and we liked it just fine during the height of the Cold War. Is Casey advocating that NATO - or more importantly the EU - should be constituting its own Expeditionary Corps structure. I suspect that the folks at higher pay grades than his at Defense or State would disagree with his opinion ferociously if that's the case.

is another man's freedom fighter. I accept that. I don't see the relevance, though.

Tom Ricks is both a moral and physical fucking coward! He didn't have the fucking balls to join the military and instead wrote a really shitty book about USMC MCRD, PI! And now this ass clown is going around with his knee pads on and giving general grade officers blowjobs both literally and in print!

So, the original invasion of Iraq was a 'terrible idea' but a long-term military presence there is a good one? Did we not enter into a SOFA that stipulates otherwise? Why would we not honor our commitment - oh - sorry - that assumes we are the honorable ones.

The "long war" is every general officer's dream, apparently. They all talk about it as if it is inevitable. A sad lack of imagination leads to the conclusion that the only option is always the military one. Hopefully the grown-ups will realize before long that we do not have either the bankroll or the unending supply of volunteer soldiers (willing to do three - four - or many more tours of duty in all the stinking, dusty third world butt-holes on the planet) to fight on and on and on, to the greater glory of our four stars and the military industrial complex that now passes for the USA.