Where’s The “Hope” For U.S. Troops?

By Nick Dial
Troop morale in Afghanistan is reportedly low. Before asking why this would be, let’s look at some of the events that have transpired in the last year. Obama announces he will close Guantanamo bay with no preformulated plan on how this would be achieved. He then decides to suspend military tribunals in favor of civil criminal approaches, which would result in detainees having the advantage due to the fact they were not captured on a battlefield and not in a situation where police conduct a formal investigation and tag evidence. Obama then pushes for Miranda rights to be read to prisoners captured on the battlefield; something of which they have no constitutional entitlement to in the first place.
With this alone, one must question; what, exactly is the tact being used here? Obama changed the rules of engagement for U.S. troops, stating they cannot fire on a structure from which they are receiving fire. They must first see the enemy, something which more often than not is impossible when taking hostile fire from a structure 300 plus yards away. According to one report in Afghanistan, “U.S. commanders, citing new rules to avoid civilian casualties, rejected repeated calls to unleash artillery rounds at attackers dug into the slopes and tree lines — despite being told repeatedly that they weren’t near the village”. These new rules resulted in the death of several marines when they became pinned and ran low on ammunition. Fact is, a president that has never served in combat is dictating how our troops should conduct themselves in combat and as a result they are dying.
The questionable decisions, however, don’t stop there. Obama has cut funding for research and development, insulted our European allies with denial of the promised missile shield, and continues to drag his feet with Afghanistan. President Obama personally picked General Mcchrystal and yet he does not show much interest in meeting General Mcchrystal’s recommendations. General Mcchrystal requested troops in August of this year, yet it took the president until October to meet with him for a mere twenty- five minutes. General Mcchrystal requested 40,000 troops and what does Obama do after procrastinating for more than a month? Nothing, he stalls more saying he must wait for a clear election in Afghanistan. The president has repeatedly shown that other priorities come before the troops. How do you explain to your military that booking seven talk shows to promote health care and flying to Copenhagen to promote the Olympics in Chicago is more important than addressing the war in Afghanistan in which our troops are fighting and dying? The president has stated that we are no longer “at war with terror”, acts of terror are “man caused disasters” and “we are no longer at war with Jihad”. Perhaps the troops and the enemy didn’t get that message, because we have dead heroes coming back home in caskets from fighting Islamic Jihadist!
When does incompetence turn into all out betrayal? Earmarks and pet projects are nothing new when it comes to Washington, but what about when funds for the military are taken away from our troops and given to pet projects instead? According to the Washington Times, “Senators diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill to pet projects largely at the expense of accounts that pay for fuel, ammunition and training for U.S. troops, including those fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to an analysis” (2009). The article goes on to state “$25 million for a new World War II museum at the University of New Orleans and $20 million to launch an educational institute named after the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat” (2009). This recent act is simply a slap in the face to the troops by this administration. How can we expect the morale of our troops to be high when this administration continues to put its own self -serving interest before the troops? Have they no shame?
References
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/15/troop-funds-diverted-to-pet-projects/




