drop the wrote on Jul 14, 2008 2:37 PM:false charges. NOW, and hang a medal on him,

esteban wrote on Jul 14, 2008 3:01 PM:Thats a step in the right direction. He is innocent of any charges. All charges should be dropped and let this Marineo on to be the best he can be. I support our troops as everyone should. If not then they should go to Iraq where they will be welcomed.

Ronin wrote on Jul 14, 2008 3:17 PM:Winnick did what he thought was right to protect the lives of fellow marines.

When terrorist and insurgents have to abide by rules of engagement then our troops should do the same.

Until then being and insurgent should be a short lived occupation.

He believed wrote on Jul 14, 2008 4:16 PM:I have issue with the word "mistakenly" in this article. From everything that I read, I don't believe that the innocence of the men in the truck was ever established. - The trailer was never adequately searched.
Bottom line...Stg Winnick believed, he acted, and he did what he was trained to do.
Good job Sgt. Winnick!

Of course wrote on Jul 14, 2008 6:57 PM:DROP THE CHARGES.... this was ridiculous from the get go!!

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 14, 2008 8:04 PM:Red Flag 4cryinoutloud! "As Winnick and another Marine ran up to the truck, a second man who had been wounded was crawling TOWARD A CELL PHONE...". Where has the leadership of this military been? I'm a civilian and "I" know they use cell phones to detonate bombs. My God, is there one single "functioning" brain between the higher echelon of the corps and the prosecutors? Just asking! Two more questions: anyone curious as to why the majority of these Marines being Persecuted are from the 3/5 and the 3/1 out of Pendleton; all with honorable records of service?, and why 'someone' feels it necessary to go all the way back to Fallujah to create war crimes from the worst battle of the Iraq war? I don't believe in coincidence.

Jeff wrote on Jul 14, 2008 8:32 PM:Finally someone with some brains in this process, now the General needs to drop ALL charges and thank this marine for his service.

to AWcryingoutloud wrote on Jul 14, 2008 8:37 PM:After watching how this war has been waged and how our brave marines have been treated, I think that the answer to your functioning brain question is a giant NO!

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 14, 2008 10:42 PM:To 'To' AW4: Amen!!!

jose wrote on Jul 15, 2008 5:58 AM:Now if the marine shot 2 people at Disneyland or some city park it would be a crime.This is different. It is a war...does anyone get it yet?

DESERT BUG wrote on Jul 15, 2008 8:46 AM:My prior blog was dumped; don't know why. It sure complied with NCT rules. Anyway, this case just goes to show how totally idiotic this whole circus of persecution and political antics is and has been. In this case there is NO question but that the actions of the Iraqis were more than suspicious: those actions by any standard were THREATENING. Yet, charges were instigated ANYWAY. Holy cow, even now the prosecution persists. Non-judicial punishment? Yeah, deny Sgt Winnick oatmeal for one morning's breakfast, then award him the Silver Star for gallantry and heroism in combat and promote him from Sergeant to Sergeant Major (E-9) based on his outstanding leadership. On second thought, if he likes oatmeal, let him have it and then let his case be CLOSED. It's a shame that outstanding Marines such as Sergeant Winnick are put through this hell back here in the States, after they have served so well in Iraq and in combat.

Chris wrote on Jul 16, 2008 7:10 PM:DESERT BUG
[-] wrote on Jul 15, 2008 8:46 AM:My prior blog was dumped; don't know why. It sure complied with NCT rules.

Hey Desert Bug, they wont print most of my blogs so do not feel bad!!

And AWcryinoutloud I thought you were a Marine the way you think you know what is going on. Then I find out you are a civvie!! Oh MY!!

The kid ( Marine) is probably suffering from a mental problem from the stress of combat. Split decisions and a wrong decision and then-wow! Make a decision and it is wrong and then--jail time?

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 16, 2008 10:17 PM:To Chris: I'm a civilian. So what? What are you, pray tell? I doubt you ever had a name, rank, or serial number. Oh MY! The only thing the "Marine" is suffering from is a government that's high on power and abuse of it. If he doesn't have PTSD, after they get through, he will. So will the rest of us who know what's going on. If you'd been reading all of the articles you'd know that even his senior commanders couldn't decide the ROE's, but his Captain sure knew how to cover his own six didn't he? Sgt. Winnick made a judgment call, NOT a wrong decision. Civilian that I am, I would have shot the crap out of anyone suspicious crawling on the ground to reach a cell phone. Where have you been for the past five years Chris? Never heard about the enemy using them to detonate bombs? Get with it, your ignorance is showing.

Chris wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:31 AM:AWcryinoutloud
[-] wrote on Jul 16, 2008 10:17 PM:To Chris: I'm a civilian.

I say---The way you describe what went on you sound like you may have been a witness! And you also say --"Winnick made a judgment call, NOT a wrong decision". A decision and a judgement call are the same. But keep blogging AWcryinoutloud you make a few interesting observations based only on what you have read I assume. If it was all so obvious as to what happened to the Marine why have a trial--I will let you answer that-"civvie", no disrespect intended.

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:26 AM:To Chris: Are you the same Chris who has been blogging here for months? If you aren't, you might want to add something to your name to differentiate. Of course I wasn't a witness. On this event I go by "everything" I find that is reported. If, in your words, a judgment call and a decision are the same, then let me rephrase: Winnick made a "decision" based on his training and the murky ROE's as he understood them. He made a "decision" based on the environment, which impacted his perception of the threat to Marines he was obligated to protect, to himself who he had every right to protect, and to innocent Iraqi's who might also be in harm's way. Anyone who doesn't like it might want to contact the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and ask him about it since he, in 2003, is the one who clarified it for the media. As far as being obvious as to what happened to the Marine, I take his word because he "is" a United States Marine, because from what I've read in all of these cases the leadership hasn't known what the hell it was doing for some time, which is evident in the number of times they've changed their ROE's and their strategy manuals for Marines. I also take his word because he is innocent unless someone can "prove" otherwise. NO one "proved" guilt in Hamdania, Haditha, and so far, certainly not against this Marine. I don't think one has to be a Marine to come to this conclusion. The fact that I've had the honor to meet many retired and a few active duty Marines over the past two years has strengthened my resolve. I know their heart, their strength, and their courage. These are honorable men, from the youngest to the most wise. The fact that I personally witnessed the railroading of an innocent Marine at his GCM almost one year ago has made me even more aware of the unlawful, abusive, persecution of our troops. You asked, if it was obvious what happened, "why have a trial"? Well, there you go. That is what we all would like to know. There's a trend in this government today to persecute men who have never had a blemish on their life's record, much less their military record of service to this country. Keep asking it Chris because there are "many" of us seeking the answer, and the remedy. AW4.

Lorie wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:40 PM:This whole thing is crazy. WE ARE AT WAR!!! We are treating Johnny as he was the enemy. He is there protecting us. Let us all remember that and be grateful!!!! He is more than willing to be in these dangerous situations and he needs the freedom to make decisions based on his training. Hmmm... suppose it was found that these men WERE planting a bomb, we would be applauding Johnny. He did his best. So...let's applaud him and thank him. Blessings to him and his family.

DESERT BUG wrote on Jul 17, 2008 4:54 PM:To Chris: re "But keep blogging AWcryinoutloud you make a few interesting observations based only on what you have read I assume." Chris, are you privvy to some source of information or some facts that AW is not? If so, what would they be? The problem with you is that you twist what little you know, and I do mean LITTLE, to vilify and smear some great Marines; based on your own warped view of reality. AW is, in my opinion, an expert on these cases and has an encycopedic knowledge of them. She is also a very gifted writer and I am sure her efforts have not gone unnoticed by some in power who read these blogs, just like everybody else does. You, on the other hand come across as some kind of flower child who hates his own country and so condemns those who defend it with their own blood and lives. Shame on you Chris.

Chris wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:55 PM:Say-AWcryinoutloud what are all those acronims you use like ROE and GCM. Many civvies do not know what you are talking about. Also you said- "- the Marine, I take his word because he "is" a United States Marine, because from what I've read in all of these cases the leadership hasn't known what the hell it was doing--"
MY question is--
Who are / or who is the LEADERSHIP you talk about that does not know what they are doing?? Are they also Marines??

DESERT BUG
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 4:54 PM: --- "I am sure her efforts have not gone unnoticed by some in power who read these blogs"--.
Lets hope this is not the case DB!

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:54 PM:To Chris: You're kidding, right? I'm sure that everyone who reads these articles knows what ROE's are and GCM is a no-brainer when used in context; general court-martial. You most likely know it so I wonder why you even ask. As for who the leadership is, try high up on the food chain, civilian and military. Haven't you noticed that from the Pentagon on down how ROE's and manuals have been changed several times within the past couple of years? Every time an incident reflects on the Senior leadership they cover their butts with Core Value speeches or new manuals or new ROE's. It's become predictable. Yet who pays the price for the failures in that Senior leadership? That's also a no-brainer. Have you read Warfighting by General C. Krulak? It explains, in detail, why young men like Sgt. Hutchins, Staff Sgt. Wuterich, Sgt. Winnick, and many more should never have been charged with war crimes. It's about 367 (pdf) pages long, interesting, and an eye-opener. Officers, as well as enlisted members of the military, were instructed to read it, understand it, and abide by it. Looks like Senior leaders forgot.

Chris wrote on Jul 18, 2008 10:51 AM:AWcryinoutloud
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:54 PM-------You state; "Have you read Warfighting by General C. Krulak? It explains, in detail, why young men like Sgt. Hutchins, Staff Sgt. Wuterich, Sgt. Winnick, and many more should never have been charged with war crimes.

It's about 367 (pdf) pages long, interesting, and an eye-opener. Officers, as well as enlisted members of the military, were instructed to read it, understand it, and abide by it. Looks like Senior leaders forgot".

SO--This is your eye opener? [PDF] The COE and its effect on the Norwegian Army's training File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
and warfighting (Krulak 1998, 1).

What I say is-- this is a piece of work that is WAY, off of how the US Military operates.

It pertains to concepts that are not or should not be used in a modern Nation State such as USA. We are not back in 1918 trench warefare.

It neglects our Nuclear Navy, our Nuclear bomber forces, the Inter continental balistic missile forces, our littorial military application of force such as the Naval Infantry / Marines, and our heavy Land forces that fight away from the ocean shores and deep within a continent- US Army. And, Dont forget satellite, and cyber.

In fact this work by Krulak was written withour reguard to modern warefare--

Example---Fact; most insurgents deaths stem from FIGHTER, BOMBER, and GUNSHIP attack from the air!! Another fact is Airborne systems monitored 70,542 potential roadside bomb targets.

Take for example in "Northern Watch" and "Southern Watch", the US - led coalition flew more than 300,000 sorties over Iraq between 1991 and 2003 while suffering NO COMBAT losses and with a cost of 1 billion USD per year.
The RESULT, Saddam Hussein was contained. He could not threaten his neighbors, and he was unable to build facilities for weapons of mass destruction!!

This type of warefare should be one of the first options for Americas military and political leaders.

The biggest MYTH of all is-sucess needs boots on the ground!! Last year it cost in Iraq=604 billion , and will surpass a trillion!!

Northern and Southern Watch= 1 billion anually!

Marine and Army doctrine=20 boots on the ground for every 1000 people!! Do the math---27.5 million people in Iraq, requires 550,000 ground troops!

Bottom Line-- WE use a strategy that emphasizes the notions of boots on the ground and occupation of territory and body counts! Wrong thinking!

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 18, 2008 12:50 PM:To Chris: WHAT!!! in the name of all things military are you talking about? The Norwegian Army's training file??? As far as I know there is only one General Charles Krulak, Commandant of the Marine Corps until June 30, 1999. In 1997 (NOT 1998) he re-wrote the Marine Corps' basic combat study text for all Marines, senior and junior alike; ALL were to abide by it ("act upon it"). It is about 367 pages long in pdf form and has "nothing" to do with the Contempoaray Operational Environment and its effect on the Norwegian Army. He foresaw the things that are now occurring today and he spent detailed explanation of his theories on operations in the modern battlefield, which included NOT crucifying junior leaders or junior members of the service IF they made errors. He encouraged leniency and a NO Zero Defects Mentality by Senior leaders because "they" bear the responsiblity for the actions of their subordinates. It's titled: MCDP-1:Warfighting. Good Grief man! How in the world did the Norwegian Army's training file get into this? And what the bajeebers are you talking about when you say that Krulak's 'Warfighting' is way off of how the U.S. military operates? OMG! It "IS" how the military is "supposed" to operate. I hope the Marines read what you've said. AWheck! I hope General Krulak reads this. I wrote to him months ago concerning the senior leadership of the Corps and it's inability to stand by its own today. Oh My! I'm sure he'd get a chuckle out of your interpretation of his work.

chris wrote on Jul 18, 2008 2:25 PM:[PDF] The COE and its effect on the Norwegian Army's training File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
and warfighting (Krulak 1998, 1). Later, generals Frank G. Hoffman and James N. Mattis. added an extra dimension to the “three-block-war” concept, ...

Does the names Hoffman, Mattis and Krulak ring a bell?

If this is the warfighter strategy
it misses the mark when compared to the S. and N. watch. But stick you head in the sand and close your mind-

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 18, 2008 3:21 PM:To Chris: I could care less about your opinion of our military's war strategy. That was not the issue. You apparently have no clue about General Krulak's 1997 text on Warfighting which I mentioned in reference to the way our Marines are being crucified today not in reference to any war strategy. You try to refute it with gibberish about some Norwegian Army's training file format, or whatever that mouthful was about. If you can't stick to the subject, go argue your war strategy with the Generals or just go away.

DESERT BUG wrote on Jul 18, 2008 4:45 PM:Chris, your little dissertation on the strategies of modern warfare are about as current as buggy whips and spats. Intercontinental ballistic missiles, atomic bombs, aerial bombardment on a massive scale without the use of combat infantry and artillery are a throwback to the days of our standoff with the Soviet Union and the cold war. Those are now held IN RESERVE to insure that superpowers never attack us in those ways. But reality is that the challenges to the United States today are not superpowers, they are restrained by the threat of atomic warfare. Terrorism, Al Qaeda, The Taliban and "insurgents" are our modern enemies. They cannot be destroyed by Cold War style tactics and strategies. These Marines,whom you vilify, are the weapons of choice in combating the modern foe. Have you ever heard of 9-11 and the terrorist attacks that ensued? Try dealing with them by aerial bombing and missiles alone. There is no "Hiroshima" or "Nagasaki" that we can destroy with atomic bombs or missiles, there are only the invisible and stealthy extremists who are warped with hate and who chop off the heads of innocents with glee and plant roadside bombs to kill and maim our military.

Chris wrote on Jul 18, 2008 6:45 PM:Desert Bug---- Read carefully-TWO Facts; most insurgents deaths stem from FIGHTER, BOMBER, and GUNSHIP attack from the air!! Another fact is Airborne systems monitored 70,542 potential roadside bomb targets.
Now Dessert Bug, just two facts mentioned above are about this current war not the cold war!! And I can site many more.

We do not have enough man power to fight with little small arms door to door. Technology is what wins wars, and boots on the ground theory will not work if you do not have Air, Land, and Sea dominance. Some nations have a million boots on the ground.

The cold war was won because of our nuclear military superiority. Russia did not fear the Marines, but of our nuclear strategic aircraft, Navy and ICBM'. Marines have a special mission-ever hear of ROLES and MISSIONS?

The threat of terrorism is well understood, but again your trench "world war I mentality" is so costly in US dead and wounded.

And do not discount nation states such as China or Russia as threats. In fact both China and Russia are developing superior aircraft and ships to our outdated aircraft, and ships.

Botton line, both you and your friend resort to name calling, when you have a different view-"only you have the correct answer". What both of you need to do is counter with hard facts and not assumptions and name calling.

I can learn from others when facts are presentd that can be researched and verified. Such as the two facts I presented, which can be verified as pertinent to this war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Which you had no rebuttal so you sunk to name calling.

And BTW if the Warfighting "BOOK" says all,and I have not read it, then why all the trouble with court cases? And what does it matter as it is a matter to be settled in the court!!

But then again it goes back to Name calling-spewing out words- he is innocent, the brass are out of touch-they do not follow the book-warfighter-ect!

And, as you buddy says just go away-sorry but this is a public forum and neither of you own it. And I did not call anyone names, I just presentd current facts.

What!!!--Quote; You say-superpowers never attack us in those ways. But reality is that the challenges to the United States today are not superpowers, they are restrained by the threat of atomic warfare. Terrorism, Al Qaeda, The Taliban and "insurgents" are our modern enemies.

Now you talk like the military people in 1941 when they said Japan would never attack the USA. Or that an aicraft could never sink a Navy battleship! Or when Billy Mitchell said the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor with Aircraft-and he was court martialed!! And when did I ever villify a Marine?

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 18, 2008 8:08 PM:To Chris: I hate to inform you of this but you might want to re-read what you have accused me of in this article; name calling. Show me one name I've called you. I stated that your ignorance was showing but that is not name calling. You go on and on ad-nauseum about verifying things yet when someone does you "choose" to ignore it and go off on a ludicrous tangent of nothingness. I told you to either go argue your war strategy with the generals or go away. That's a request, not name calling. YOU, sir, are the one who verifies nothing and ignores the truth. You asked why all the trouble with court cases if the Warfighting "BOOK" says all. My goodness Chris, it's so simple a 5th grader could understand it but, hey, I'll help you out. Because they don't listen. They don't care. Their only goal is to PROSECUTE! Wake up! FYI... HE IS INNOCENT!!!!

Uncle Sam wrote on Jul 18, 2008 8:22 PM:You must be the other Chris that has been posting. Nice to see some verifable facts for a change, but you are getting away from the story of this Marine and his trial.

Uncle Sam wrote on Jul 18, 2008 9:06 PM:The term "strategic corporal" was coined by General Charles C. Krulak in the title of an article in Marines Magazine about the "Three Block War," Basically a decision executed to respond to situational needs may result in LATER PROSECUTION as the team leaders action / actions(a Corporal can be a team leader, as he is the bottom rung in the chain of command) are reviewed by higher authorities.
Note; Training "strategic corporals" requires time and money above and beyond what would be considered normal infantry or military police training.

So what Krulak said is when there is no higher rank than a Corporal to take charge of a situation or must become a team leader, the Corporal has the authority, but his actions will be reviewed by higher authority and may lead to prosecution. I hope this will help our readers.

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 18, 2008 9:39 PM:To add to Uncle Sam's comment; General Krulak realized that "the very nature of war makes certainty impossible; all actions in war will be based on incomplete, inaccurate, or even contradictory information". Regarding the boldness of initiative in Junior leaders he stated that, "...we must realize errors by junior leaders stemming from overboldness are a necessary part of learning." "We should deal with such errors leniently; there must be no "zero defects" mentality." And here is the part I was trying to get across to Chris, but he doesn't want to hear it if it means anything positive for our Marines: "...we do not stifle boldness or initiative through the threat of punishment." Of course there is much more but this is pretty clear. It's also pretty clear that the Senior leadership in this military have totally ignored it. Whether Chris can deal with it or not, it came from the Commandant of the Marine Corps and until someone else revises it, it stands; which will probably be the next thing for this CYA mindset. As for the startegy of wars, Chris may have at it. My concern is for the unjust persecution of our troops.

George to Uncle Sam wrote on Jul 19, 2008 12:00 PM:I think Uncle Sam nailed it, and made things clear for everyone. Thank's Uncle Sam.

Samantha wrote on Jul 19, 2008 12:08 PM:Now it is clear why our Marines are being persecuted. Thank you uncle sam for letting us know about the Generals article in Marine Magazine. Uncle Sam you sound like a great American-God Bless.

DESERT BUG wrote on Jul 19, 2008 3:49 PM:Chris: re "TWO Facts; most insurgents deaths stem from FIGHTER, BOMBER, and GUNSHIP attack from the air!! Another fact is Airborne systems monitored 70,542 potential roadside bomb targets." You made that up. There are no reliable statistics on the causes of death of insurgents in Iraq or Afghanistan. You have fabricated data to support your claim that our infantry, armored infantry, artillery and other ground forces are unnecessary and that those forces comit atrocities. Cite the source of ALL of your statistics. Calling in strikes by heliocopters and planes is done by ground troops. If your strategies were followed not thousands of deaths incidental to combat would have occured, but MILLIONS. Therefore you advocate a policy of mass murder. Ground troops do surgical and precise stikes against ENEMY combatants. In any case, you deflect from the subject under discussion which is the total innocence of Marines WRONGLY charged for political reasons.

Rose wrote on Jul 19, 2008 4:26 PM:To Mr Uncle Sam, I like wat you said.
You make sense with all this trials. Mi casa es su casa. We are all family USA.

Chris to DB wrote on Jul 19, 2008 8:24 PM:Chris: re "TWO Facts; most insurgents deaths stem from FIGHTER, BOMBER, and GUNSHIP attack from the air!! Another fact is Airborne systems monitored 70,542 potential roadside bomb targets."

Just because you can not find the facts does not make them false. I got the info from AFA. I have the magazine infront of me. Go back to school.

Chris II- to DB wrote on Jul 19, 2008 9:00 PM:Desert Bug--I am Not the other Chris!
Chris: re "TWO Facts; most insurgents deaths stem from FIGHTER, BOMBER, and GUNSHIP attack from the air!! Another fact is Airborne systems monitored 70,542 potential roadside bomb targets."

I suggest you contact AFA, editorial entitled Bad Medecine, by Mr. Dudney, editor in chief and ask him about the statistics. June 2008,vol.91.no 6., pg 2.

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 19, 2008 11:41 PM:I thought the AFA was going to be an actual up to date military publication. Instead, it's an independent, non-profit civilian education organization's publication. Somehow, just not the same.

AWwinenoutloud wrote on Jul 20, 2008 8:57 AM:AWcryinoutloud
[-] wrote on Jul 19, 2008 11:41 PM:I thought the AFA was going to be an actual up to date military publication. Instead, it's an independent, non-profit civilian education organization's publication. Somehow, just not the same-AS WHAT?

JUST LIKE LEATHERNECK MAGAZINE AND MARINE CORPS ASSOCIATION. AIR FORCE ASSOCIATION, AIRFORCE MAGAZINE AND , NAVY LEAGUE. stars and stripes.

KEEP MEMBERS UP TO DATE ON CURRENT EVENTS.

Sailor Joe wrote on Jul 20, 2008 10:30 AM:Dont forget the Navy. The Airforce magazine is excellent as well as Leatherneck. Also read----Seapower magazine and the Almanac of Seapower (published in January) are the official publications of the Navy League of the United States (NLUS). Procurement decision-makers in the defense market, senior officials of the Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and U.S. Flag Merchant Marine, Congress, and the Departments of Defense and Transportation read Seapower magazine.

Winnick is getting a fair trial, this is just the way it is done. All the services have to follow the rules.
Even the Police Department has internal affairs, or else there would be massive abuses. The military is just policing themselves, which every American wants.

To AW wrote on Jul 20, 2008 10:54 AM:AWwinenoutloud
[-] wrote on Jul 20, 2008 8:57 AM:AWcryinoutloud
[-] wrote on Jul 19, 2008 11:41 PM:I thought the AFA was going to be an actual up to date military publication. Instead, it's an independent, non-profit civilian education organization's publication.

Sailor Joe
[-] wrote on Jul 20, 2008 10:30 AM:Dont forget the Navy. The Airforce magazine is excellent as well as Leatherneck. Also read----Seapower magazine and the Almanac of Seapower (published in January) are the official publications of the Navy League of the United States (NLUS). Procurement decision-makers in the defense market, senior officials of the Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and U.S. Flag Merchant Marine, Congress, and the Departments of Defense and Transportation read Seapower magazine.

Winnick is getting a fair trial, this is just the way it is done. All the services have to follow the rules.
Even the Police Department has internal affairs, or else there would be massive abuses. The military is just policing themselves, which every American wants.

ALSO_--- Air Force Magazine is the monthly journal of the Air Force Association and one of the world’s foremost publications in the fields of defense and aerospace. From Air Force operations, programs, and people to the exploits of Air Force heroes, Air Force Magazine reports on important aerospace news and developments, and provides authoritative background material.

And I agree with Sailor about our military that it has to police itself and that it answers to Higher Civilian authority. Congress, President and the American people.
Also all the service magazines are a great way to keep informed on what our services are doing and what laws congress is passing to help our military.
Medical benefits, educational benefits and operations in our current war on terror, so do not ridicule PEOPLE in the Service or MILITARY MEMBERS and Military Families for staying current on MILITARY MATTERS by reading these magazines..

DESERT BUG wrote on Jul 20, 2008 11:53 AM:To: "Chris to DB": You cite some magazine as a source of your "statistics." Cite the exact issue, complete title of the magazine, date and page numbers of the article you claim supports your phony baloney. Let's all be able to read it and see just what it really does say! Furthermore, we need to know the name of the author of the article(s), his/her qualifications and just what sources their info came from. Absent that and your claims are just HOT AIR.

Uncle Sam to DB wrote on Jul 20, 2008 12:22 PM:Airforce magazine, AFA, current issue, Bad Medecine,Editorial-Its on the computer I just read it today. But who are you? Click on the magazine picture with the airplane-current issue easy to find! Second time I am sending this to you, not all are printed!

Heads up Folks--Read the current issue of Leatheneck on you computer there is an article on Rules of Engagement-special weekend addition--Read Free!

Also Tricare for life-wants more money.

Read Airforce times, Navy times and Army times--all on the computer.

Note;DB-you should keep current!

Rules of engagement-pull the trigger and you are a hero or you go home in handcuffs-- Leatherneck magazine-link!

Uncle Sam to DB wrote on Jul 20, 2008 12:43 PM:If you insist here is part of it-I assume you dont know how to find it in editorials--It says-QUOTE from Airforce Magazine, Editorial-Bad Medecine.

In fact, quite a few current and former military leaders worry that the Pentagon puts too much ephasis on irregular warfare and counterinsurgency. Last Fall, USAF Gen. Lance L. Smith, the outgoing chief of US Joint Forces Command, warned, "[W]e get so focused on counterinsurgency and irregular warfare that we are not prepared for a different kind of war, whether that is major conventional war or ... a hybrid of large conventional war and irregular war."

Gates is also misreading the value of airpower. He opines that, in years ahead, the Air Force (along with the Navy) will provide "America’s main strategic deterrent," implying it offers little for irregular war. Yet today—right now—USAF is making a huge contribution to the war effort. Airborne ISR systems monitored 70,542 potential roadside bomb targets last year, according to Air Combat Command. Most insurgent deaths stem from fighter, bomber, and gunship attack from the air. Airlift has been vital.

I don,t think NCT will allow the entire article, so here is just a few lines.

DB-This does not take away from the Navy or Marines or the Army.

To DB wrote on Jul 20, 2008 12:50 PM:Bad Medicine
By Robert S. Dudney
Editor in Chief
Gates wants to cure the services of “next-war-itis,” but he would only weaken the patients.

From Airforce magazine

Here it is
if they will allow it!

Sailor Joe wrote on Jul 20, 2008 1:10 PM:DESERT BUG
[-] wrote on Jul 20, 2008 11:53 AM:To: "Chris to DB": You cite some magazine as a source of your "statistics." Cite the exact issue, complete title of the magazine, date and page numbers of the article you claim supports your phony baloney.

TO DESERT BUG==I think all of the readers are getting tired of you belligerant attitude. The name and source you want has been sited several times! The man is correct with his numbers as I have look into this myself.

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 20, 2008 1:14 PM:To 'To'AW @10:54AM: Don't get your knickers in a twist. Then again, why not! When I checked out AFA, the first thing that came to mind was General Wesley Clark. That's just the way it is.
I subscribe to a couple you mentioned, and a few others you didn't. Until I know more about just who publishes something I remain skeptical. Gee, whatever could cause that in the perfect military judicial system you'd like everyone to believe exists?

DESERT BUG wrote on Jul 20, 2008 1:51 PM:Here we have Air Force cheerleaders touting the Air Force and pretending to quote some AF General about how the Air Force is THE force of the future. What baloney. It's because of that kind of nonsense that the Chiefs of Staff were reduced to the bureaucrats that they are with their Chief having NO command authority. Now the chain of command runs from Secretary of Defense straight down to the combatant commands in the field. The Chief merely relays those messages. Of course the AF is important as are all the Departments. They are supposed to be a coordinated force to defend our country, not independent and bickering entities. The fact is however that the Marines are the preeminent force in our current operations in Iraq and especially Afghanistant.

DESERT BUG wrote on Jul 20, 2008 2:05 PM:Uncle Sam, you don't know what you are talking about. You quote General Smith, an Air Force General who is touts the Air Force. Wow. Big Deal. What else would he do?? I have yet to see any exact source citations as to the so-called statistics you and the Iraqi loving Chris dream up. So roadside bombs were monitored, isn't that their job? So What? The truth is that the ground forces in our current operations do the surgical strikes, call in airborne strikes and engage the enemy directly as well as police huge insurgent areas. This gets way off of the subject of these articles WHICH IS that some Marines have been WRONGLY prosecuted for political showboating reasons by a bunch of power abusing bureaucrats in Washington. You and Sailor Joe cheerlead for the AF and the Navy. But you are blind when it comes to justice for some great Marines. Sailor Joe, if you don't like my blogs, TUFF STUFF ~ get used to it! Your contributions to the dialogue are daffy and inaccurate. You can dish it out Sailor Joe, but YOU CAN'T TAKE IT. Hey, why do you two keep appealing to some imaginary authority for your opinions? Don't you have any thoughts of YOUR OWN?

To Desert Bug wrote on Jul 20, 2008 2:54 PM:No one has a problem but you.

You- DB said; "Of course the AF is important as are all the Departments. They are supposed to be a coordinated force to defend our country, not independent and bickering entities".

You should follow your own advise. STOP Bickering!

Or are you an arm chair military "wanna be" who never served"? Either way you can go away mad. No disrespect ment!

Any Marine or Army grunt that can be saved by air power from losing his life or limbs will tell you they appreciate air power- from any of the air services!

Any seriously wounded soldier or Marine appreciates air evacuation to save his life from any of the air services.
Air strikes from any of the services save many lives.

I have the Marines as well as Army and AF - without them I would not be here.

No disrespect, but if you flip out reading a magazine-I suggest you never join the military.

Served with all the branches! And STOP bickering! There is a real war on, not the war you are fighting on the computer!

Our troops dont want to hear you devisive comments! THEY do NOT to HEAR your COMMENTS__STOP!

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 20, 2008 2:59 PM:To Uncle Sam: You mentioned that Junior leaders actions may lead to prosecution, and you use General Krulak for that. Have you forgotten that the same General Krulak also said that Junior leaders should NOT be punished for errors made, that the Corps should be Lenient< that there should be No Zero Defects Mentality in the Senior leadership of the Corps concerning their Junior leaders. Samantha said you nailed it. I beg to differ. You half-nailed it. The last part is the most important in these hearings and trials yet, somehow, it's ignored.

Sailor Joe to Desert wrote on Jul 20, 2008 3:06 PM:This old salt has no more comments, things I say seem way over your head. Stop talking and join the Navy if you want to help. You are a verbal blight to our Joint Military Operations! You try and cause trouble between the services-you are not or never have been a military man. NO self respecting Sailor or Marine would say things like you do against his brothers in arms and sister services!

Don't you read what is happening in all these Marine trials? And then you pile on disrespect to our military services and say they another branch is responsible -you Mister are no military man -so button it up!!

Samantha wrote on Jul 20, 2008 3:22 PM:With all the problems with our Marines going on trial two people -DB and AW are out of line and no help for the Marines. They both are making bad remarks about other services. Plaeas stop DB and AW. Our soldiers read this, please stop.

DESERT BUG wrote on Jul 20, 2008 4:28 PM:Now "Sailor Joe" has lost it. He fell apart. All this phony can do is call names and say NOTHING. Sailor whatever your name is, you KNOW NOTHING about me personally, NOTHING. So stop with the name calling and your silly little attacks claiming you know what military service I've had. From what you blog [blab] I would GUESS that you were never in the Navy. "They are supposed to be a coordinated force to defend our country, not independent and bickering entities. The fact is however that the Marines are the preeminent force in our current operations in Iraq and especially Afghanistan." I know that's way beyond your comprehension, but what I said speaks for itself. As for "To Desert Bug" who now hides from his true blogonym of "Uncle Sam", I couldn't possibly care less about your opinions about my comments. For sure, you ARE NOT A SPOKESMAN FOR ANYBODY when you say, "THEY do NOT to HEAR your COMMENTS__STOP!" "THEY" is of course "YOU." If you don't like my comments and they have confounded you, which they obviously have, TUFF STUFF. This is an open forum, you don't control it, and you can't censor other people's opinions because you disagree with them. From your tone, I would guess that IF you had any kind of military career (which I doubt) it was one where a little martinet swaggered around telling other people to SHUT UP. Pathetic!!

DESERT BUG wrote on Jul 20, 2008 4:35 PM:To Samantha: Kindly tell us what "help for the Marines" you have been. For your information, I have had a military career, I have spoken with and do speak to MANY members of our Armed Services, both active duty and retired. Have you? "Our soldiers read this..." So? All I have spoken with agree with those of us who DEFEND them and not with the confused and clueless, such as yourself. If your tender little self is offended by the strong opinions of others, I suggest YOU TUNE OUT.

AWcryinoutloud wrote on Jul 20, 2008 4:37 PM:Samantha, your bs propaganda attempt is pathetic. Theses Marines know who supports them and who doesn't. Apparently you're on the "doesn't" list. And stop begging; it's unbecoming!

AWcryinoutlod wrote on Jul 20, 2008 6:28 PM:Typo, in 'these'. bothers me!

To Desert Bug wrote on Jul 20, 2008 10:37 PM:Now I get it, you are a High School Kid playing on the computer. And that goes for you HS side kick AW.