General down! Isn’t the attack in Afghanistan a reminder that in war, you are never 100% safe on the battlefield?

) August 6th, 2014

In Afghanistan a US Maj. Gen. got whacked, ambushed by a combatant dressed as a friendly. As much as you have armored vehicles up the ying yang, and drones by the swarms, and can hide in palaces turned ”Green Zones”, isn’t this attack a reminder that no matter how high up the rank ladder you are or if you think you are in a highly fortified area and ”untouchable”, if you are fighting where everywhere is the de facto frontlines, you can be ”touched”? Do you think that will affect how generals decide to send young men out to risk their lives, or it will just make the generals less likely to ”go to country” so long as there is fighting still happening?

Observing members: 0

Composing members: 0

4 Answers

This was a security breach; he was not the only one killed. Generals have to go where the facilities are; he wasn’t out on patrol. It wasn’t about deciding to send young men out to risk their lives or generals “going country”.

Yes, it’s not good news, but it won;t change the fact that some generals have to be there, and war is very dangerous. It was time for us to get the hell out of there 5 years ago.

zenvelo (39417

)“Great Answer” (4

) Flag as…

IT’s common tactics to take out higher ranks, Vietnam was the same. Just another day in guerilla warfare.

KNOWITALL (29687

)“Great Answer” (3

) Flag as…

It is incomprehensible to me that some soldiers think they are totally safe in a war zone. I doubt he did. Although, I personally knew some young adults who joined the Army when Iraq was in full swing. When I asked if they were worried about being sent to Iraq or Afghanistan they weren’t. They all talked about being excited about being able to travel and live new places and that the Army told them what jobs they likely could be placed in. I was dumbfounded I have to say. However, I think a General knows better.

JLeslie (65416

)“Great Answer” (1

) Flag as…