I empathize with President Joe Biden’s current resolve not to directly engage in a military conflict with Russian troops in Ukraine. I was against sending our armed forces into Viet Nam and Iraq and staying too long in Afghanistan. The pointless loss of life suffered by our valiant American soldiers and their families back home didn’t make sense to me then or now.
I came within a hair’s breadth, as a second lieutenant in the California National Guard, to being called up to fight in Viet Nam in 1968. Had I been, my chances of surviving as an officer on the front lines would have been severely limited. And for what? The potential of direct harm to America was essentially non-existent at the time.
Nevertheless, it’s heartbreaking to observe the carnage now ravaging a fellow democratic nation facing a murderous rampage, including genocidal attacks against the defenseless aged and children. The Putin-instigated massacre has enjoyed pretty much cart blanch to forge ahead with no fear of direct conflict with the U.S. military, its most feared and well-armed opposing threat. Still, because Vladimir Putin could be mentally unbalanced, with his finger on the nuclear trigger, I do agree with the reluctance for any direct military engagement.
The sanctions are a prudent move and will pay dividends over time. But, in the meantime, the death and destruction rages on. The Ukrainian military is desperately outgunned. We can and should immediately provide more military support than we currently are without risking direct confrontation.
For example, we could train, in neighboring friendly countries, company- and squad-sized Ukrainian resistance forces while arming them with a massive supply of the latest destructive military hardware available. They could then return to Ukraine with the capability and increased confidence to effectively counteract Russian troops and their accompanying armament.
A substantial supply of drones, missiles and other modern weaponry, along the training to install and strategically instigate deployment, would go a long way in deterring the Russian advance. Taking out bridges, supply trucks, helicopters, tanks, etc., would put a major crimp in Russia’s ability to fight far away from home base.
There’s talk about Poland providing outdated MiG aircraft. It probably makes more sense to train and provide state-of-the-art aircraft such as AH Apache helicopters armed with Hellfire missiles. Those would not only not require lengthy air strips, that can be more easily disabled by the enemy, but it’s also likely the more easily hidden and maneuverable aircraft would prove more efficient in engaging in a resistance-oriented battle strategy.
Raymond A. Hult served as an officer in National Guard units in both Utah and California; tasked, in part, with training company sized units with tactical strategic military planning.
from The Salt Lake Tribune https://ift.tt/xb4tNop
إرسال تعليق