I read the article: "Special Operation Forces Should not be Americas' Band-Aid" on CNN, by Gayle Lemmon: http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/06/opinions/special-operations-forces-lemmon-opinion/index.html. She discusses the deployment of special operations troops throughout the world and argues that special op forces are not the end all be all of military solutions. The article is directed towards more left-winged readers interested in foreign military procedures and the war on terror. The author seems credible and provides sufficient evidence to support her claims. While special operation forces have been the overseas military tactic of choice since the aftermath of Iraq, and understandably so, we have started using them as a crutch. While this method has been more affective than large scale deployments it is beginning to lose its efficacy. The leader of special operations command has recently spoken out claiming that "We are not the ultimate solution for every problem, We've mortgaged the future in order to facilitate current operations. That has affected readiness and it's also affected the development of force for the future". He continues on to claim that the answer is to deploy more conventional forces on the ground to held advise and assist overseas. The US has begun a habit of using small scale special operation teams in oversea missions, and while in the short run it is an easy solution, the use of these military teams are not sustainable and we are just creating a larger issue.
Comments
Post a Comment