Vets returning to the battlefields of Iraq, Syria, et al., what do you think?

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 May 2015 11:07:07 -0400

So I was watching the news this morning and seen where a former Soldier was returning to Iraq with 12 of his new best friends to fight ISIS. He said it was something that needed to be done, but he couldn't do it without your money. He would feel better if the locals didn't have to feed them, was his biggest concern. He said he had one tour in Iraq and one in Korea, I'm not sure why Korea matters but okay. He's a normal Joe with no true understanding of how the Army sustains their mission for so many people and the amount of planning that goes in to the prep. Is he a war junky, I doubt it, but some of the guys going with him could be. Some I'm sure are dealing with post traumatic stress, and see this as a way to deal.
My person views are these groups should not exist, and the US government does a fair job of keeping Americans out of war zones but it's not a perfect process. We've seen other Americans leave for "battles" like this and very few have a favorable outcome.
So does the US risk special operations to bring these people back home safe, after things turn to shit? Does the POTUS say let them be, they're there and keep the news media busy with other things? If these people did get captured, do we trade more of our detainees for these guys?
I see a serious issue with potential Americans policy and stance once these people try to do, what they feel is right. Do you?

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made May 19 at 2015 11:11 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Tue, 19 May 2015 11:11:51 -0400

So this guy was deployed twice and has no idea how the military gets troops into the field?
And he needs to be wandering around someone's AO?
Oooooooooooooooooook

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2015 11:14 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 May 2015 11:14:11 -0400

Im sorry but once you cross that bridge of being paid to fight by another country...you become a mercary. If he truly believes in his cause who am I to tell him whats right and wrong. I don't pass judgement on them.

But they are traveling into a warzone where America's role is advise and assist and on occasion kinetic operations by those bearded men who do bad things to bad people and they must understand that they are not going in as part of a coalition force so they shouldnt expect sustainment from US/Coalition Forces. Remember the old saying "One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist."

Response by LTC Gavin Heater made May 19 at 2015 11:16 AM

LTC Gavin Heater — Tue, 19 May 2015 11:16:24 -0400

Americans have taken up arms to join into other nation's fights for centuries. While a truly noble cause, they often fight these conflicts on their own, without support or sanction. I laud their actions, but strongly heed attempts to provide extraordinary support them and/or recover them. They may become an excellent source of intelligence, but they could also endanger coalition forces trying to save them.

Response by SGT Kevin Brown made May 19 at 2015 11:41 AM

SGT Kevin Brown — Tue, 19 May 2015 11:41:37 -0400

SFC. Jolly, you bring up many good points. To the best of my understanding some of those guys that have been there a while or are going over their now are there in defense of Christianity (or so they claim). Sometimes doing what is right has a very large cost. If you feel your government should be doing something, but they seem inactive on the topic, do you feel obligated to do it yourself?

I did such a thing a few years ago when i petitioned the government to fund a law that was enacted in 1972 to incorporate services between the VA system and the community mental health care system (as only 60% of veterans get care from the VA and most often then not, there families are left to dry when it comes to effective services). After obtaining no response or hint of action, I took matters into my own hands and developed a program that did what the law was intended to do. We sought our own funding and successfully implemented a productive system that has been copied across the nation. Unfortunately since I left the program a few years ago, it fell apart after no-one stepped up to take it over (I was the only veteran on staff, but at least the program is still running elsewhere).

Obviously the above example is a hell of a lot less controversial, and it doesn't hold a flame to the amount of liability and potential consequences of failure. I mentioned it because I understand what it is like to be put in a situation where you must choose to go against the odds and do what others won't in order to see the mission through.

I do think we need to go back into Iraq and maintain a strong presence in the Middle East (with permanent bases). With that said, I don't think these men are going about the fight the right way. If your service is done, but you don't want to be done serving their are many ways one can still support the war without as much liability. Getting active politically to help influence action, providing support through care packages, letters and so on or even joining a private military force (like TC or Acadamia) to get back into the fight are just a few.

These guys may be doing what is right and needed, however, the potential of risking the lives of other Americans is high (as you identified). This is a tough one.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 19 at 2015 12:38 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Tue, 19 May 2015 12:38:51 -0400

Some troops miss the adrenalin, crave the adrenalin, need the adrenalin of war.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2015 1:05 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 May 2015 13:05:27 -0400

I commented on a similar questions a few months ago and maintain the stance that these vets are brave, and well intentioned, but stand a good chance of doing more harm than good. It is very hard for an individual to vet the fighters around him. Therefore, the vets are sharing our TTPs with with who knows who. Also, the strategic propaganda value the enemy will have from killing/capturing a veteran greatly exceeds the tactical advice these individuals are providing. I could go on, and once again they are well intentioned, but I don't think the value a few scattered vets brings to the fight is sufficient enough to counter a myriad of second and third order effects.