Ebola: "Out of Control in West Africa"

[Totentanz]

Originally Posted by mugwump

Infuriating. How are 3000 American troops going to cure West African ignorance, superstition, and corruption? More PC BS.

It's this administration's response to "OMG, do something!"

[Sohei]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

I want to make it very clear that I do not see those 3,000 soldiers as expendable. My assumption was that the government and military had the knowledge to send them there safely. According to TR though, this is not the case.

I suspected that you didn't actually think they were expendable, it simply sounded that way. However, even if our military had that capability...we still don't need to be there.

The only Ebola issues that we have had here were the ones we brought here. Currently, Ebola isn't a threat to our national security...nor is it a situation that deserves having 3,000 of our personnel being sent there to "possibly" contract the virus and either die there or be forbidden from returning to the US.

[Flagg]

Personally, I would think some form of effort/investment to keep such a nasty threat at arms length make sense if it could help mitigate it from reaching home.

But I would be a bit worried about an effort that includes a significant and costly dog and pony show component to appear to be doing something, rather than actually achieving something.

I'm thinking at the very least it represents a real world/real time example for some specialised folks in/out of uniform to conduct some big picture planning considerations in the background while OGAs/NGOs handle the workload.

I do wonder if there's a risk that harsher measures(like creating "viral firebreak" equivalents to out of control forest fires) that may be necessary are deemed politically unpalatable under the mass media spotlight?

I wonder how quickly NEO training scenarios will be adapted to include a pandemic aspect?

[ProudGSMom]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

Putting soldiers into Syria though could probably get them killed a lot more easily than being sent to West Africa (or at least that is how the thinking goes, I imagine some would rather be sent into combat than around Ebola). I wouldn't say though that this is just a social program, it is a program in which the United States has a national security interest. It isn't like the military is being sent in to just build huts or something for the sake of it. Peace Corps and USAID probably do not have the training to properly handle something like Ebola in that sense.

This is the Bergdahl Brigade mentality, in my opinion. Our troops are not the Peace Corp with guns.

Everyone I know would rather go to Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan. If you 'get it' there, your chances of survival are higher. And you'd be shooting at bad guys, not scared, superstitious, potentially infected civilians. Then again, the same ROE would probably apply and our troops would be told to take them into protective custody, Ebola and all.

As harsh as it sounds the only use I can see for troops, any troops not just ours, is to enforce a quarantine, with extreme long range and very lethal measures. Sadly, the area that would have to be included is a large part of the continent.

For weeks, Doctors Without Borders and others have said this is going to get very, very bad before it gets better. So far, nothing has worked. 3000 troops will do nothing but create more victims and facilitate the spread to this continent. Unless they quarantine those 3000 on a ship, then hold the ship at sea for an additional 30 days to insure no one was a carrier who then infected someone already on the ship. Do you really think our government will take those extreme precautions?

Because some in our government may know what to do does not mean that the actions of our government will align with that knowledge.

[sinjefe]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

Putting soldiers into Syria though could probably get them killed a lot more easily than being sent to West Africa (or at least that is how the thinking goes, I imagine some would rather be sent into combat than around Ebola). I wouldn't say though that this is just a social program, it is a program in which the United States has a national security interest. It isn't like the military is being sent in to just build huts or something for the sake of it. Peace Corps and USAID probably do not have the training to properly handle something like Ebola in that sense.

Syria is just the current bright, shiny object. What part of "soldiers are for breaking things and killing people" did you not get?

[Old Dog New Trick]

This is a horrible and ill conceived idea from the current people in government that brought you failed states in Libya, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Mali, Sudan, Ukraine, soon to be Afghanistan and places in Southeast Asia that China is exploiting by the numbers, while the Middle East burns!

If the DOS, CIA and DOD couldn't protect an Ambassador and three contractors from an ambush on a consulate with known threats against it. What makes you think those agencies and the CDC, UNHCR can provide force protection and anti-stupidity to 3000 medical, engineer and support soldiers while combatting a deadly outbreak of a virus with no known cure.

If you get it, you either die or survive it! (The treatment if available is "EXPERIMENTAL" and in short supply!)

While "nobel" and providing world class leadership this operation is doomed and will lead to untold complications for hundreds if not thousands of these deployed soldiers, their families, and the VA down the road from now.

Someone will contract something they didn't want to bring back home!

BTW: I hope they kill and trash the hell out of Boko Haram while on this misguided tour of Western Africa!

"See the shiny ball! Keep watching the shiny ball!"

[LarryW]

Originally Posted by Old Dog New Trick

(Entire post.)

Agree.

[Old Dog New Trick]

Soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Airmen, do stupid things with their dicks while away from home and without constant adult supervision. It's a fact of life!

They may not get Ebola, but they will get something for less than an MRE pack of Skittles.

I guarantee it!

[PSM]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

I do get that Sir, however I had thought that soldiers also could be used for other things too, just that destroying enemies is their main job. For example, how the U.S. has provided help throughout the world when natural disasters have occurred.

Amigo, you are starting to sound like a troll.

Pat

[Old Dog New Trick]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

I do get that Sir, however I had thought that soldiers also could be used for other things too, just that destroying enemies is their main job. For example, how the U.S. has provided help throughout the world when natural disasters have occurred.

This is different! (Or, at least I hope it is.)

I don't know the make up of the force yet, but it sounded like medical and horizontal engineers with their collective support units. And also probably a small security force which may or may not be armed with much more than light personal weapons.

Don't be surprised if no US troops have guns or ammo on this "Humanitarian Mission."

[LarryW]

Originally Posted by Old Dog New Trick

Don't be surprised if no US troops have guns or ammo on this "Humanitarian Mission."

(Got it. OK, sure, but add one or two Apache Brigades for logistic support.)

[MR2]

Originally Posted by PSM

Amigo, you are starting to sound like a troll.

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

I am not trolling.

Troll...

[Trapper John]

Originally Posted by ProudGSMom

This is the Bergdahl Brigade mentality, in my opinion. Our troops are not the Peace Corp with guns.

Everyone I know would rather go to Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan. If you 'get it' there, your chances of survival are higher. And you'd be shooting at bad guys, not scared, superstitious, potentially infected civilians. Then again, the same ROE would probably apply and our troops would be told to take them into protective custody, Ebola and all.

As harsh as it sounds the only use I can see for troops, any troops not just ours, is to enforce a quarantine, with extreme long range and very lethal measures. Sadly, the area that would have to be included is a large part of the continent.

For weeks, Doctors Without Borders and others have said this is going to get very, very bad before it gets better. So far, nothing has worked. 3000 troops will do nothing but create more victims and facilitate the spread to this continent. Unless they quarantine those 3000 on a ship, then hold the ship at sea for an additional 30 days to insure no one was a carrier who then infected someone already on the ship. Do you really think our government will take those extreme precautions?

Because some in our government may know what to do does not mean that the actions of our government will align with that knowledge.

Well said!

ODT: BTW: I hope they kill and trash the hell out of Boko Haram while on this misguided tour of Western Africa!

I thought the same thing, but learned from an expert and most recently a member of the "country team" that Boko Haram operates almost exclusively in the northern regions and is hated by the tribes in the southern region which is the current AO of concern for EBOLA. It's unlikely that the troops that are being sent in will encounter Boko Haram.

[Richard]

Anybody ever see this flash or hear of FEST?

We medics did. Although FEST was no longer around, this sort of medical surveying was still on-going during my time in SF with teams deploying on MTTs to areas in LA, Africa, SWA, and SEA as many of us with a 91B4S PMOS also had a 91S4P SMOS and dealt with such add'l mission taskings.

One reason we used to have SF Medics in support cycle manning the ER and certain clinics at Womack Army Hospital was to use that expeience to help the medical staff there recognize the signs and symptoms of those exotic diseases afflicting personnel who had been on MTTs to such regions.

Have things really changed so much we no longer do such things?

Richard

The U.S. Army Special Forces — Walter Reed Army Institute of Research Field Epidemiological Survey Team (Airborne)

http://www.jsomonline.org/Publicatio...9254Dorogi.pdf

[LarryW]

Richard:

The corporate knowledge atrophies and all the tough lessons have to be re-learned every few years. That's been my experience, sir, and I can't defend it as to why, neither do I have any solution (other than re-teach the dunder-heads). There was a time in our military when before an operation was executed leaders were apt to look up the experienced guy and ask a few stupid questions, thereby mitigating some of the risk in making stupid mistakes. They didn't always do that, but the good leaders did. JMHO...