Sure, you could do the whole thing on faith, but then you end up looking like a Taliban wannabe. Current data is required to back predictions, otherwise the human factor steps in and knocks them for a serious loop. Far too many reporters out there were firing from the hip, relying on faulty human memory to back their gloom and doom scenarios, completely disregarding the fact that today’s U.S. Militaries are populated by people -- and these are the best international crop of young people the world has to offer -- not faulty automatons, and that the trainers of these young people actually allow them to think and make field-decisions all on their own, stating that the course is to be recalled as a guide, not a rule.

Are we really this good?

Hell, yes!

My reply to Tom some time ago regarding the fate of the American Allies in the then-upcoming conflict in Afghanistan. BTW, in my response, our blessed contentious observers should have been our blessed conscientious observers.

I didn't see very many reporters predicting a sure-win for the U.S. and her Allies, probably because it would have made real people feel real good about themselves, and maybe even a little gung-ho in their backing the fall of the Taliban regime. I suppose it’s for this reason I was able to appreciate Simberg's humor. It was tongue-in-cheek, yes -- but it was also very well deserved.

American has been trifled with far too long, and more often by their own, home-grown news-staffers. I think some of us just got a little tired of it.

Cheers,
Dan