How do you explain the fact that the U.S. military is more interested in Iraqi politics than finding Bin Laden? Dianavan

The reason you don't understand, is because you only pay one attention to the roles played by the military, and specifically Special Forces. One of the critical roles played by Special Forces is to assist local governments in establishing and maintaining a stable political system. This has always been the case, but since Vietnam it has had a more pronounced role. All Special Forces aren't the combat teams. In fact, their duties comprise a small part of the total role. The reason so much more time is spent on Iraqui politics is simply because that has much more to do with a stable country than finding Osama does.

In citing these things, I am in no way endorsing this war, as my record is clear on this matter. But it is a response to your contention that implies somehow the amount of resources put into the Iraqui political scene is proof of conspiracy about the 9/11 tragedy.

Non-combat roles Source:BBC

While the Hollywood image of special forces is often of gung-ho Rambos dropping into a foreign country for snatch-and-grab or assassination exercises, real-life special operations also include the training of local forces or moving non-combatant populations out of harm's way.

In addition to combat units, psychological operations and civil operations teams fall under special operations command.

Those units' operatives might be trained in languages, negotiation tactics and cross-cultural communication.

Special forces were active in 152 countries and territories around the world in 1999 - "a figure that does not include classified missions or special access programmes", the command says.


Another source of the non combat roles is this THESIS by Armando Ramirez for the US Naval Post Graduate School in Monterrey, CA