<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rapid Fire 09/29/06</title>
	<atom:link href="http://defensetech.org/2006/09/29/rapid-fire-092906/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/09/29/rapid-fire-092906/</link>
	<description>The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 07:17:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Byron Skinner</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2006/09/29/rapid-fire-092906/#comment-148892</link>
		<dc:creator>Byron Skinner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:55:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2115#comment-148892</guid>
		<description>Good Morning Folks,
The article regarding 12K U.S. going under NATO command is of great interest. What ever happened to the U.S. policy of not putting American troops under foreugn command?
It would seem that putting American military personal under NATO Command is a regressive move, since NATO by all accounts has been inept in handling it&#039;s mission in Afghanistan in the first place. It is troops under NATO who have had operational control in S.E. Afghanistan, Kandahar where the Talbain has regained territory lost to U.S. forces in 2002.
It appears that this is just one more ill thought out part of the Afghanistan operation that has managed to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good Morning Folks,<br />
The article regarding 12K U.S. going under NATO command is of great interest. What ever happened to the U.S. policy of not putting American troops under foreugn command?<br />
It would seem that putting American military personal under NATO Command is a regressive move, since NATO by all accounts has been inept in handling it’s mission in Afghanistan in the first place. It is troops under NATO who have had operational control in S.E. Afghanistan, Kandahar where the Talbain has regained territory lost to U.S. forces in 2002.<br />
It appears that this is just one more ill thought out part of the Afghanistan operation that has managed to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.<br />
ALLONS,<br />
Byron Skinner</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

