Article

2009-07-23 Afghanistan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2009-07-23 01:03|| || Front Page|| [9 views ] Top

#1 The Defense Language Institute Foreign Language School and Presidio of Monterey (DLIFLC) is just a fraction of the size it needs to be. To make matters worse, the facility is shared by lots of other federal agencies, especially the FBI. CIA has its own facility, as do the other intelligence services.

However, there is a fundamental problem. Instructors at foreign language programs are often foreign nationals, or US citizens of foreign origin. This creates a conflict of interest when training US forces that might be at war with their native country, or in this case, religion.

The seriousness of this problem is seen elsewhere, such as the foreign desks at the State Department, where loyalties can often be confused, at best.

Posted by Anonymoose 2009-07-23 10:03|| 2009-07-23 10:03|| Front Page Top

#2 This creates a conflict of interest when training US forces that might be at war with their native country, or in this case, religion. I grant you the possibility of a conflict of interest. However, Mission Essential Personnel is obviously able to come up with some interpreters who meet the very basic DOD standards to go to Afghanistan. (The possibility of a conflict of interest is even higher there.) Rather than sending the decrepit specimens mentioned in the article into the field, make them the teachers for intensive, multi-year, domestically based language training. The government has not shown signs of seriousness in dealing with this, unlike it did in the '50s. This is not a partisan issue, and would be just as important if combat operations were not going on.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2009-07-23 12:54|| 2009-07-23 12:54|| Front Page Top

#3 There is different solution initiative well under way, to provide troops with handheld electronic translators. The earliest ones only managed set phrases but more sophisticated capabilites are on the way. Protoptypes have been tested in some countries and right now a project at the Afghan national military academy is collecting inputs for a Pashto version.

And once the hardware and setup capabilities are in place, adding new languages is manageable.

Posted by lotp 2009-07-23 15:26|| 2009-07-23 15:26|| Front Page Top

#4 I'd rather spend languid hours with the lady ~~busting out of~~ in the pink blouse in the Rosetta Stone ads

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2009-07-23 18:39|| 2009-07-23 18:39|| Front Page Top

#5 ;-) Frank.

Uniformed military and DOD civilians can access Rosetta Stone for free, online, from the DOD computers.

Posted by lotp 2009-07-23 19:19|| 2009-07-23 19:19|| Front Page Top

#6 The issue is one of attitudes. The current conventional wisdom a multifaceted one. Part of it is that what takes away from the troop's ability to fight can be supplied by contractors.

Another is the attitude that it was all supposed to be a war with lots of coming and going in many places. Hence no one language would do.

The third is the attitude of academia. They don't like the current war; they won't cooperate. Besides Russian was more 'romantic', given the political tendencies of academia at the time. Hence the wider availability and aquiescence to studying the Russian language.

Posted by Pappy 2009-07-23 23:17|| 2009-07-23 23:17|| Front Page Top

23:17 Pappy
23:11 Pappy
22:27 gorb
22:23 gorb
22:20 JosephMendiola
22:12 Frank G
22:11 Frank G
22:09 CrazyFool
22:08 JosephMendiola
21:59 JosephMendiola
21:57 Besoeker
21:50 Ptah
21:46 JosephMendiola
21:44 tu3031
21:40 Ptah
21:38 JosephMendiola
21:33 Barbara Skolaut
21:25 Redneck Jim
21:24 Barbara Skolaut
21:17 Redneck Jim
21:13 Redneck Jim
21:11 KBK
21:08 Redneck Jim
20:59 Redneck Jim