What is interesting is the great length the article goes to show or justify that this cross dressing is a cleverly devised war tactic ("shock and awe"). Sorry, but I don't buy it, running around in a wedding dress, with a purple wig, packing heat, and being hostile is not "shock-and-awe". Instead its the perfect prescription for the early termination of your life.
Why are Liberian soldiers wearing fright wigs?
Because the soliders are in their teens and are consuming enough narcotics to make a hippie blush. Key phrases in the story: the soliders believe that their attire gives them the ability to "dodge bullets" and have a "dual identity". Sounds like classic drug induced hallucinations as a result of being stoned out of your mind.
[ This Message was edited by: bitmasher on 2003-08-06 22:11 ]
Somebody's been reading WAY too much Carlos Castaneda. It's particularly ludicrous to compare this type of thing to US soldiers wearing camouflage and face paint. This idiot assumes that the military wears camouflage purely for psychological reasons and not for the fact that it actually does make you harder to see. The closest this guy's ever been to combat was probably pushing his way to the front of the cappuccino line at Berkeley. Misplaced garbage like this belongs in The Onion or National Lampoon, and not something that purports to be a serious publication.
Nobody talked about tribal manhood rituals or voodoo totems when Dennis Rodman was doing this.
[ This Message was edited by: expatriate on 2003-08-07 05:19 ]
Out here in Colorado, and in the units that I haunt, it is a tricky game to figure out how far to pack in on a rifle hunt. You want to get away from the masses that have moved game away from the roads but might want to stay close enough that you are taking advantage of the animals forced movements. There is no universal distance but I like the 1.5 to 4 mile range for day hunts where I am not planning on bivying out. This keeps you in that productive buffer zone where the animals are really...