الكلام دخل الحوش يا عبدالله قوش

العنوان اعلاه ليس من باب سجع الكهان وإنما الكلام لكل من وصله لسان السوط إن كان للسوط لسان .
عندي سؤال خفيف :
هل يمكن الاستفادة من إمكانات الأمن والجيش والشرطة في التنمية ؟؟ بدل الرتب في الفاضي وحقوق ومعاش وسيارات ونياشين ؟؟ يعني سلاح المهندسين ما ممكن يعمل شارع او حتى جسر ؟؟
هل الحروب الأهلية أكسبت الجيش خبرة في المعارك ؟؟
صدقوني من باب الهضربة والوسواس القهري والنهاري والشوت الضفاري وركوب اللواري وبوليس السواري ( من سرى ليلاً) والكمساري وناس الضهاري ( الغبش ) والدفاري والجمل العشاري والبراري ( بري ، وليس براري كندا)
الحاجات دي كلها ممكن تتعدل ؟؟

Dear Abdel Rahman
One of the principal responsibilities of armies around the world is to defend the territorial integrity of their countries. In democracies armies are used to defend the borders of countries and repel external invasion or agression. The internal security of any democratic state is left to the internal security organs such as the police. In addition, democracies have used armies in disaster relief and participation in construction of national projects. For example, the USA uses its army corps of engineers in dam construction and flood fighting and control. We have recently seen that during the Hurricane Katrina.
In totalitarian systems armies are there for the protection of those in power, and this is applicable to our country, Sudan. Since independence, the Sudan army has been used either to effect coups or to fight insurgencies, whose main causes are political. Hence, the Sudan Army performance has been charactrized by horendous human rights abuses throught the last fifty years, particularly in the South. As such it has developped sophisticated technics, brutal though, in carrying out those abuses. I do not believe therefore that the Sudan Army has any meaninful experiece or capability in combat, because its has been fighting only insergencies whose training and militariy equipment have been far inferior to it. It will be a nightmare for all of us if we were to be invaded by an army like that of Egypt, for instance. I do not see therefore such an army can be used in reconstruction or something of the sort, unless we begin now.
However, the present Sudan army has been given high doses of ideological indoctrination, which makes it a political cadre of the NIF, rather than an army for the country. You therefore need to dissolve it altogether or undertake drastic restructuring in order to be of any use to the Sudan. This task is impossible to undertake under the present circumstances in which the NIF still controls everything and insists on theocratic totalitarianism.

My brother charles Deng
Thanks for your thoughts and your point view towards what are Sudan army
should do ,and am agree with your view which it say I do not believe therefore that the Sudan Army has any meaningful experience or capability in combat, because its has been fighting only insurgencies whose training and militarily equipment have been far inferior to it.
so this post as a red light to the regime in Sudan to change the strategic that an army can be used in reconstruction