A tragic reminder of war’s ultimate reality
“A Bibb County sheriff’s deputy serving in the Georgia Army National Guard has been killed in Afghanistan.
Staff Sgt. Alex French, 31, of Milledgeville, was a member of the National Guard’s 48th Brigade, which deployed to Afghanistan earlier this year.
Sgt. Alex French (Department of Defense photo)
French was killed Sept. 30 in Kwhost, Afghanistan, when enemy forces attacked his unit using an improvised-explosive device, the Department of Defense said. He was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 121st Infantry Regiment, out of Lawrenceville.
French had been with the Bibb County Sheriff’s Office for several years, according to the Macon Telegraph.
French was the eighth member of the 48th Brigade to be killed in Afghanistan.”
That’s a pretty high casualty rate, eight members of a Guard unit. Georgia’s brigade must be in a tough spot. The Macon paper reports that French was one of 18 soldiers who took part in NASCAR’s “Thank a Hero” program at the March 18 race at Atlanta Motor Speedway, so if you attended the race, you may have seen him.
According to the Georgia National Guard, French also deployed to Iraq with the 48th in 2005-06. He leaves behind a wife, Shanoca, and three children: Shaniya, Alex and Madison.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
246 comments Add your comment
N.J.
October 1st, 2009
4:33 pm
People die in wars. That’s why its best to have a really good reason to have one. Nation building or Coercive Democracy just is not good enough reason.
Normal
October 1st, 2009
4:36 pm
May the Great Spitit, bless him and ease his family’s pain.
Normal
October 1st, 2009
4:37 pm
That;s Spirit.
josef nix
October 1st, 2009
4:37 pm
“That’s a pretty high casualty rate, eight members of a Guard unit. Georgia’s brigade.”
Why?
mike? AmVet? Normal? Dusty? @@? Debbie? Any opinions?
josef nix
October 1st, 2009
4:39 pm
Normal: Thanks. I let my politics get in the way.
Hef
October 1st, 2009
4:40 pm
Thank You for your service Staff Sgt Alex French my prayers are with you and your loved ones. Rest in Peace.
I Report/ Vast White Wing Conspirator (-: You Whine )-:
October 1st, 2009
4:47 pm
War’s ultimate reality is not half halfheartedly committing troops to the battle field.
We should be there to win.
josef nix
October 1st, 2009
4:48 pm
May his family find some peace.
@@
October 1st, 2009
4:58 pm
With all the high-tech defensive technology at our disposal, you’d think they could come up with something that would detect IEDs before it’s too late.
Sgt. French is not the first nor will he be the last brave soul to die in combat.
My heart goes up and it carries with it, Sgt. French.
Normal
October 1st, 2009
5:04 pm
It’s time we all start telling the President and Congress that this has to stop. Bring our troops home now.
Pogo
October 1st, 2009
5:07 pm
Nothing anyone can say about something like this will make it better. Afghanistan is a septic tank. The ROE’s that have been imposed this year by the Obama adminstration regarding “civilian” engagement basically have made our soliders sitting ducks for IED’s and snipers. The soldiers can be hit but cannot necessarily defend themselves because of the ROE’s. And, the American casualty count has gone up since this decision was made. That is why I now believe we should pull them all out immediately. You cannot tie a soldiers hands and expect them to compete with an enemy like the Iranian backed Taliban that is willing to use women, children and old people as explosives mules and as human shields. They are actually using these civilians for planting the IED’s like the one that killed Sgt. French. This is a sad state of affairs for both our soldiers and their civilians. Either fight to win and provide the resources and rules to do it or get out. There is no in-between and Americans know this better than anyone (after Korea, Vietnam, Iraq).
Jay, I also wonder who the other seven Georgians were that were killed or did you put their pictures up and I just missed it?
@@
October 1st, 2009
5:08 pm
I offer no speculation as to whether or not this is a sign of things to come.
The top US military commander in Iraq has said that the withdrawal of US forces is going faster than expected – freeing up resources for Afghanistan.
Gen Odierno said that military equipment no longer required in Iraq was being freed up to be sent to Afghanistan.
“I worked very closely with Gen Petraeus to identify any capabilities that we no longer need that can be used in Afghanistan,” he said.
If it’s any comfort, things are looking great for “The Nation” of Iraq. Those brave men and women have done a tremendous job of holding it together.
Paul:
I left a post for you downstairs.
pat
October 1st, 2009
5:10 pm
War sucks no doubt. There is little good about it, but the reality is that these people attacked us, several times and vowed to atttack us again. The Afghan theater is an important one and it is high time the President takes it seriously. We need to bring this conflict to an end in such a way that we will not have to return. If we leave now, the taliban will return to power and al qaeda will fully operate with in it’s borders. We will be attacked again, they have vowed to do so, so it’s best they never get the chance. We have piddled around enough, we need to escalate and win decisively and totally. That is the only option.
michael
October 1st, 2009
5:11 pm
I am a freelance journalist who spent 3 weeks with the Georgia Army Guard’s 48th Brigade in Afghanistan in August. This is the 8th casualty for the group of 2,400 which deployed mostly in April and May. The troops are from 27 armories scattered throughout the state. The Georgia soldiers fall under Task Force Phoenix IX, which is headed up by Georgia Guard Brigadier General Larry Dudney, Jr. Their mission is to train Afghan National Police (ANP) and Afhgan National Army (ANA), serving as mentors. Roadside bombs like the one that killed SGT French are a constant danger for all NATO forces throughout Afghanistan. I should note that, during my 3 weeks in country, I personally encountered soldiers from 20 different allied nations.
Paul
October 1st, 2009
5:11 pm
@@
Thanks. And I, one for you.
Normal
October 1st, 2009
5:14 pm
Our Government and our Military leaders are just throwing lives away. I had friends at the Panama airport, I had friends at the Grenada Governors house. I lost an entire boat crew except for me in a sudden explosive ambush. These heroes of these undeclared wars from Viet Nam until now have a special place in Valhalla, but I hope to the Creator that they haunt the dreams of the people that sent them there. I want to be the boat captain when those people cross the river Styx. Will we ever stop sending our young men and women to die like this? No supplies, no equipment, no plan. PRESIDENT OBAMA, G-DDAMMIT, BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW!!! I’m going to get drunk now…
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:20 pm
SSG Nix, SALUTE!!!!!
Peace be with this fallen warrior.
It is time to rethink the Afghanistan policy. There is no “win” and we do not honor those that have paid the ultimate price.
josef nix
October 1st, 2009
5:21 pm
Normal–someone posted two floors down on DADT that I should be in a good mood tonight. I’m not. I look at my first post, before you reminded me to think first of Mr. French’s family and his soul. I let my politics override that. I am really no better than the Fierce Advocates who allow political concerns to override the human cost of their actions. I second you with FIERCE ADVOCATE, QUIT THE HORSESH*T LYING HYPOCRACY,
Eric
October 1st, 2009
5:22 pm
What are we at “war” over? I’ve long forgotten . . . such a tragic and senseless loss–my heart goes to out this man’s family!
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:23 pm
My apologies to SSG French.
josef nix
October 1st, 2009
5:26 pm
Jackie–thank you for the correction. I thought that’s what you meant to say and I second you…
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:27 pm
@pat
Are we trying to defeat The Taliban or al Qaeda?
What strategy would you employ to make the win a reality?
How many soldiers would you deploy?
What is an acceptable casualty rate?
@@
October 1st, 2009
5:27 pm
Normal:
While I respect your opinion, I’ve gotta say there are thousands over there who feel differently. Case in point – my husband has a cousin whose son (career Marine) is over in Afghanistan right now training Afghani military personnel. His father has just found out he is in the late stages of lung cancer. When his son asked if he should come home his Dad told him “Absolutely not! You’ve got a job to do and I know how committed you are to it. I’ll hang tough, son. Don’t forget, I’ve walked in your shoes on a different ground.”
Sheesh! I didn’t really wanna share that.
Now I need a tissue.
RW-(the original)
October 1st, 2009
5:28 pm
Enter your comments here–
Since Obama has set the rules of engagement so that Sgt French’s only choices were to die or run we need to get the hell out of there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
jo nix,
I took that comment about your being happy tonight about that earlier topic as sarcasm.
@@
October 1st, 2009
5:33 pm
Can somebody enlighten me on these rules of engagement everyone’s talking about?
I’m in the dark on this.
Please be specific.
josef nix
October 1st, 2009
5:34 pm
RW
“I took that comment about your being happy tonight about that earlier topic as sarcasm.”
I wasn’t sure how to take it, but I settled on sarcasm, too.
Public Option's Doing Swell
October 1st, 2009
5:36 pm
Two US Presidents, sharing the same exact personnel, including McChrystal who was the quarterback of the Pat Tillman Lyingpalooza and using lies about Pat Tillman to promote Bush’s election campaign aren’t going to learn from history.
The US is poised to get exponentially more deaths in Afghanistan from IEDs with next to nothing to show for them just as we have next to nothing to show in Iraq.
McCrystal lied for years and denied friendly weapons spray killed Tillman after an idiotic order splitting of his unit after a truck breakdown.
McChrystal’s Pat Tillman Connection
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090525/zirin2
History: Adding 40,000 troops to the 64,000 that will soon be in Afghanistan and the 130,000 contractors is going to yield nothing but exponentially more American deaths. The US is going to repeat the Russian nightmare tha yielded 60,000 body bags over 10 years from 1979-1989.
WhoCares
October 1st, 2009
5:36 pm
Send Jimmy Carter over there. Maybe they’ll blow his @$$ up
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
5:36 pm
I salute you Sgt. French, and apologize for the politicians that placed you in harm’s way. Will we ever learn?
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:37 pm
@RW-(the original)
As you understand, what are the rules of engagement for our forces in Afghanistan?
How does make a choice about an IED?
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
5:38 pm
Public Option’s Doing Swell
October 1st, 2009
5:36 pm
It won’t be exponential, but the deaths will continue and would rise if more targets were deployed.
I Report/ Vast White Wing Conspirator (-: You Whine )-:
October 1st, 2009
5:41 pm
McWhirley (Yes, Jaggie, I spelled it wrong) should tell Obozo that there is much community organization and voter registration to be done in Afghanistan so that maybe he’ll take some interest.
RW-(the original)
October 1st, 2009
5:42 pm
Enter your comments here–
@@,
Basically it’s no firing of weapons in the presence of civilians. If the enemy is firing where civilians are present there will be no air support and we are supposed to retreat. Of course the retreat lines may well have just had IED’s set up.
Paul
October 1st, 2009
5:44 pm
Jackie
ROE
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/22/world/asia/22airstrikes.html
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:45 pm
@@@
The military rules of engagement are how our troops will fight the “enemy.”
The President does not set those rules, the professional military sets those rules based upon military doctrine, law and regulations.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
5:46 pm
Like nobody was dying there before Obama took office. The strategy was changed to try to make progress instead of spinning wheels. At least he has the ability to see it isn’t working and has it under review…again.
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:47 pm
@Paul
SSG is Army, not Air Force.
What does the Air Force rules of engagement got to do with him and his mission?
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
5:47 pm
I Report/ Vast White Wing Conspirator (-: You Whine )-:
October 1st, 2009
5:41 pm
That’s already being done, and I’m sure he’s aware of it.
pat
October 1st, 2009
5:48 pm
Fair enough Jackie I will answer:
Are we trying to defeat The Taliban or al Qaeda? Yes, or in other words both. The Taliban harbored and supported al qaeda in it’s activities. That not only makes them culpable, but also a threat. We gave the taliban a way out. All they had to do is turn over bin laden and both would have survived, unscathed, they refused.
What strategy would you employ to make the win a reality? It would be multifaceted. I would be backing away from counter insurgent elements as helping one terrorist to defeat another doesn’t make much sense. I would attack them where they are, be they in Pakistan or Afghanistan. I would gather as much intelligence as possible to reduce and prevent civilian casualties, but I would hit them with tremendous force which would inevitably cause some. Make no mistake, it’s going to take dominant force and these people use it’s citizens as shields. It is a sad reality we have to deal with.
At the moment , though, I think it’s time to drop back and punt. I would give warnings all over the country and revert back to a massive air campaign to soften things up. especially in the mountains. These are my armchair-general thoughts. Ultimately, the generals in the field know much more than I or anybody. They should be listened to and the strategy corrected and implemented today, not later. I think Gen. Stanley McChrystal should get the tools he needs to win.
How many soldiers would you deploy? As many as necessary.
What is an acceptable casualty rate? Zero, but that’s just not going to happen. War is awful. One thing is certain; allowing the war to drag on endlessly will result in more casualties over all than if a strategy for decisive and quick victory. If we are putting soldiers in harms way it must be with a plan to get them out of there as quickly as possible. If we are planning on filibustering and playing politics with their lives, it’s best not to send them.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
5:49 pm
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:47 pm
Unless it’s changed we had SSGts in the USAF when I served.
@@
October 1st, 2009
5:49 pm
Thanks, RW. I was just reading about a Taliban ambush over at Flopping Aces. No air cover.
Geeeezzz. Four Americans died.
Jackie:
Then why did they change when CiCs change? This isn’t right. This is political meddling in military conflict. If it was Obama’s ass over there he’d be calling it different.
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:51 pm
@RW-(the original)
You interpretation of military actions are nowhere near correct.
If you are in a firefight, your responsibility is to protect yourself and your fellow soldiers. You try to minimize civilian casualties, as best you can. You do not attack civilians and try to direct fire away from those civilians, but, you do not make yourself a target if those that are attacking you are interspersed with the combatants.
RW-(the original)
October 1st, 2009
5:54 pm
Enter your comments here–
Jackie,
Not to be too curt here, but you’re nuts.
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:55 pm
@TnGelding
SSG is common between the two branches, but, SSG French is Army.
@@@
Ambush is the tactic that is used by insurgents. They can not stand and fight the might of the USA.
The change was implemented by the professional military because tactics used in one place may not be effective and the combatants try to learn what to expect so they change their tactics.
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:58 pm
@RW-(the original)
Not to be curt, but you just do not have a clue, therefore you make these inane assertions that you see on TV.
I can speak from experience, Viet Nam 1968-69, 1st Cav Div, Bronze Star.
Now, what do you have to support you statement about my being “nuts?” I thought so, keyboard warrior.
TnGelding
October 1st, 2009
6:00 pm
Jackie
October 1st, 2009
5:55 pm
Didn’t McChrystal change the ROE and Obama approve them? Or was it vice versa? The Pentagon underestimated and disrespected al Qaeda and the Taliban and apparently still does. When they can’t protect themselves, how are they going to protect the citizens?
@@
October 1st, 2009
6:01 pm
Jackie:
They won’t be learning any new tactics if they’re dead now, will they?
Karzai complains about the airstrikes? Hasn’t this administration determined him to be corrupt? Why should we listen to a corrupt Karzai?
Pogo
October 1st, 2009
6:03 pm
The ROE’s imposed by Obama on McChrystal make it much more difficult for our soldiers to call for air support, artillery support or to engage the enemy if there is a chance that there may be “civilians” present or involved at the location where the problem is occurring. In a country like Afghanistan, the Taliban look just like the civilians (they don’t wear uniforms) so Obama’s ROE’s make it much easier for them to go about the business of killing Americans. The Taliban simply surrounds themselves with civilians or they use civilians to plant the IED’s and they continue to kill us using our own weak rules against us. This is an old, old tactic which is used by fanatics such as the Taliban against conventional soldiers such as ours. The Obama administration is not the administration to be deployed soldier.
RW-(the original)
October 1st, 2009
6:04 pm
Enter your comments here–
Jackie,
What about your service makes it mutually exclusive with your being nuts?
Paul
October 1st, 2009
6:07 pm
Jackie 5:45
[[The President does not set those rules, the professional military sets those rules based upon military doctrine, law and regulations.]]
As the commander in chief, the president can change those rules at will. But they generally defer to the military.
Your 5:47
[[SSG is Army, not Air Force.
What does the Air Force rules of engagement got to do with him and his mission?]]
The mission of the Army, AF, Navy, Marines is to train, organize and equip for war. The heads of the Army, Navy AF, Marines (the chiefs of staff) do not fight wars. They offer advice to the president. The Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff is the senior military advisor to the president.
When it come to warfighting, the world is divided into zones called ‘Unified Commands.’ They’re headed by a general of any service. When the AF sends a member to Afghanistan, he (or she) no longer has a chain of command through AF channels. They are assigned to the unified command of Central Command, headed by (Army) General Petraeus. General McChrystal is responsible for operations in Afghanistan. They are the people who set the rules of engagement.
So the AF people in Afghanistan have the same rules of engagement as any Army, Marine or Navy servicemember in Afghanistan.