Air Force pounds MILF lairs with rockets.
I love this acronym!
insert insertible King Missle song title here and the term 'rightious pounding of MILF's
On the MILF: Many, many years too late, they should've done the deed while the MILF was still young and fresh. Right now the assault was more a symbolic penetration rather than a committed attempt to impregnate the resistance with law and order.
Our thrust is to prick holes in the stiff front erected by the smut dealers. We must keep mounting an offensive to penetrate any crack in his defenses so we can to lay to rest his dominant position. We want him hung and we want fast action. Let's get on him. Let's ram through a stiff bail law so it will be hard for him to get it up. We've got to come together so we can whip this thing into submission! It'll be hard on us, but we can't lick it by being soft!
FTA: "Yung nakuha natin na mga IED (improvised explosive device) dun sa na-overran na kampo ay marami so isa yun sa mga pinaghihinalaan natin na dun sila gumagawa... tapos bababa lang e, malapit lang five kilometres magpapaputok na sila ng IED sa mga detachments o sa mga nearby (areas)," he said.
Truer words were never spoken!
The evidence that circumcision is beneficial in terms of HIV prevention is well dodgy.
The three main trials were all by people with a pro-circ agenda, all ended early, the actual absolute benefit was small (even 60% more of not many infections is not many) and it's assumed that sex with women is the primary source of infection for the men which may or may not be true.
The early end means that if, as is quite possible, it only delays infection for a year or so on average, it wouldn't have been picked up by the studies. Given the significant level of side effects they reported, even with the best care money could buy to perform them, that would totally change the cost/benefit claimed.
Those supporting it are also effectively claiming that much less than 1% of men in those areas have sex with other men. If, as is highly likely, this isn't the case, again the costs outweigh the benefits: there's plenty of long-term evidence that circumcision is irrelevant for male-male transmission.
Suggesting that the real motivation here is something else entirely. Which just brings us back to Eddie Dane's question, "What does Bill Gates plan to do with 650,000 foreskins?"
The three main trials were all by people with a pro-circ agenda, all ended early...
So...you might say they were cut short?
I do feel like if you had $50M to spend, you could find something more useful to do with it than slice up some poor African guys' dicks.
I was basically going to make the OP but didn't. There seems to be a 'noticable effect' (HIV has great affinity for the mast cells present in the foreskin/marginally less present in a penis with less penis left), but it's hard to say if the rush to promote it is the smartest idea, especially when "we"'re trying to de-promote involuntary female genital mods on the same continent, don't need anyone getting weird ideas that circumcision makes them immune, and condoms are a hell of a lot more effective.
Except that there isn't. The biggest UK surveys can't find any difference in HIV or other STI incidence relating on circumcision. Memory is telling me there's no difference in the US either and in some African countries, it's the circumcised men with a higher incidence.
Even you think there is a small but noticeable effect, it'd be a case of saying 'Right, we want to do this to young children, accepting that there will be some side-effects, including some sustaining permanent damage, in the hope that it will make a small positive difference in about fifteen years time. Oh, if they come to us for advice then, we'll still say "use condoms". Oh, and if they turn out to have sex with other men or share needles, we know circumcision won't help them.'
If you can get that past an ethics committee, they have an agenda that's not the best interests of the patients...
I cna only add this: MILF raid leaves prison guard dead.
i always knew he was a putz