allthumbs Posted November 20, 2003 Posted November 20, 2003 By Lt. Col. Allen West "I would go to hell carrying a can of gasoline for my men." War IS hell, and being rude to a captive should be permissible. Quote
scrambler Posted November 20, 2003 Posted November 20, 2003 So, I read somewhere that our military had basically been training many years for large scale Soviet attacks on the European theatre (conventional warfare), etc. The lessons learned about guerilla warfare during Vietnam were not maintained to this day so the tactics are being relearned the hard way. Â It seems that meeting guerilla warfare requires a different set of rules of engagement, which means getting down and dirty often. Â Countries and people weak in conventional weapons will rely on unconventional weapons and means, i.e., terrorism and guerilla warfare. For our favor, the Powell doctrine up to now has been to attack enemies that are manageable, e.g., Grenada, Panama. Quote
Thinker Posted November 20, 2003 Posted November 20, 2003 Strictly off the top of my head, I'm not sure 'we' really learned any lessons in Vietnam or Korea, other than how to get 'our' butts kicked for years on end, take heavy casualties, destroy native populations in bulk, and then run away with 'our' tail between our legs. Â I do think 'we' have forgotten the lesson of how wrong it was/is to hide the disabled war vets for ever, deny vets quality health care including long-term psychological counselling, and spurn them for partaking in an unpopular war. Â What other lessons were learned? Quote
allthumbs Posted November 20, 2003 Author Posted November 20, 2003 Thinker said: Strictly off the top of my head, I'm not sure 'we' really learned any lessons in Vietnam or Korea, other than how to get 'our' butts kicked for years on end, take heavy casualties, destroy native populations in bulk, and then run away with 'our' tail between our legs. Â I do think 'we' have forgotten the lesson of how wrong it was/is to hide the disabled war vets for ever, deny vets quality health care including long-term psychological counselling, and spurn them for partaking in an unpopular war. Â What other lessons were learned? They are not always relearned the hard way, Thinker. The Army has long studied Che Guevera's tactics as has the world of guerillas. It's pretty much the bible for that kind of warfare. Yes - the Army prepared for war in Central Europe with the Soviets as the bad guys. A lot of that still applied during the Persian Gulf War I, but we began to apply the tenets of the Objective Force in Iraq during the second war - which is why we really only fought that war with about 2.75 divisions against far superior numbers, with far less training and discipline, and with inferior equipment. Â What is not clear is what possible goal the insurgents in Iraq hope to achieve. Possibly to reinstate Saddam - I can't see that happening again - his position is too weak. I'm not saying he couldn't - it would be very difficult and without his two henchmen sons, it would be even harder to retain. Maybe there are some who support him and think that is possible. But, for the sake of argument, let's assume that their goals are limited. That they want us OUT - so that other forces at play can make their way IN - i.e. a Muslim fundamentalist government. Probably unfreindly to the west, but friendly with Syria, and perhaps even the Russians, who seem to be surrepticiously sending them some advanced weaponry. Where I have difficulty making this work is that the majority of Iraqis are Shi'ites, whereas the majority of insurgents are Sunni. The two have not worked or played well together for a long time. So I can only assume that the immediate goal that they both could agree on is getting us OUT of Iraq. Â My point is that once you understand the goal of the insurgents, it makes it more clear on how to deal with them. (A lesson we failed to learn in Viet Nam) (We understood the goal - we just chose to fight it the wrong way - through attrition) Another problem is that there is no visible "head" of what we might call the opposition. So it is hard to isolate that aspect. While it is easy for an Arab or Persian to know the difference between a foreign Muslim in country only to kill Americans and wage jihad, it is difficult indeed for us to determine who are the local boys and who is the furriners. We do have people on our side that help us with that task, but they cannot be everywhere - and the local boys, to me, would always be suspect. Yeah - we had the same problem in Viet Nam - but other than putting trust in the locals and your own Arab native speaking troops - what other means do we have? And, as Che Gueverra postulated, how do you develop a democracy where terrorism is causing ill-will on both sides of the fence, with the greatest turmoil on our side of it. We are trying to sell something. But we have to crack down and deny certain freedoms in order to eradicate these folks. Which causes more ill-will. Â It is indeed a complex issue. One that requires better minds than mine to divine a solution - armed with better facts. Â trask- Quote
j_b Posted November 20, 2003 Posted November 20, 2003 Thinker said: What other lessons were learned? Â they definitely learned about presenting war as an aseptic picnic to the public. i am not sure who said (fisk perhaps) something to the effect that if people knew the reality of war they would never go for another one. ergo no pix of casualties, no body count, use of euphemisms (collateral damage, precision bombing), etc ... Â something to chew on: http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17192 Quote
murraysovereign Posted November 20, 2003 Posted November 20, 2003 trask said: War IS hell, and being rude to a captive should be permissible. Â So, Trask, can I assume you'd be OK with Iraqi or Taliban units roughing up captured GIs? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure you'd be among the first ones screaming for blood if it were revealed that someone had been "rude" to an American POW. Maybe you're thinking the Geneva Convention should only protect US troops? Quote
allthumbs Posted November 20, 2003 Author Posted November 20, 2003 murraysovereign said: So, Trask, can I assume you'd be OK with Iraqi or Taliban units roughing up captured GIs? I believe they already are. I say, 'retaliate'! Quote
murraysovereign Posted November 20, 2003 Posted November 20, 2003 trask said: murraysovereign said: So, Trask, can I assume you'd be OK with Iraqi or Taliban units roughing up captured GIs? I believe they already are. I say, 'retaliate'! Â But retaliate for what? You said at the outset that being "rude" to prisoners is perfectly alright. So even if there were any American prisoners out there (and I don't think there are any, are there?), if they were being mistreated, well, that would be "permissible" because, as you said, war is Hell. Since their being mistreated is "permissible" why would you feel any need to retaliate? Quote
allthumbs Posted November 20, 2003 Author Posted November 20, 2003 please Murray, give it a rest, you know what I mean Quote
cracked Posted November 20, 2003 Posted November 20, 2003 trask said: please Murray, give it a rest, you know what I mean Murray, this means you've won. Congrats. Quote
allthumbs Posted November 20, 2003 Author Posted November 20, 2003 Cracked - How about you get a hobby beyond making a rancid ass out of yourself every time you open your mobile sperm bank of a mouth? Â Â Quote
murraysovereign Posted November 20, 2003 Posted November 20, 2003 cracked said: trask said: please Murray, give it a rest, you know what I mean Murray, this means you've won. Congrats. Â Â I WON?! I don't think I've ever won before. Yeay, me! Â I !!!! Â This is FUN!! Â Â Â Quote
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 trask said: By Lt. Col. Allen West "I would go to hell carrying a can of gasoline for my men." War IS hell, and being rude to a captive should be permissible. Â FUCK THE FLAG AND FUCK YOU! Â Quote
scott_harpell Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 trask said: murraysovereign said: So, Trask, can I assume you'd be OK with Iraqi or Taliban units roughing up captured GIs? I believe they already are. I say, 'retaliate'! Â duh. there were pictures released where they said they murdered POW's. Quote
EWolfe Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 trask said: Cracked - How about you get a hobby beyond making a rancid ass out of yourself every time you open your mobile sperm bank of a mouth? Â Â I am in complete agreement . (with Trask? ) Quote
scott_harpell Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 MisterE said: trask said: Cracked - How about you get a hobby beyond making a rancid ass out of yourself every time you open your mobile sperm bank of a mouth? Â Â I am in complete agreement . (with Trask? ) Â i think it is the one thing that all cc.commers can agree with. Quote
cracked Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 scott_harpell said: MisterE said: trask said: Cracked - How about you get a hobby beyond making a rancid ass out of yourself every time you open your mobile sperm bank of a mouth? Â Â I am in complete agreement . (with Trask? ) Â i think it is the one thing that all cc.commers can agree with. Quote
klenke Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 Murraysovereign did not win this argument. He won another argument altogether: Â Trask used the word rude, the antonym of polite. Murray transformed rude to "roughing up." Rude and roughing up are not the same thing at all. One can be rude and not rough up. Â This type of alteration of a comment (changing or redirecting the original intent of the comment to fit your own argument) is the type of thing that so often happens on this website that it is hard to carry on cogent, logical arguments with others. I am guilty of redirecting like this too, but I try to be level-headed most of the time. Quote
EWolfe Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 Yes, well that's the kind of blinkered philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage. You sit there on your loathsome, spotty behinds, not caring a tinker's cuss for the struggling artiste, you excrement. You whining, hypocritical toadies with your bleeding secret masonic handshakes and your Tony Jacklyn golfclubs. You wouldn't let me join you, would you? You black-balling bastards. Well, I wouldn't become a freemason now if you got down on your lousy stinking knees and begged me.... er sorry, I went off there. Quote
cracked Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 MisterE said: blah blah blah insult insult insult  Quote
Ratboy Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 MisterE said: Yes, well that's the kind of blinkered philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage. You sit there on your loathsome, spotty behinds, not caring a tinker's cuss for the struggling artiste, you excrement. You whining, hypocritical toadies with your bleeding secret masonic handshakes and your Tony Jacklyn golfclubs. You wouldn't let me join you, would you? You black-balling bastards. Well, I wouldn't become a freemason now if you got down on your lousy stinking knees and begged me.... er sorry, I went off there. Â Shut your festering gob, you tit! Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert! Quote
EWolfe Posted November 21, 2003 Posted November 21, 2003 cracked said: MisterE said: blah blah blah insult insult insult   Hey, Upper Class Twit of The Year, It's a Monty Python Skit, entitled: "The Architect Skit". Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.