\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

Analysis of why the US Military keeps losing wars

Before Korea, America never lost a war. Ever since, other th...
Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth
  05/27/15
If we lost Korea, we lost 1812.
deranged insane selfie
  05/27/15
lol at losing Korea. Fucking shitlibs
French territorial mad-dog skullcap
  05/27/15
If we had listened to MacArthur and nuked China, then we wou...
Odious mentally impaired skinny woman senate
  05/27/15
...
Cream Well-lubricated Stead
  05/28/15
I must have read a thousand of these "analyses" si...
Stirring Principal's Office
  05/27/15
Can you say more about that in terms of Iraq?
Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth
  05/27/15
We tried to do nation-building on the cheap. Aside from t...
Stirring Principal's Office
  05/27/15
Which would be a horrible investment
purple dashing dilemma nibblets
  05/27/15
not disagreeing with you bro
Stirring Principal's Office
  05/27/15
Oh whatever. Here is why America keeps losing wars: It keep...
trip hall
  05/27/15
Plus it could probably accomplish those non-military goals i...
unholy sinister theater stage
  05/27/15
No. You can install and back a dictator if you kill enough ...
trip hall
  05/27/15
Wtf do u know, faggot
Rusted Genital Piercing
  05/27/15
everyone not supportive of democratic institutions = enemy c...
pink quadroon
  05/27/15
This. You need stability before you can have democracy. ...
Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation
  05/28/15
It's because of evolution, gay marriage, and illegal immigra...
vermilion business firm
  05/27/15
You fucking idiot. We haven't lost any war other than Vietna...
flirting avocado sound barrier
  05/27/15
We won Iraq and Afghanistan so we can pack up and leave?
purple dashing dilemma nibblets
  05/27/15
Winning the military war isn't the same as keeping the polit...
flirting avocado sound barrier
  05/27/15
So then it was a huge waste of time and money to invade, got...
purple dashing dilemma nibblets
  05/27/15
Oh, of course. That isn't what we are arguing though.
flirting avocado sound barrier
  05/27/15
Yeah it is. You're arguing semantics but we all know that ...
purple dashing dilemma nibblets
  05/27/15
You seem dumb.
Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation
  05/28/15
Not my analysis.
Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth
  05/27/15
Well, he is a fucking idiot then.
flirting avocado sound barrier
  05/27/15
we need to be like the british at the height of the empire a...
Mind-boggling Parlour
  05/27/15
cr. we really should literally contract/partner w/ the Brit...
magenta low-t jewess field
  05/27/15
this is actually a good idea. back in the day bros would gra...
Mind-boggling Parlour
  05/27/15
CR. I mean India, HK and Singapore turned out pretty decent....
Stirring Principal's Office
  05/27/15
not to mention australia, new zealand, canada, and the us, b...
Mind-boggling Parlour
  05/27/15
LOL at this cherry picking bullshit, Iraq was a British colo...
khaki kitchen keepsake machete
  05/27/15
interestingly, Saudi Arabia kind of/sort of works this way. ...
free-loading cruel-hearted lay
  05/27/15
i think the UK is a huge arms supplier to SA in addition to ...
Mind-boggling Parlour
  05/27/15
yes a lot of the big contracting is still done with Britain....
free-loading cruel-hearted lay
  05/27/15
Arab states, KSA in particular, are huge markets for UK defe...
Stirring Principal's Office
  05/27/15
have you seen "the mayfair set?" great documentary...
Mind-boggling Parlour
  05/27/15
I have not, thanks for for rec
Stirring Principal's Office
  05/27/15
it's 180, one of my favorite docs, probably the best adam cu...
Mind-boggling Parlour
  05/27/15
tyft
Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth
  05/27/15
Thats not how the brits did it. They acted through back chan...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/27/15
It's all right here. The best historical fiction of all time...
Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation
  05/28/15
Flashman is 180.
Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth
  05/28/15
since when did we lose Iraq?
House-broken aphrodisiac giraffe
  05/27/15
You can almost NEVER win a guerrilla type war against a sust...
glittery puce orchestra pit
  05/27/15
This is not true and has never been true. If you're referri...
French territorial mad-dog skullcap
  05/27/15
We never accomplished the goals we set out to in Vietnam or ...
purple dashing dilemma nibblets
  05/27/15
Vietnam - whatever those goals were, considering Kennedy/ LB...
French territorial mad-dog skullcap
  05/27/15
Lol I'm the most conservative poaster here short of CGM
purple dashing dilemma nibblets
  05/27/15
Friendly fire. I was up all night drafting documents so I'm...
French territorial mad-dog skullcap
  05/27/15
I salute the work you're doing brother. As a conservahero ...
purple dashing dilemma nibblets
  05/27/15
U voting for Rand? I am.
French territorial mad-dog skullcap
  05/27/15
I would be happy with Rand (although I like Ron much more), ...
purple dashing dilemma nibblets
  05/27/15
You should be very critical of what our treasure is spent on...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/27/15
I'd love to hear a breakdown of exactly how I've benefited f...
Floppy school cafeteria
  05/28/15
Yeah citizenship in the current world hegemon does nothing f...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
I'm not being glib its obviously nice being a citizen her...
Floppy school cafeteria
  05/28/15
http://benefitof.net/benefits-of-hegemonic-stability-theory/...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
"the war was won in 08" - LOLOLOL! come on. you ...
jet big-titted immigrant
  05/27/15
I have no issues with how Iraq was carried out. The Obama ad...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/27/15
there were hundreds of iraqi civvies getting shot and blown ...
jet big-titted immigrant
  05/27/15
Small price to pay.
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
for what?
Floppy school cafeteria
  05/28/15
If we would have secured a long term presence.
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
what does a long term presence in a country that doesn't hav...
Floppy school cafeteria
  05/28/15
Acts as an anchor, extending US Sphere of Influence in the r...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
perhaps it'd be interesting to see a breakdown of 1) h...
Floppy school cafeteria
  05/28/15
It was more that Iraq was a closed market sitting on very va...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
wait, what are you talking about Iraq being a closed market ...
Floppy school cafeteria
  05/28/15
We didn't tell them to invade Kuwait and scare the fuck out ...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
how would lifting restrictions condone their behavior any mo...
Floppy school cafeteria
  05/28/15
I'm missing something here - losing wars? In what war were ...
French territorial mad-dog skullcap
  05/27/15
you can drop the retard schtick. politics and war and insep...
jet big-titted immigrant
  05/27/15
They have to be assessed together, but the conclusion that w...
Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation
  05/28/15
The left provides political cover for a lot of our actions. ...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/27/15
flawed premise. Its often better for the US if the conflict ...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/27/15
If you really compare casualties its not so good for Yankees...
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
Casualties are dead and wounded.
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
Yes, the Russian male seems remarkably well-adjusted. ...
Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation
  05/28/15
Russia at war = humanity's menstruation
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
Bad officers who are incapable of standing up to incompetent...
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
didn't lebed get himself assassinated?
jet big-titted immigrant
  05/27/15
No, just died in helo crash.
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
(Guy whose country lost a WAR (not counter insurgency) to Ja...
primrose fragrant box office wrinkle
  05/27/15
Guy whose country lost 75% of its Pacific fleet to the same ...
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
Yes, 75% was destroyed in a sneak attack. Then we went on to...
primrose fragrant box office wrinkle
  05/27/15
You do realize that but for pure chance had those 3 carriers...
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
Are there three Russian carriers that actually work in 2015?...
primrose fragrant box office wrinkle
  05/27/15
Why does a country that sits on a dozen time zones need airc...
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
So, no.
pearly vibrant psychic pit
  05/28/15
Ouch.
plum theatre partner
  05/27/15
I think a big part of this is the fact that we fight pointle...
Impressive Razzle-dazzle State Rigpig
  05/27/15
HINT: The answer is because our army is filled with cowards....
Cream Well-lubricated Stead
  05/27/15
We now have the ability to destroy entire societies and cult...
Costumed pale electric furnace
  05/27/15
Not with conventional weapons you dont. The US would actuall...
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
Cut off supply lines, seize the food supply and source, dest...
Costumed pale electric furnace
  05/27/15
So only if Americans turned into Russians. Gotcha.
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
If only Americans turned into completely amoral butchers. G...
primrose fragrant box office wrinkle
  05/27/15
US conventional power is incapable of engaging near peer pow...
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
Well Russians do it to their own population every time someo...
Costumed pale electric furnace
  05/28/15
This article goes about as deep as an upper level college pa...
Pontificating provocative main people
  05/27/15
The US dropped more bombs on Vietnam than on Nazi Germany an...
Histrionic disturbing stage
  05/27/15
We killed a ton of north vietnamese. That pace was not sust...
high-end charismatic chapel really tough guy
  05/28/15
Vietnam is now one of the most pro American countries on the...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
america HANDSOME
high-end charismatic chapel really tough guy
  05/28/15
There is a doctoral thesis waiting for someone to incorporat...
Adventurous striped hyena university
  05/28/15
where's the part where this analysis "skewers shibbolet...
Floppy school cafeteria
  05/28/15


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 12:19 PM
Author: Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth

Before Korea, America never lost a war. Ever since, other than the first Gulf War, it hasn’t won any. In Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan America spent trillions of dollars, exploded countless tons of munitions, killed hundreds of thousands of enemy combatants along with innocent civilians and accomplished hardly any of the goals its leaders proclaimed when they sent their soldiers into battle.

America’s inability to translate its immense firepower into meaningful political effect suggests the $500 billion it spends annually on defence is wasted. In a recent article in the Atlantic Magazine, James Fallows asked the previously unmentionable question: how can America spend more on its military than all the other great powers combined and still be unable to impose its will on even moderately sized enemies?

I think the media generally ignores this question because the answers skewers shibboleths revered by both left and right. I spent much of the last decade in Iraq and Afghanistan, as a news cameraman embedded with the American military. I like American soldiers, enjoy their company, respect their bravery, their loyalty, their ethos: but hanging out on their Forward Operating Bases, I could see why the world’s most expensive military doesn’t win wars. Here are four factors worth considering, in descending order of importance.

Too much logistics, not enough combat.

They call it the tooth to tail ratio: the number of combat soldiers compared to the number in support roles. More than three-quarters of Americans in Iraq didn’t fight. A ridiculously large number of American soldiers spent their entire tour in Iraq “inside the wire”, barely leaving their huge prefabricated bases that felt more like Arizona than Anbar.

My Baghdad based colleagues and I used to look forward to embeds so we could eat all American cuisine at the mess halls. Pecan pie, sweet ice tea, lobster and steak on Fridays, all shipped halfway around the globe. The logistical tail was wagging the combat dog. In Afghanistan, the Americans had to pay off the Taliban so the supplies could get through.

I never thought I would say this out loud, but Donald Rumsfeld was right about one thing: the American military is too big and bulky. Special Forces are lean and mean and - not coincidentally - more successful. The one triumph of the misbegotten War on Terror was the rapid defeat of the Taliban in the fall of 2001. With almost no regular army involvement, a handful of Special Forces commandos slipped into Afghanistan, liaisoned with Northern Alliance units, and coordinated air strikes against Taliban positions. At the time, the Taliban held all but a few slivers of Afghanistan. The Northern Alliance was outnumbered, outgunned and heading towards ignominious defeat, but the combination of local boots on the ground, elite American scouts and massive American airpower proved unbeatable. Within a month, the Taliban recognized they had lost and faded away, at least for a few years.

The military would be more successful if it was smaller and more concentrated. America should shrink its regular army and focus on elite units who can get in, accomplish a targeted mission, and get out quickly. A smaller footprint solves a multitude of problems, both logistical and political.

Learn the Language

One desert night on a Marine base outside Basra, I chatted with an Egyptian interpreter hired by the US military. Knowing that Cairene Arabic is vastly different from that of Southern Iraq, I asked him if he had any trouble understanding the local dialect. He shook his head. “I have no idea what they are saying. I have a much easier time understanding you.” His English was excellent, which is presumably why he got the job, but his comprehension of Basrawi Arabic was almost nonexistent. But Marine officers, who inevitably spoke no Arabic, depended on him to explain what the locals were trying to tell them. Since the interpreter just made up what he thought his bosses wanted to hear, the Marines were operating with negative intelligence.

The moral: don’t invade a country if you are too lazy to learn the language. If you can’t understand what people are saying, you are operating blind. I’ve been told by American officials that up to 95% of the Iraqis imprisoned in American brigs were probably guilty of nothing. They were ratted out, perhaps by someone who owed them money, and the gullible Americans just locked them up. Imprisoning the innocent created unnecessary enemies for the occupation. In 2003, most Iraqis were pleased at Saddam Hussein’s ouster. They could have been predisposed to support American aims, if the Americans hadn’t alienated so many of them for little reason. It is impossible to successfully conduct a war if you can’t distinguish friend from foe because they all look the same to you. If more American soldiers understood Arabic, their insight and awareness of Iraqi culture could have made a huge difference.

Fear of Casualties

One of the most moving moments of my time in Iraq was a memorial service for a young soldier, nicknamed “Doc”, a 19 year-old medic killed by an improvised explosive device in Diyala Province. Almost all of Camp War Horse showed up for the ceremony. We stared at his boots and dog tags while his comrades remembered his bravery and kindness. As the service came to a close, his Sergeant called roll. He barked out the dead man’s name; the silence was blistering, and unforgettable. Four Generals flew in from Baghdad to pay their respects. As well they should. The death of a young man is always a tragedy. But had generals in the First World War gone to as many funerals, they would never have been able to plot the next battle.

The American military is deeply committed to force protection, to not losing soldiers. Captains tell you proudly their primary goal is to get through the tour without any fatalities. This is an admirable sign of human decency, but it is not particularly bellicose. It is impossible to imagine William the Conqueror, Genghis Khan, Napoleon, or Patton focusing above all else on not losing soldiers. Historically, officers are happy to use their men as cannon fodder if it will help them achieve their objectives.

In 1982, Reagan sent Marines into Beirut to try and stop the Civil War. When a car bomb killed 241 of them, he soon withdrew the entire force. In 1993 Clinton sent US soldiers into Somalia for a similar humanitarian purpose. When a few of them were killed and their bodies dragged through the streets of Mogadishu, the domestic political fallout was such that they too were quickly extracted. Our fear of death sends a message to our enemies. Despite apparent American strength, its enemies know if they have a little patience and inflict a little pain, the Americans will probably leave.

Only go to war if it is worth sacrificing your children. When Hitler invaded Russia, Stalin’s son went to the front, was captured and eventually died in a POW camp. Would Bush have been so happy to invade Iraq had he expected Jenna and Barbara to end up on point in Fallujah? Of course not. And that brings us to the last and most important reason America keeps losing wars.

War as Symbol

From a military perspective, the Tet offensive was a great victory for American arms. For several years the Americans had been desperate for the Viet Cong to stand up and fight, to stop hiding in the shadows. In February 1968, they did. Initially, they were successful. For a few hours they captured the US embassy in Saigon. For a few weeks they conquered the ancient imperial capital of Hue. But soon, the immense firepower of the US army took its toll. The Viet Cong were slaughtered, more than decimated, destroyed as a fighting force for the rest of the war. Tet was a great battlefield success for the US army. It is also the moment the United States lost the Vietnam War.

Vietnam was televised. Civilians watching at home did not see victory, they saw carnage. They recognised that their President had been lying to them when he suggested that victory would be easy, and they wanted out.

Fifty thousand Americans died in Vietnam. So did more than 2 million Vietnamese. If war were a numbers game, America would have been victorious. But war is ultimately a matter of will. The North Vietnamese were willing to suffer more than the Americans were, because victory was more important to them.

Lyndon Johnson only went to war because he feared being accused of “losing” Vietnam by congressional Republicans. Indochina was insignificant to America, important only as a symbol of US resolve, as a message to China and Russia that the US would stand by its allies, no matter the cost.

In 1975, Saigon finally fell. Other than psychologically, the effect on America was negligible. Likewise, in a few years, most Americans won’t know or care who controls Mosul or Helmand or South Waziristan. America lost in Vietnam, in Iraq, in Afghanistan primarily because it had no real reason to go to war in the first place, no compelling national interest. Were Canada to invade North Dakota or Mexico to invade California, I suspect the US military and people would find the will to win. But the American people, wiser than their bellicose elites, ultimately are unwilling to make sacrifices for mere symbols.

War, What is it good For? Absolutely Nothing

In 1910, Norman Angell wrote The Grand Illusion, a long pamphlet suggesting that a general war between the great powers was impossible. Of course, 1914 proved him wrong, and history professors since then have mocked Angell for his mistimed prophecy. But on a deeper level Angell was just a bit ahead of the curve. He argued that in an intertwined capitalist economy, war was self-destructive. Even the victor would lose.

Angell observed that no German personally profited from the annexation of Alsace in 1870. All land remained in its legitimate owners’ hands. When William conquered Britain, when Cortez conquered Mexico, their soldiers made fortunes. War traditionally was mostly an excuse for plunder. In the modern world, Angell argued, armies slaughtered not prospective slaves but potential customers. Today, in the developed world, war is pointless. China needs America to buy its manufactured goods. America needs China to buy its government debt. No geopolitical dispute can trump their symbiotic ties.

For the developed nations today, going to war is more a signifier than anything else. If their primary interest was oil, American diplomats would have told Saddam to grant exclusive contracts to select oil companies and he would have gladly complied in order to avoid invasion. But Bush, Cheney et al weren’t really interested in Iraq’s oil but rather in an opportunity to demonstrate America’s awesome military power, in order to cow the rest of the Middle East and the world beyond. It didn’t work out as they had hoped.

Had Siegfried Sassoon and Wilfred Owen been able to post YouTube videos of the horrific and pointless slaughter on the western front in World War 1, the British public would have sued for peace. In a democracy, with a free media, the horrors of war are a hard sell, especially when war serves little purpose other than to make the country or its leaders look tough. The most fundamental reason America’s huge military can’t win wars is that it doesn’t need to.

http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/why_the_worlds_biggest_military_keeps_losing_wars



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27973904)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 12:22 PM
Author: deranged insane selfie

If we lost Korea, we lost 1812.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27973936)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 2:02 PM
Author: French territorial mad-dog skullcap

lol at losing Korea. Fucking shitlibs

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974509)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:00 PM
Author: Odious mentally impaired skinny woman senate

If we had listened to MacArthur and nuked China, then we would have definitively won Korea.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978338)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:33 AM
Author: Cream Well-lubricated Stead



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980669)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 12:25 PM
Author: Stirring Principal's Office

I must have read a thousand of these "analyses" since 2003. Militarily, we could absolutely dominate every foe we have faced, the real reason for our "failure" or perceived failure is politics. A political "win" and military victory are 2 different things.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27973956)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 12:33 PM
Author: Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth

Can you say more about that in terms of Iraq?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974003)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 12:38 PM
Author: Stirring Principal's Office

We tried to do nation-building on the cheap.

Aside from the fact we probably should not have gone in there, what pols don't want to admit, and what voters don't want to here, is the true cost of actually building a functioning, secular democracy in the middle east. The only way Iraq turns out "good" long-term is if we basically go back in and leave a garrison force that an guarantee security for the next 20+ years.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974032)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:24 PM
Author: purple dashing dilemma nibblets

Which would be a horrible investment

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974281)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:33 PM
Author: Stirring Principal's Office

not disagreeing with you bro

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974345)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 12:25 PM
Author: trip hall

Oh whatever. Here is why America keeps losing wars: It keeps trying to use the military to accomplish non-military goals i.e. creating "democracy". The only major war it won since Korea, Iraq I, had a straightforward military goal.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27973957)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 12:40 PM
Author: unholy sinister theater stage

Plus it could probably accomplish those non-military goals if it were more willing to just kill the fukkkk out of its enemies.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974039)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:04 PM
Author: trip hall

No. You can install and back a dictator if you kill enough people, but you can't force any country to be a democracy that doesn't have the institutions to support a democracy.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974172)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:06 PM
Author: Rusted Genital Piercing

Wtf do u know, faggot

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974182)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:34 PM
Author: pink quadroon

everyone not supportive of democratic institutions = enemy combatant

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974355)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:22 AM
Author: Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation

This.

You need stability before you can have democracy. And, anyway, democracy doesn't benefit the United States. (1) Most people in the region don't like us; and (2) it is easier to deal with a single dictator rather than many representatives.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980623)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 12:42 PM
Author: vermilion business firm

It's because of evolution, gay marriage, and illegal immigration. Hth (mike Huckabee)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974050)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:03 PM
Author: flirting avocado sound barrier

You fucking idiot. We haven't lost any war other than Vietnam.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974166)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:25 PM
Author: purple dashing dilemma nibblets

We won Iraq and Afghanistan so we can pack up and leave?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974290)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:28 PM
Author: flirting avocado sound barrier

Winning the military war isn't the same as keeping the political puppets in place.

Militarily we have won every war/police action we have entered with the exception of Vietnam and had we allowed the military to bomb the shit out of the North, we would have won that war as well.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974316)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:30 PM
Author: purple dashing dilemma nibblets

So then it was a huge waste of time and money to invade, gotcha.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974329)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:32 PM
Author: flirting avocado sound barrier

Oh, of course. That isn't what we are arguing though.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974341)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 2:03 PM
Author: purple dashing dilemma nibblets

Yeah it is. You're arguing semantics but we all know that losing these wars means not accomplishing the political goal, not actually losing militarily.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974513)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:24 AM
Author: Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation

You seem dumb.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980627)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:25 PM
Author: Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth

Not my analysis.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974293)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:29 PM
Author: flirting avocado sound barrier

Well, he is a fucking idiot then.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974321)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:08 PM
Author: Mind-boggling Parlour

we need to be like the british at the height of the empire and just outright colonize places, set up the american flag, get people to send their whole careers in iraq or some place. but we don't have the will to do that so instead just do half assed interventions.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974192)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:14 PM
Author: magenta low-t jewess field

cr.

we really should literally contract/partner w/ the British to do this FOR US. let them administer colonies in these shithole countries, backed by the US military.

they've got nothing better to do, and it will restore their national pride.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974225)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:20 PM
Author: Mind-boggling Parlour

this is actually a good idea. back in the day bros would graduate from oxbridge and spend 30 years in the jungle somewhere before retiring to the english countryside with an OBE. they'd love to get back in the game.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974264)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:23 PM
Author: Stirring Principal's Office

CR. I mean India, HK and Singapore turned out pretty decent. Obviously India has its quirks and a weird relationship with human fecal matter, but I don't worry about Patel from Hyderabad blowing up the 737 I'm flying on.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974275)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:29 PM
Author: Mind-boggling Parlour

not to mention australia, new zealand, canada, and the us, but they had different stories. i wonder how much more ttt india would be without colonialism.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974324)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 10:35 PM
Author: khaki kitchen keepsake machete

LOL at this cherry picking bullshit, Iraq was a British colony until about the same time India gained independence

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978147)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:24 PM
Author: free-loading cruel-hearted lay

interestingly, Saudi Arabia kind of/sort of works this way. a lot of the university programs, even their toiletries are mostly british, but we all know who keeps the place from getting blown up.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974285)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:27 PM
Author: Mind-boggling Parlour

i think the UK is a huge arms supplier to SA in addition to the US

and despite all the weapons they buy isn't SA still basically a crap military that can't do anything on their own?

also the UK is building a permanent naval base in bahrain: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/06/britain-first-middle-eastern-military-base-bahrain

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974306)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:30 PM
Author: free-loading cruel-hearted lay

yes a lot of the big contracting is still done with Britain. BAE does a lot.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974326)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:31 PM
Author: Stirring Principal's Office

Arab states, KSA in particular, are huge markets for UK defense industry (Just google "Al-Yamamah arms deal"). KSA army is well equipped, has all the latest and greatest stuff, but is basically a show army used as a not so subtle way to discourage any internal opposition.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974335)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:36 PM
Author: Mind-boggling Parlour

have you seen "the mayfair set?" great documentary on post-war britain with most of one episode dedicated to arming the middle eastern states:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_kE8GczzuA

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974361)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:37 PM
Author: Stirring Principal's Office

I have not, thanks for for rec

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974369)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:42 PM
Author: Mind-boggling Parlour

it's 180, one of my favorite docs, probably the best adam curtis doc

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974396)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 5:33 PM
Author: Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth

tyft

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976012)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:35 PM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

Thats not how the brits did it. They acted through back channels and slight of hand, pitting their enemies against each other and having someone else fight their battles.

Crazy that at most they had 100k troops in India, which had a population of over 100 million at the time.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976821)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:26 AM
Author: Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation

It's all right here. The best historical fiction of all time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Flashman_Papers



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980638)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:42 AM
Author: Talented brilliant set scourge upon the earth

Flashman is 180.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980702)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:45 PM
Author: House-broken aphrodisiac giraffe

since when did we lose Iraq?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974415)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:45 PM
Author: glittery puce orchestra pit

You can almost NEVER win a guerrilla type war against a sustained insurgency. It is not possible esp when you are fighting thousands of miles away from home. Just the cost of maintaining the troops will fuck your nation over. People do not like being occupied. It's a fact of human existence.

America has never learned any of this.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974416)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:59 PM
Author: French territorial mad-dog skullcap

This is not true and has never been true. If you're referring to Iraq - war was won in 08. That Obama is a terrible foreign policy president can't really be chalked up to military defeat.

If you're talking about Vietnam, veit-cong was decimated by Tet offensive in 68 and never mounted a serious threat after. Vietnam army was a regular army, North Vietnamese, with conventional weapons, with foreign support secured by treaties (China, Russia, etc.), that would have been crushed had we decided to roll tanks into NV.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974493)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 2:05 PM
Author: purple dashing dilemma nibblets

We never accomplished the goals we set out to in Vietnam or Iraq HTH.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974521)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 2:19 PM
Author: French territorial mad-dog skullcap

Vietnam - whatever those goals were, considering Kennedy/ LBJ just basically said that we were protecting SV from communism and that's about it, were not met. No doubt. We attempted to defend SV, then lost interest in doing so and left, despite achieving military victories in every major battle. We lost no land, lost no battles, we just left. That's different than losing the war though, it wasn't like NV regulars overwhelmed the 1st marines and took Saigon. Cornwallis was defeated by Washington, Napoleon by the allies at Waterloo, Hitler by the Allies, etc.

Iraq: depose Saddam Hussien and institute regime change. Pretty much seems like that was accomplished. Changing Iraq to look like Peoria, IL was not the goal, although things were in good shape before Obama decided to pull troops out.

There's plenty of wars were won that didn't achieve stated goals, plenty of wars that were lost that that did. Shitlib, you be comparing apples & oranges but by all means continue on your antiwar lisp campaign.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974602)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 2:22 PM
Author: purple dashing dilemma nibblets

Lol I'm the most conservative poaster here short of CGM

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974616)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 2:25 PM
Author: French territorial mad-dog skullcap

Friendly fire. I was up all night drafting documents so I'm cranky and am seething in my dislike of libs. During memorial day I think about what shitlibs did to this country during Vietnam and I just get all fired up.

All my posts today - 100% - will be attacking shitlibs. That is my pledge.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974639)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 2:27 PM
Author: purple dashing dilemma nibblets

I salute the work you're doing brother. As a conservahero I'm against paying taxes to fund pointless wars.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974661)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 2:29 PM
Author: French territorial mad-dog skullcap

U voting for Rand? I am.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974685)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 5:56 PM
Author: purple dashing dilemma nibblets

I would be happy with Rand (although I like Ron much more), Walker, Rubio, or even Carson. I like Rand on policy, I like Walkers performance battling Wisconsin shitlibs, I thought Rubio was shockingly charasmatic in his announcement speech and I like that Rubio and Carson would pull a lot of middle of the road voters just because of their race.

Who I will vote for cow primary time prob depends on which of them are polling strongest towards the nomination.

I think Santorum and Huckabee are morons and Ted Cruz is Romney 3.0: Smart but unlikable/unelectable.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976175)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:31 PM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

You should be very critical of what our treasure is spent on but we've fought relatively few pointless wars. Somalia maybe? You've benefited greatly from our past conflicts.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976786)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 10:09 AM
Author: Floppy school cafeteria

I'd love to hear a breakdown of exactly how I've benefited from each paticular US military action

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980855)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 10:45 AM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

Yeah citizenship in the current world hegemon does nothing for you bro, nothing at all.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27981063)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 11:15 AM
Author: Floppy school cafeteria

I'm not being glib

its obviously nice being a citizen here as opposed to Pakistan or Venezuela or some other 3rd world place,

its not overwhelmingly apparently what my citizenship here does for me that citzenship in most other first world countries wouldn't do

more to the point, its not obviously what being a citizen of a first world country that insists on spending its tax dollars on wars half way around the world as opposed to spending its tax dollars in some other manner does for me

I can imagine a few answers that you might have for this, but it'd actually be nice for you to show you work here

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27981244)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 1:20 PM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

http://benefitof.net/benefits-of-hegemonic-stability-theory/ Pretty whitewashed but hits some good topics. Our foreign engagements are maintenance on hegemony. WWII essentially extended the Monroe Doctrine globally. The other first world nations have similar benefits, but at the cost of a certain degree of sovereignty.

Better question is how long will it last.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27982081)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 6:58 PM
Author: jet big-titted immigrant

"the war was won in 08" - LOLOLOL! come on. you can troll better than that.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976591)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:39 PM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

I have no issues with how Iraq was carried out. The Obama admin dropped the ball on a permanent US installation, which is a huge folly. That was the primary objective and we lost it. Oh well move on.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976850)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:42 PM
Author: jet big-titted immigrant

there were hundreds of iraqi civvies getting shot and blown up every single month even during the "low point" of the violence. violence was ticking back up long before the US withdrawal, too.

a "permanent installation" would have taken around 50K soldiers on a couple dozen bases and airstrips at the cost of hundreds of billions per year just to babysit a continuous series of low-level civil wars.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976870)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 10:02 AM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

Small price to pay.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980808)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 10:10 AM
Author: Floppy school cafeteria

for what?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980861)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 10:24 AM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

If we would have secured a long term presence.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980920)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 11:17 AM
Author: Floppy school cafeteria

what does a long term presence in a country that doesn't have any ability to project military power toward us do for me?

other than spend tax money?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27981256)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 11:43 AM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

Acts as an anchor, extending US Sphere of Influence in the region. A region that just so happens to sit on top of the largest energy reserves on the planet. Nations within that sphere stay within the US controlled political/economic global system and their markets remain open and favorable to US corporations.

The military is only one prong in the effort, but the most tangible, especially for backward societies like the ME that place a heavy emphasis on strong arm power. Our soft influences (Hollywood, CocaCola, etc.) are pretty weak around there too.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27981417)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 12:06 PM
Author: Floppy school cafeteria

perhaps

it'd be interesting to see a breakdown of

1) how our military involvement effects the price of oil in the regions relative to the price of oil in region we don't have a military presence (say Nigeria or Venezuela)

2) the degrees to which all those gains aren't privatized by owners of energy interests

my sense for it is that oil is a commodity that goes to whoever is willing to pay the most for it regardless of the political situation on the ground

additional if some american oil company managed to get a good deal on ME oil due to the US military presence there, well that's good for that paticular company, but relatively neutral for me

but tbf, I could be wrong about that

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27981575)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 1:14 PM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

It was more that Iraq was a closed market sitting on very valuable resources that were inaccessible. As you know, oil is globally traded so it would have to be a pretty complex breakdown, and I'd guess impossible.

US companies were indeed given preferential treatment, and I think some of the contracts were revoked due to this, but overall inconsequential. We'd rather just have the market open, them sell us oil and in return we give them dollars that they use to purchase goods and services from us. All of this wealth does eventually make it back into our system.

All gains are privatized. Not to sound like some conspiracy nut, but tribute in general is privatized now. Brits invented the corporation to divorce extraction from direct state involvement. We're just a continuation of that. It certainly supports our economy though. The elites receive the primary benefit, but shit does trickle down, and many of us are employed in some fashion through these efforts. Its not neutral for you.

The macro goal is making sure oil is traded in dollars, which buttresses the dollar as the global reserve currency.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27982057)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 1:28 PM
Author: Floppy school cafeteria

wait, what are you talking about Iraq being a closed market

was that for any other reason than we (along w/ the rest of the world) had put trade restrictions on them?

if we had simply lifted all trade restrictions on them, and did the same for Iran, wouldn't that have accomplished that objective?

-------------------------------------------------------

so long as there is a liquid currency market, what difference does it make what currency oil trade in? Why doesn't arbitrage between currencies quickly make any difference irrelevent?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27982138)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 1:43 PM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

We didn't tell them to invade Kuwait and scare the fuck out of the Saudis. Not okay. Lifting restrictions condones their behavior and erodes American power. Besides, you're forgetting the sphere of influence aspect. These people only respect power. The US running roughshod in a week over an Iraqi force that had fought Iran to a stalemate for a decade was a huge sign of power.

Buying oil in dollars is one of the foundations of the dollar’s role as the world’s primary reserve currency. Because the dollar is the world’s primary reserve currency we have been able to borrow money for significantly less than other countries are able to. That very much affects you.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27982262)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 2:05 PM
Author: Floppy school cafeteria

how would lifting restrictions condone their behavior any more than say, not killing the eldest male in every family?

all theses things are a matter of degree

objective - open Iraq oil market

option #1 - lift restrictions

option #2 - spend whatever trillion dollars we spent there (not to even factor in turning Iraq in whatever hellhole it got turned into)

are you proposing that the openning of the Iraq oil market has given us collectively a benefit > pricetag of US military action there?



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27982428)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 1:56 PM
Author: French territorial mad-dog skullcap

I'm missing something here - losing wars? In what war were we overcome militarily? NONE. We won every major battle in Vietnam, just lost the political will (i.e. anti-war left came into power in 60's) to fight and voluntarily gave up - so you can make a reasonable argument that we lost that war.

Lost Iraq? lol we crushed the Iraq army, both times. Accomplished all military objectives.

I've been thinking of this - the left has two issues that people will listen to them on, discrimination and anti-war. For Lefties, we lost or were dishonorable in every war.

Shitlibs - you have a dick stuck in your brain if you think that we've been losing wars.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27974477)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 6:59 PM
Author: jet big-titted immigrant

you can drop the retard schtick. politics and war and inseparable and have to be assessed together.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976595)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:32 AM
Author: Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation

They have to be assessed together, but the conclusion that we *lost* a war presumes military defeat, which is incorrect.

More accurate to say we prevailed militarily, but were unable to achieve our political objectives, or didn't have the correct or adequately defined political objectives.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980660)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:29 PM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

The left provides political cover for a lot of our actions. Its a very useful component. Otherwise you really need to whip up some nasty shit to get generally isolationist Americans on board.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976768)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:25 PM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

flawed premise. Its often better for the US if the conflict never really ends. Its easier to justify keeping a garrison on foreign soil like korea. Mission accomplished? Okay, go home. Ww2 is remarkable given the populace was on board with total war and everything that follows, such as the permanent military presence in japan and Germany as payment for our lost sons.

The real reason is that the public doesn't have the stomach for it. After nam there was hope it only applied to US casualties but Iraq cost hardly any American blood and people still got queasy. Now if this were Rome and some insurgents were starting shit we'd role in and level the town, women and children. End of story.

In any event compare casualties and see who thinks who is the winner.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976729)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:42 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

If you really compare casualties its not so good for Yankeestan army. Your grunts dont die in battle -- they just come home crippled and perpetually on the dole. Nearly half the people who cycled through Iraq are fucked in the head permanently. Advances in battlefield medicine are just masking true counts of lives ruined.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976871)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:06 AM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

Casualties are dead and wounded.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980566)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:34 AM
Author: Idiotic fear-inspiring heaven mediation

Yes, the Russian male seems remarkably well-adjusted.

"Overall, a quarter of Russian men die before reaching 55, compared with 7% of men in the UK and about 10% in the United States. The life expectancy for men in Russia is 64 years, placing it among the lowest 50 countries in the world in that category."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980672)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:59 AM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

Russia at war = humanity's menstruation

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980788)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:39 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

Bad officers who are incapable of standing up to incompetent and interfering political leadership in the manner of a General Lebed. The reality is there is no tradition of an officer class in the US or of hereditary military careerism on anything resembling an institutional scale where sons follow fathers into the service so your officers are fundamentally amateurs with no deep attachment to their service. They all want to get out and write books or get on Fox News. Its just a job for them. In Russia general staff officers are raised from birth in families that have done nothing else for generations.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976848)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:42 PM
Author: jet big-titted immigrant

didn't lebed get himself assassinated?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976873)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 7:43 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

No, just died in helo crash.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27976884)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 10:54 PM
Author: primrose fragrant box office wrinkle

(Guy whose country lost a WAR (not counter insurgency) to Japan)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978286)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 10:59 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

Guy whose country lost 75% of its Pacific fleet to the same Japan in one single battle.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978329)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:07 PM
Author: primrose fragrant box office wrinkle

Yes, 75% was destroyed in a sneak attack. Then we went on to kick the shit out of them with the rest. LOL at Russia ever doing such a thing

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978388)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:10 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

You do realize that but for pure chance had those 3 carriers been at Pearl Harbor on December 7 and not out on maneuvers the entire war in the Pacific would have been 10x the bloodbath it turned into for the US, right? There would have never been a Midway or a Marianas Turkey shoot but for sheer chance. The old line from The Hunt for Red October -- "Halsey acted stupidly" is actually more or less true. The entire war in the Pacific was a fucking coin flip.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978410)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:11 PM
Author: primrose fragrant box office wrinkle

Are there three Russian carriers that actually work in 2015? Honest question

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978420)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:15 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

Why does a country that sits on a dozen time zones need aircraft carriers? The only spots Russian cant readily access with land based aircraft are S.Africa and Argentina.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978449)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 12:46 AM
Author: pearly vibrant psychic pit

So, no.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27979154)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:12 PM
Author: plum theatre partner

Ouch.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978431)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:22 PM
Author: Impressive Razzle-dazzle State Rigpig

I think a big part of this is the fact that we fight pointless wars. My dad was a Marine and said that he would disown me if I joined the military because all of the wars we fight at this point are bullshit. Have plenty of other friends with dads in the military who have the same perspective. And my family was a "military family" I guess. Grandfather was also a Marine and great grandfather fought in WWII.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978492)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 10:01 PM
Author: Cream Well-lubricated Stead

HINT: The answer is because our army is filled with cowards.

You think a nation that produced this article would have lost the Iraq War?

http://www.nytimes.com/1863/03/13/news/the-crime-of-cowardice-to-the-editor-of-the-new-york-times.html

The Crime of Cowardice.; To the Editor of the New-York Times:

The fifty-second Article of War ordains that: "Any officer or soldier who shall misbehave himself before the enemy run away, or shamefully abandon any fort, post, or guard which he or they, may be commanded to defend, or speak words inducing others to do the like, or shall cast away his arms and ammunition, or who shall quit his post or colors to plunder and pillage, shall suffer death, or such other punishment as shall be ordered by the sentence of a general Court-martial."

This is the military estimate of the crime of cowardice as defined by law.

The world has always specially honored courage and stigmatized cowardice. To be brave is as essential for a man as to be chaste is for a woman, and a coward among men is in as poor repute as a prostitute among women. These fundamental points of honor are rigidly exacted in proportion to the elevation of society -- as essential to all respect and even tolerance. Prove a man a coward, and you leave him utterly deprived of character, so that none can honor him or suffer his society. This Article of War correctly embodies the settled sense of the civilized world concerning military cowardice. The resort to the death penalty, though rarely made, is strictly just and quite as humane as the worse-than-death penalty of living a branded coward.

It is as much the duty of our citizens to be brave by their firesides as of our soldiers to show pluck "before the enemy." It is as base for the American freeman at his home to give way to cowardice and to clamor for "peace at any price," as it is for the volunteer to run away from the enemy on the battlefield. Indeed it is more so, for the soldier has his senses comfounded by battle sounds and scenes, while the citizen enjoys a quiet which gives to his cowardice the quality of deliberation. Morally speaking, those men who are Unionists -- but &c., are, in the main, simply cowards. To run away from the cause of Constitution and Government when they are in their crisis, just because war is hard work and costly, is more disgraceful and craven than to run away from Stonewall JACKSON for fear of bodily harm.

There is a citizen courage and a citizen cowardice, analogous to these traits in military life, and alike deserving of the highest praise or blame. Gloss it over as we may, to talk of peace until there is a chance of a peace under which an American can hold up his head, is simply to "show the white feather," and deserves just as severe treatment as battle skedaddling. Perhaps, Mr. Smith and Mr. Gunnybags may not have thought of the thing in this light, as they have croaked, and coddled, and clamored, and played the civic coward generally. Those leaders of opinion who "shamefully abandon" their trusts, and "cast away" their principles, as scared soldiers throw away or surrender their arms, are precisely the political cowards they seem, and as such will be remembered. There is a style of Copperhead exactly analogous to the military sneak who "induces others to do the like," and who actually works to make others as bad as himself. There are, too, plundering contractors and pilfering officials, who "quit their posts" as good citizens to rob the Government. Now, to compel all these cowards and sneaks "to suffer death" would overwork the undertakers, which, of course, humanity forbids. They are, however, precisely the same curse to our civil and political contest that arrant cowards are to an army on the battle-field.

It is the sailor's duty never to give up the ship; the soldier's, never to give up the fight; the American's, never to give up the Republic. E.B.H.

---

Sorry neocons. America's army is a joke. Just a bunch screeching women and far too many fancy toys for their own good. If Patton were alive today, he'd shoot up a school in a fit of uncontrollable rage and defect to the Russians.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27977883)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 10:18 PM
Author: Costumed pale electric furnace

We now have the ability to destroy entire societies and cultures with minimal loss of American lives.

We just don't have the political will. We should have slaughtered everyone, destroyed every mosque, every trace of the native culture, and put up McDonald's and churches and called Iraq East Dakota and colonized it and taken all the oil.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978001)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 10:22 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

Not with conventional weapons you dont. The US would actually be hard pressed to run an air war significantly larger than the one in Iraq. Conventional capability has only decayed since the Iraq war. All those MRAPS are not forward deployable vehicles and the vehicles that are are 25 years old Bradleys and M1's that are even older.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978041)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:04 PM
Author: Costumed pale electric furnace

Cut off supply lines, seize the food supply and source, destroy the power grid, destroy the infrastructure, starve the population to death.

It takes a while. But it would be relatively easy.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978366)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:07 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

So only if Americans turned into Russians. Gotcha.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978393)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:09 PM
Author: primrose fragrant box office wrinkle

If only Americans turned into completely amoral butchers. Good thing Russian military is actually shit

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978405)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:13 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

US conventional power is incapable of engaging near peer powers in full offensive full theater combat. The conventional force, including the Air Force, is too small. You can deny the sea lanes with your big navy, but that's it. For traditional land powers like Russia and China that's almost an irrelevancy.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978433)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 11:38 AM
Author: Costumed pale electric furnace

Well Russians do it to their own population every time someone invades, but yes, same idea.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27981372)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:19 PM
Author: Pontificating provocative main people

This article goes about as deep as an upper level college paper. Nothing every book written by a former grunt hasn't touched on.

The biggest problem is that the author utterly missed the problems posed by such incredibly, ridiculously restrained rules of engagement. This should have been the gravamen of the article.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978475)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 27th, 2015 11:30 PM
Author: Histrionic disturbing stage

The US dropped more bombs on Vietnam than on Nazi Germany and the Viets didnt quit. The Iraqis are already living in the stone age. You cant bomb them any deeper into it. Now genocide always works but heart and minds you cant win unless they want to be won. The best you can do is find yourselves a puppet ruler like a Kadyrov and take as much victory from that as you can and hope over generations shit will get better. In Iraq best to partition it and 2/3 of the country will do okay and the other third will become a game preserve for wild savages left to live in the wild like wildebeest.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27978542)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:49 AM
Author: high-end charismatic chapel really tough guy

We killed a ton of north vietnamese. That pace was not sustainable for them. It was left-wing libs who forced us out of vietnam.

We had arguably "proven our point" to Russia, and didn't really care that much about the SV anyway. Nixon wanted to make friends with China, and protecting SV was viewed as less important to that relationship, so he ended it. Whether that was worth all the trouble I guess is a point of debate, but is a clear no to me and clearly Lyndon Johnson miscalculated when he escalated the war.

But saying we "won" or "lost" that conflict is impossible because it depends on what goals you are looking at, and how those goals change over time. Making friends with China was not lyndon johnson's goal, but rather nixon's, which partly explains why nixon had no interest in fighting in vietnam other than he didn't America to look weak.

The best you can say about it was that it was a huge clusterfuck and s poorly contrived waste of resources, which you can also say about Iraq II.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980739)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 10:03 AM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

Vietnam is now one of the most pro American countries on the planet.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980815)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 10:05 AM
Author: high-end charismatic chapel really tough guy

america HANDSOME

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980826)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 1:21 PM
Author: Adventurous striped hyena university

There is a doctoral thesis waiting for someone to incorporate NOWAG into geopolitics.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27982085)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 28th, 2015 9:27 AM
Author: Floppy school cafeteria

where's the part where this analysis "skewers shibboleths revered by both left and right"?

this seems pretty much straight up the left's alley

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2890508&forum_id=2#27980639)