From: Steve Grammont (islander@midmaine.com)
Date: Fri Sep 10 2004 - 10:41:53 PDT
Ryan,
>We had troop morale problems in November/December of '44. Should we
>have pulled out of ETO then?
No, troop morale should not be a factor for deciding whether to stay in a
war or not. Never said that. I just said that troop morale is down
because the war is being mishandled and they know it.
>Poland is still there. Pakistan is still there. Britain too (the ones
>we'll always need and welcome. Japan has some troops in the mix
>(amazing that). Austrailia and Canada have some of their PBI in
>Afganistan which is more than good of them.
The point is that it started out as a very, very weak and small
coallition. And it gets weaker by the day. It does not mean non-US
troops aren't of value, just that they are insignificant in the big picture.
>Do you really lament the loss of the 50 or so Phillipino troops?
That's my point... most of the coallition nations had troops that could
be counted in the dozens or low hundreds. Not a very strong coallition.
>Given history, as long as we have members of the Anglosphere on our
>side, we're probably on the right track militarily.
Problem is that we don't. We had and have it for Afghanistan and for the
War on Terror, but not for Iraq. The fiasco surrounding the US trumped
up case for the war, along with the prisoner abuse scandal (which has
widened), has left us discredited in the eyes of our "peers". And with
no surprise.
>Ever hear of a spoiling attack? Refocusing someone's attention on
>another part of the battle field? Principle of the lighting rod?
>Militarily, fighting the insurgents in Iraq accomplishes a number of
>things. It focus's the Wahabist on trying to defeat a democracy and
>shows the world how the Islamists are devoutly against a pluralist
>vote or women's rights. It also pulls many of them into a land battle
>where we have the upper hand.
We have also galvanized the disenfranchised of the world to fight against
us. Since that is the root of terrorism, I'll have to go along with the
CIA and say that the war in Iraq has made the War on Terrorism far more
difficult to fight and far more likely to lead to another major attack
against us.
>The major faults I see are we didn't go
>in with enough men (hindsight is 20/20)
BS. The Army itself said it needed 2-3 times the number of men the Bush
admin claimed were needed. And when they pressed their case, they were
removed. As a military historian NONE of the things happening to us
right now are a surprise because they were all predicted ahead of time.
> and that the Marines have not
>been given enough of a free hand in dealing with Fallujah. Even so,
>Fallujah's insurgents aren't sneaking out at night because there are
>24/7 predator flights over the city and every movement outside the
>perimeter is noted and prosecuted.
The VC and NVA didn't do certain tactical maneuvers because of US
military might... but we still lost.
Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:35:12 PDT