Article

2015-02-20 Home Front: WoT

WHY THE WORLDâS BIGGEST MILITARY KEEPS LOSING WARS

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2015-02-20 17:45|| || Front Page|| [6 views ] Top

#1 Laughable. He seems to have confused our military with our political leadership.

Name one lost battle. With the possible exception of "Black Hawk Down", the Army (And the rest of the armed forces) have won every engagement they have been directed to win.

Its not the military that bailed out too soon - that was a decision by politicians to give back all the gains from the surge.

Posted by OldSpook 2015-02-20 20:05|| 2015-02-20 20:05|| Front Page Top

#2 OS, same thing happened in VietNam.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2015-02-20 21:17|| 2015-02-20 21:17|| Front Page Top

#3 Before Korea, America never lost a war.

Anyone who see the night sky image of the peninsula knows who won. Anyone miss all those Kia and Samsung products floating around. How about those Hanjin container on railroad flatbeds.

Posted by Procopius2k 2015-02-20 22:38|| 2015-02-20 22:38|| Front Page Top

#4 First, what do you mean by 'victory'?

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2015-02-20 23:26|| 2015-02-20 23:26|| Front Page Top

#5 "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?"

That's because a political decision was made that imposing Western will on the enemy was not the objective.

The will to win is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for winning. 21st century Western political leadership does not fulfill that condition.

"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."

9/11 has profoundly and permanently changed the West, and not for the better.
There's more police state, more surveillance, more fear and, curiously enough, more Sharia in the West because of it.
Yet 9/11 isn't even mentioned when the rationale for "Infinite Justice/Enduring Freedom" is discussed.

Suppose the president in office in 2001, whether he was called Bush or Gore, had chosen not to respond to an attack on the scale of Pearl Harbor.

Could any president have survived politically after making such a decision?

Posted by Elmerert Hupens2660 2015-02-20 23:39|| 2015-02-20 23:39|| Front Page Top

23:45 Procopius2k
23:39 Elmerert Hupens2660
23:34 mossomo
23:26 Anguper Hupomosing9418
22:38 Procopius2k
22:37 Frank G
22:13 Zenobia Floger6220
21:58 Rob Crawford
21:43 Frank G
21:17 Rambler in Virginia
21:16 JosephMendiola
21:10 Whamble Joluter4909
20:44 JosephMendiola
20:05 OldSpook
20:02 OldSpook
19:58 OldSpook
19:54 OldSpook
19:53 OldSpook
19:37 JosephMendiola
19:35 JosephMendiola
19:25 JosephMendiola
19:20 g(r)omgoru
19:19 DarthVader
18:49 NoMoreBS