1. #9041
    Banned cubby's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    35,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    And you'd be wrong because, again, more advanced weapons do not automatically translate to victory.

    The US armed forces were crushed in war game exercise wherein the enemy was using motorcycle couriers and morse lamps.
    I read that summary you provided...there were some unrealistic physical limitations because of shipping lanes and such. Sounds like it wasn't a very realistic scenario. I do like that the Red Team won with old-school communication tactics.

  2. #9042
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Bless.
    Provided it's actually food and not that crap that's done by the same catering companies as prisons. Lol.
    If nothing else I can't believe it's the same stuff served in county prisons near where I am. I'm told it's all watery tasteless gunk with only the colors to distinguish differences.

  3. #9043
    Banned cubby's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    35,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    "Since the wargame allowed for a ship-to-shore landing of ground troops at some (unknown) point during the 14 day exercise, and because their naval force was substantial, the Blue force was positioned on the shore-side of the region's active shipping lanes to keep them from impacting commerce during the exercise. This placed them in close proximity to the Red shore rather than at a "standoff" distance. Conducting the wargames during peacetime also meant that there were a large number of friendly/unaligned ships and aircraft in the zone, restricting the use of automated defense systems and more cautious Rules of Engagement. Red's tactics took full advantage of these factors, and to great effect."

    The Blue Force (with at least one hand tied behind its back) followed the restrictions given to it by the wargame designers. Given those significant restrictions, Blue Force had no chance of winning against a non-handicapped foe. Any time there is a war where one side tries to minimize civilian casualties and the other does not, the first force is always fighting an uphill battle.
    That was my read as well. Essentially overall an unrealistic war game scenario.

  4. #9044
    Banned Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    23,363
    Quote Originally Posted by YUPPIE View Post
    not joking, by genocide, do you mean everyone in the region. Because if genocide only applies to the Taliban, that's a good thing.

    Anyone that denies that doesn't know the true horrors propagated by the Taliban. They aren't human in their depravity. Everything about the Taliban and their culture needs to be eradicated.

    And to the person that said some things go wrong and that's life: the fact Biden withdrew is a huge blow to democracy around the world and makes the US look pathetic.
    I would love to introduce you to this wonderful thing called agent orange.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange

  5. #9045
    Old God PhaelixWW's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    10,872
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    I would love to introduce you to this wonderful thing called agent orange.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange
    But... but... the only reason we didn't win the Vietnam War was because we weren't trying hard enough, just like Afghanistan, right? /s

    Let's face it. The only way the US wins a war against guerilla fighters is by getting our hands so dirty and bloody that we become the evil we are attempting to eradicate. And even then, we don't really ever win, because we'd end up driving more people into the arms of terrorist groups just like Al-Qaeda or ISIS.

    There's a reason why people like @YUPPIE can't seem to articulate just exactly how we're supposed to defeat guerilla fighters, and it's either because they're too naive to really understand the truth, or because their argument would fall to pieces if they actually admitted the truth.
    R.I.P. Democracy


    "The difference between stupidity
    and genius is that genius has its limits."

    --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  6. #9046
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by PhaelixWW View Post
    But... but... the only reason we didn't win the Vietnam War was because we weren't trying hard enough, just like Afghanistan, right? /s

    Let's face it. The only way the US wins a war against guerilla fighters is by getting our hands so dirty and bloody that we become the evil we are attempting to eradicate. And even then, we don't really ever win, because we'd end up driving more people into the arms of terrorist groups just like Al-Qaeda or ISIS.

    There's a reason why people like @YUPPIE can't seem to articulate just exactly how we're supposed to defeat guerilla fighters, and it's either because they're too naive to really understand the truth, or because their argument would fall to pieces if they actually admitted the truth.
    Actually, we were not really trying hard to win the war, though we did try to win the military side of the conflict.

    The US either fails to become evil enough to win or it fails to address the underlying issues causing the conflict.

  7. #9047
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    Actually, we were not really trying hard to win the war, though we did try to win the military side of the conflict.
    And it went super well.

    What do we call Saigon again?

  8. #9048
    Vietnam "Conflict." A declaration of war never happened. I don't believe a total war would have been seen as acceptable as that would have demanded far more resources...and the political/public will to commit atrocities.

  9. #9049
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    The Blue Force (with at least one hand tied behind its back) followed the restrictions given to it by the wargame designers. Given those significant restrictions, Blue Force had no chance of winning against a non-handicapped foe.
    And?

    You've already admitted the US has handicaps in place that prevent it from winning a war against an asymmetrical opponent, ergo this is a fairly adequate reflection of that.

    But of course I fully expect you to contradict yourself here because of a compulsive inability not to kneejerk to even the slightest criticism of the armed forces. /yawn

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    Actually, we were not really trying hard to win the war
    Quote Originally Posted by PhaelixWW View Post
    The only way the US wins a war against guerilla fighters is by getting our hands so dirty and bloody that we become the evil we are attempting to eradicate.
    Like here. You're not actually disputing the point, you just have to get the last word in.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  10. #9050
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    Actually, we were not really trying hard to win the war, though we did try to win the military side of the conflict.

    The US either fails to become evil enough to win or it fails to address the underlying issues causing the conflict.
    Man, I'm sure all the vets and their families will be thrilled to hear that so many young (mostly) men suffered and died for...uh...a war we weren't trying to win?

  11. #9051
    The Lightbringer D Luniz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    The Coastal Plaguelands
    Posts
    3,060
    Wars are not won on the field of combat. Battles are, but those are only ever part of the story. To win a war you need to break the enemy's resolve, to force him to accept defeat. Otherwise the war will never end. Too many conflicts persist because battles are won but the hearts and minds of the people are not. Winning involves every level of society, from the generals and politicians to the shop girls and street cleaners. The infantryman with his rifle may be the blunt weapon used to win this fight, but he is neither the instigator nor the concluder.
    -Anastasius Focht
    "Law and Order", lots of places have had that, Russia, North Korea, Saddam's Iraq.
    Laws can be made to enforce order of cruelty and brutality.
    Equality and Justice, that is how you have peace and a society that benefits all.

  12. #9052
    Banned Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    23,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Man, I'm sure all the vets and their families will be thrilled to hear that so many young (mostly) men suffered and died for...uh...a war we weren't trying to win?
    Not to mention, if we weren't there to win. What were we there for? Just to kill some foreigners? Test herbicides effects on humans?

  13. #9053
    Old God PhaelixWW's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    10,872
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    17 years and roughly the equivalent of $1T spent and we weren’t trying all that hard?
    Not to mention the 60k KIA US forces, which also doesn't mention the millions of total lives lost in the "conflict", nor the countless more wounded.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    Not to mention, if we weren't there to win. What were we there for? Just to kill some foreigners? Test herbicides effects on humans?
    For the PR effect back home? /s
    R.I.P. Democracy


    "The difference between stupidity
    and genius is that genius has its limits."

    --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  14. #9054
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by unfilteredJW View Post
    And it went super well.

    What do we call Saigon again?
    When the US pulled out, it was fully controlled by South Vietnam.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    17 years and roughly the equivalent of $1T spent and we weren’t trying all that hard?
    No, not really. We made little attempt to resolve the root of the conflict and we were unwilling to eradicate the population. We could have reduced Hanoi to rubble. We could have run Linebacker II for many weeks far earlier in the war.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    And?

    You've already admitted the US has handicaps in place that prevent it from winning a war against an asymmetrical opponent, ergo this is a fairly adequate reflection of that.

    But of course I fully expect you to contradict yourself here because of a compulsive inability not to kneejerk to even the slightest criticism of the armed forces. /yawn

    - - - Updated - - -





    Like here. You're not actually disputing the point, you just have to get the last word in.
    No, that exercise was a state on state conflict, not a COIN operation. Very different.

    I react to uneducated criticism like yours.

    Also not the part I was commenting on.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Man, I'm sure all the vets and their families will be thrilled to hear that so many young (mostly) men suffered and died for...uh...a war we weren't trying to win?
    I am sure you will find most of them are actually aware of that.

  15. #9055
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    Not to mention, if we weren't there to win. What were we there for? Just to kill some foreigners? Test herbicides effects on humans?
    We were there to "win", but that does not mean we were actually trying to win.

    "He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign."
    -Sun Tzu

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    Why do you keep advocating for genocide?
    I am not. I am pointing out that genocide is the only method that relies only on a military solution that is capable of ending an insurgency.

  16. #9056
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    No, that exercise was a state on state conflict
    Because as we all know there's totally a difference between asymmetrical warfare and asymmetrical warfare.

    Lol.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    When the US pulled out, it was fully controlled by South Vietnam.
    This is about as convincing as "you can't fire me, I quit".

    Clownery.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  17. #9057
    how the fuck does every thread with kellhound in go to some war fantasy or ranting about city slickers. Do you not get bored?

  18. #9058
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,753
    Quote Originally Posted by jonnysensible View Post
    how the fuck does every thread with kellhound in go to some war fantasy or ranting about city slickers. Do you not get bored?
    People who've served in the armed forces are often very sensitive to criticism of said armed forces because of the sunk cost fallacy of having given a significant amount of time and energy to an enterprise that a) didn't quite turn out as glamorously as the recruiter who dropped by their high school led them to believe, and b) ultimately doesn't give a shit about them beyond their usefulness as a warm body.

    You know. Same shit with people that work for large corporations and get butthurt whenever you point out said corporation is exploitative. If you kneejerk hard enough, you might even convince yourself that everything's fine.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  19. #9059
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Because as we all know there's totally a difference between asymmetrical warfare and asymmetrical warfare.

    Lol.

    - - - Updated - - -



    This is about as convincing as "you can't fire me, I quit".

    Clownery.
    Actually there is a difference when discussing state actor asymmetrical warfare as seen in the exercise and non-state actor asymmetrical warfare. You are WAY out of your league here.

    When the US withdraw happened, the NVA was not in a position to launch an offensive against the capitol (see the ill fated Easter Offensive).

  20. #9060
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    Actually there is a difference when discussing state actor asymmetrical warfare as seen in the exercise and non-state actor asymmetrical warfare.


    The US' track record with asymmetrical warfare regardless of the circumstances would indicate otherwise.

    Again, "the US didn't lose the Vietnam War because South Vietnam was still technically in control when we withdrew" is as stupid as "you can't fire me, I quit". It's very very obviously a face saving measure.

    It's just kind of hilarious that someone who professes to be familiar with foreign policy actually falls for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •