Log in

View Full Version : The End Of Military History



Rakhmetov
29th July 2010, 17:20
Fascinating article by Andrew Bacevich, Vietnam veteran and current Professor at Boston University and lost his son in the Iraq war.

His conclusions echo mine. My opinion is that there will never be another major war that will result in complete victory. There will only be future Vietnams, Iraqs, and Afghanistans. The people of the Third World have learned too much since the Vietnam war.

Idem:


"No one doubted that Israelis (regionally) and Americans (globally) enjoyed unquestioned military dominance. Throughout Israel's near abroad, its tanks, fighter-bombers, and warships operated at will. So, too, did American tanks, fighter-bombers, and warships wherever they were sent.
So what? Events made it increasingly evident that military dominance did not translate into concrete political advantage. Rather than enhancing the prospects for peace, coercion produced ever more complications. No matter how badly battered and beaten, the "terrorists" (a catch-all term applied to anyone resisting Israeli or American authority) weren't intimidated, remained unrepentant, and kept coming back for more.





If any overarching conclusion emerges from the Afghan and Iraq Wars (and from their Israeli equivalents), it's this: victory is a chimera. Counting on today's enemy to yield in the face of superior force makes about as much sense as buying lottery tickets to pay the mortgage: you better be really lucky.
Meanwhile, as the U.S. economy went into a tailspin, Americans contemplated their equivalent of Israel's "demographic bomb" -- a "fiscal bomb." Ingrained habits of profligacy, both individual and collective, held out the prospect of long-term stagnation: no growth, no jobs, no fun. Out-of-control spending on endless wars exacerbated that threat.



Nearly 20 years ago, a querulous Madeleine Albright demanded to know: "What's the point of having this superb military you're always talking about if we can't use it?" Today, an altogether different question deserves our attention: What's the point of constantly using our superb military if doing so doesn't actually work?
Washington's refusal to pose that question provides a measure of the corruption and dishonesty permeating our politics."


http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/29-6

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

danyboy27
29th July 2010, 17:47
and the russian won their bid on chechenya.

the only way western army could effectively win a war today would be to do like the russian in tchechenya and totally ignore one of the basic principle klausevitz set up in the mind of politician and soldier: the gain of a victory must be more than what it would cost you politicly and militarly.

basicly, if you dont give a fuck about the nomber of your guy killed, the material cost of the war, or the result it will have on your politics, the prospect of winning a conflict is verry real. it might take decade of horror, many assasination, and if your people dont topple you for those horrible things you are doing, well, you can win.