War in Ukraine

#36,151
#36,151
Rasputin_Vol said:
It's not close? You sure about that? What is our track record over the last 60 years fighting rice farmers in SE Asia and goat herders in sandals?
Click to expand...
If the US had fought against North Vietnam the way it fought against the Axis in WWII, it would have been over before Kennedy was assassinated. You can’t make the enemy’s capital city a no fly zone and win a war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, Rickyvol77, Tnslim1 and 3 others
#36,155
#36,155
MG1968 said:
If the US had fought against North Vietnam the way it fought against the Axis in WWII, it would have been over before Kennedy was assassinated. You can’t make the enemy’s capital city a no fly zone and win a war.
Click to expand...
What was the issue in Korea?
What was the issue in Iraq?
What was the issue in Afghanistan?
What was the issue in Syria?

You mention not using the same tactics that were used in WWII, yet the same people that have given us this string of failures are still running the show. These military strategists and think tanks and neocons don't have a single success under their belt. Just wasting American blood and treasure all over the globe to only fail in their long term strategic objectives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DonjoVol
#36,157
#36,157
Rasputin_Vol said:
What was the issue in Korea?
What was the issue in Iraq?
What was the issue in Afghanistan?
What was the issue in Syria?

You mention not using the same tactics that were used in WWII, yet the same people that have given us this string of failures are still running the show. These military strategists and think tanks and neocons don't have a single success under their belt. Just wasting American blood and treasure all over the globe to only fail in their long term strategic objectives.
Click to expand...

Clearly we, the US, ****ed up. You’ll get no argument from me.
 
#36,158
#36,158
"...But conditions for Ukrainian troops are only likely to improve as more sophisticated Western weapons arrive, while those of Russian can be expected to decay as they dig deeper into their stocks of old, outdated equipment, said retired Gen. Ben Hodges, a former commander of US forces in Europe who is now with the Center for European Policy Analysis. At some point in the coming months, the Ukrainians will have received enough Western weaponry that it is likely they will be able to go on the counteroffensive and reverse the tide of the war, he said.

“I remain very optimistic that Ukraine is going to win, and that by the end of this year Russia will be driven back to the Feb. 24 line,” he said, referring to the boundaries of Russian-occupied areas in Crimea and Donbas captured during fighting in 2014 and 2015. “Right now it sucks to be on the receiving end of all this Russian artillery. But my assessment is that things are going to be trending in favor of the Ukrainians in the next few weeks.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and TVOLS
#36,159
#36,159
MG1968 said:
Clearly we, the US, ****ed up. You’ll get no argument from me.
Click to expand...
Last question. What has changed over the last 60 years that makes you confident that going forward right now that we have better leadership calling the shots for our military? Milley? Austin? Biden?
 
#36,163
#36,163
MG1968 said:
Don’t run and hide. If you’re going to put words in my mouth, have the balls to press the issue.
Click to expand...
I'm not running and hiding. I'm simply of the opinion that we don't have the leadership in this country right now to be doing diddly-squat overseas militarily. The loose cannons we have running the show are going to get us into a hot conflict and we will have the same pizz poor leadership (or worse) leading the charge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#36,164
#36,164
Rasputin_Vol said:
I'm not running and hiding. I'm simply of the opinion that we don't have the leadership in this country right now to be doing diddly-squat overseas militarily. The loose cannons we have running the show are going to get us into a hot conflict and we will have the same pizz poor leadership (or worse) leading the charge.
Click to expand...
But why do you think I support the current leadership?
 
#36,167
#36,167
Rasputin_Vol said:
What was the issue in Korea?
What was the issue in Iraq?
What was the issue in Afghanistan?
What was the issue in Syria?

You mention not using the same tactics that were used in WWII, yet the same people that have given us this string of failures are still running the show. These military strategists and think tanks and neocons don't have a single success under their belt. Just wasting American blood and treasure all over the globe to only fail in their long term strategic objectives.
Click to expand...

No one can tactically beat the U.S. on the battlefield. The kill ratios alone tell the tale. If we wanted to stay in Afghanistan and rule their country we could have. They could have never defeated American forces. We willingly left. You can't deny this. I do think that occupation doesn't work long term anymore. What will be will be, just like even if Russia can over run all of Ukraine they will not be able to hold it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64 and TVOLS
#36,168
#36,168
norrislakevol said:
No one can tactically beat the U.S. on the battlefield. The kill ratios alone tell the tale. If we wanted to stay in Afghanistan and rule their country we could have. They could have never defeated American forces. We willingly left. You can't deny this. I do think that occupation doesn't work long term anymore. What will be will be, just like even if Russia can over run all of Ukraine they will not be able to hold it.
Click to expand...
Would it be fair to say that the US has not fought a military peer on the battlefield since WWII?

I posted the numbers provided by a member of a British think tank yesterday and he said that the Russians have roughly 200k Russian/DPR/LPR/Chechen forces in Donbas going against 250k NATO trained and equipped professional service people and roughly 450k other soldiers in the field. And Russia is churning them down in a lopsided manner. The Ukrainian army was also the most experienced arm force in Europe because of their 8 years of fighting in Donbas and NATO training.

Again. the US has fought rice farmers and goat herders over the last 60 years.
 
#36,169
#36,169
Rasputin_Vol said:
Would it be fair to say that the US has not fought a military peer on the battlefield since WWII?

I posted the numbers provided by a member of a British think tank yesterday and he said that the Russians have roughly 200k Russian/DPR/LPR/Chechen forces in Donbas going against 250k NATO trained and equipped professional service people and roughly 450k other soldiers in the field. And Russia is churning them down in a lopsided manner. The Ukrainian army was also the most experienced arm force in Europe because of their 8 years of fighting in Donbas and NATO training.

Again. the US has fought rice farmers and goat herders over the last 60 years.
Click to expand...

It would be fair to say that.

So, you actually think that the Russians could actually defeat the U.S. on the battlefield? I know this may pain you to hear this, but The U.S. would establish air dominance very quickly over the Ruskies. They have NOTHING that can beat the F22 Raptors or the FA18 Super Hornet. Their planes get shot down, air superiority is established, and your precious Russians get blown up limb for limb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and InVOLuntary
#36,171
#36,171
Rasputin_Vol said:
Last question. What has changed over the last 60 years that makes you confident that going forward right now that we have better leadership calling the shots for our military? Milley? Austin? Biden?
Click to expand...

Probably not much. If you are going to fight a war, then FIGHT the war - take the gloves off and fight to win. We haven't been doing that for a while, and you are right that probably hasn't changed. Johnson and McNamara and their decisions on how to fight and who to lead were one of the biggest military blunders in our history. As far as war with insurgents - just don't; even if you win, you will lose in the end because you were really just stupid enough to grab a tiger by the tail. Korea at least ended in a stalemate, and S Korea has prospered. There weren't many end around plays possible as there were in Laos and Cambodia during the Vietnamese war. A war has to be fought to cover the real battleground rather than limited to borders if the enemy won't respect borders.

I'd say Korea was a win even if it ended pretty much where it started. My dad got to Pusan in the summer of 1950 when the N Koreans had pressed the S Koreans back to the Pusan Perimeter. After Inchon he was back at Kimpo (just outside Seoul) ... were we lived in 1947 and 48 until the military moved dependents out of Korea. He was north of Pyongyang in Sinanju when the Chinese crossed the Yalu. Both the N Korean and Chinese drives were stopped. McArthur for all his pomp and bluster had one move in his playbook - let the enemy advance too far and then cut them off in the rear and starve the head of the snake, and his intelligence (info about the enemy) was crap - at least the analysis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, Tnslim1 and InVOLuntary
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top