Hi Michael D. Cummings; Re: "Carl, you're so fixated on Vietnam it has blinded you."
I have a military library of around 2000 books. Damn few of them are on Vietnam.
Re: "This will be no Vietnam."
I agree. The problem is that if I compare this to conflicts that the herd is even less familiar with than Vietnam, my comments go completely over their heads. The recorded history of war on this planet is many thousands of years old. It didn't start in 1966. Human nature is unchanged over that recorded history. That's why it was so easy to predict that the Afghans would welcome us with parades while the Iraqis would shoot at us.
Re: "This is not the Vietnam military, it's far better trained, better equipped and better led."
(1) Saddam's military is better than the Vietcong.
(2) Our military is so good mostly because it is a volunteer force. Unfortunately, the nature of the Iraqi conflict is such that we don't have a large enough volunteer force to deal with the problem. In Vietnam, we had the assistance of the ARVN, but we have no corresponding ally in Iraq. The British are not likely to follow the massive reinforcements we'll have to do. The end result is that in order to stay in Iraq, we will have to bring back conscription, and that will lower the quality of our forces. But I agree with you, the quality of our armed forces is now the highest it has ever been. This is the peak.
Re: "Those who fixate on one event in history, and fail to see the changing circumstances will look foolish when this is all over."
The Administration's plans were caused by their fixation on the US military successes in Afghanistan and the Gulf war. This blinded them. What you accuse me of is exactly what the Administration has done. Instead of looking at war as a continuous feature of the human race, with thousands of years of history, they only looked at the two most recent conflicts. Their error is already apparent. No flag waving Iraqis.
-- Carl |
