|
Mocker
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Where I Started But In A Different Place
|
|

Dec 16th, 2004, 07:28 PM
Let's first of all understand that this war is not at all what what the U.S. military is designed for ... i.e. it is not conventional in the sense of what we thought that we'd face with most "industrialized countries" ... i.e. "unconventional". For the past several years the military has adopted the doctrine of "bomb the shit of them and then go in with the clean up crew". Unfortunately, you can't occupy and secure a country and enforce the borders against insurgents with a "clean-up crew". To be brief, they tried to do the war on the cheap. The lack of amored transport is a clear sign that they did not know what type of enemy they were going up against. The problem is that they have no way of fighting this particular type of war with the particular type of army that we're trying to present at this time. This type of guerilla war is nothing new, in a general sense. Hell, the very reason we won OUR very independence is based on guerialla warfare ... and not the gentlemenly, formal type of war that the British were used to ... that and the $ and support of the French ... a recurring theme in warfare. So, there you have it. A cause that's funded by outside forces that are able to permeate the boundaries, guerilla warfare, outside financial support, ect. In light of the fact that we underestimated our enemies and, consequently, poorly planned this war, the outcome to date is not suprising.
P.S. My analogy our founding fathers is, at best, general. I, of course, realize the lack of humanity in the current conflict.
|
__________________
Wherever you go, there you are.
|
|
|