Interesting article
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 705
Likes: 42
Interesting article
from today's dailyreckoning.com
*** We are not saying that war is always a bad thing, at least for the spectators. For example, it is a marvelous distraction from life's real pains and sorrows! How much easier it is, for example, to explain to your wife the latest strategy for taking Baghdad...than it is to explain why you spent the night in a hotel room with your secretary, albeit as a war-time, cost-saving gesture...
....and frankly, the war incites our interest in history. We read history the way we read the newspaper...not to be informed...but only for prurient interest. The whole hullabaloo of it is as titillating as a strip show, and just as rewarding:
Hitler was sure he could conquer the Soviet Union quickly. He knew the Russians hated Stalin...and thought they would lay down their arms. "The whole structure is rotten," he remarked, "we have only to kick in the door and it will fall down."
The campaign went fairly well...until the Wehrmacht reached Stalingrad. (We bring this up only because Saddam has threatened to turn Baghdad into a Stalingrad on the Tigris.)
In 1941, the old Bolshevik brought in Marshal Zhukov to defend the city that bore his name. Taking charge, Zhukov immediately lined up the city's defending troops. But instead of giving them an inspiring speech, he decimated them. That is, he accused them of cowardice and shot every 10th man - just like the Romans used to do. This brutality seemed to have the desired effect; the Russians fought for every inch of ground in Stalingrad as if it were sacred...and gradually broke the ****'s war machine.
Now, reports from Baasra tell of Iraqi soldiers shot by their officers - just like the Russians once were. They also tell us that the Iraqis are not yet throwing rose petals in the coalition forces' path; instead, they may put up the same stubborn resistance to the invader that the Russians did. And the campaign of Blitzkrieg - oops, we mean "shock and awe" - seems on the verge of losing its awe factor altogether.
*** We are not saying that war is always a bad thing, at least for the spectators. For example, it is a marvelous distraction from life's real pains and sorrows! How much easier it is, for example, to explain to your wife the latest strategy for taking Baghdad...than it is to explain why you spent the night in a hotel room with your secretary, albeit as a war-time, cost-saving gesture...
....and frankly, the war incites our interest in history. We read history the way we read the newspaper...not to be informed...but only for prurient interest. The whole hullabaloo of it is as titillating as a strip show, and just as rewarding:
Hitler was sure he could conquer the Soviet Union quickly. He knew the Russians hated Stalin...and thought they would lay down their arms. "The whole structure is rotten," he remarked, "we have only to kick in the door and it will fall down."
The campaign went fairly well...until the Wehrmacht reached Stalingrad. (We bring this up only because Saddam has threatened to turn Baghdad into a Stalingrad on the Tigris.)
In 1941, the old Bolshevik brought in Marshal Zhukov to defend the city that bore his name. Taking charge, Zhukov immediately lined up the city's defending troops. But instead of giving them an inspiring speech, he decimated them. That is, he accused them of cowardice and shot every 10th man - just like the Romans used to do. This brutality seemed to have the desired effect; the Russians fought for every inch of ground in Stalingrad as if it were sacred...and gradually broke the ****'s war machine.
Now, reports from Baasra tell of Iraqi soldiers shot by their officers - just like the Russians once were. They also tell us that the Iraqis are not yet throwing rose petals in the coalition forces' path; instead, they may put up the same stubborn resistance to the invader that the Russians did. And the campaign of Blitzkrieg - oops, we mean "shock and awe" - seems on the verge of losing its awe factor altogether.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
From: Houston and Lil ol' England
Well, the Iraqi's ARE putting up a fight.
Regardless of how much they hate Saddam, they are fighting for pride.
Didn't Robert Macnamara (?) say about the Vietnam war, "We were not fighting communism, we were fighting nationalism"
I think it's time for the gloves to come off. Like the man said, "You are either for us or against us"
Now, we can fanny around over there as much as you like or get the job done.
I'm pretty sure that they will be changing sides quicker than the French in WW2 once a bit more progress has been made but surely the time has come to get serious.
How many more pictures do we need to see of our POW's being executed before we get serious and win this thing.
BREAK OUT THE MOAB
Regardless of how much they hate Saddam, they are fighting for pride.
Didn't Robert Macnamara (?) say about the Vietnam war, "We were not fighting communism, we were fighting nationalism"
I think it's time for the gloves to come off. Like the man said, "You are either for us or against us"
Now, we can fanny around over there as much as you like or get the job done.
I'm pretty sure that they will be changing sides quicker than the French in WW2 once a bit more progress has been made but surely the time has come to get serious.
How many more pictures do we need to see of our POW's being executed before we get serious and win this thing.
BREAK OUT THE MOAB
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,803
Likes: 1
From: North Canton, Ohio
"Things" don't change. People change, time changes, methods change. But I fail to see how our current involvement in Iraq has
differed from Viet Nam.
Having experienced Viet Nam personally ( 4 tours, yes in combat)
from 69 through 73 , I see the same mistakes occuring.
We have to deal with "All" confrontations we encounter. To He!! with marching into Baghdad. Lets mop up our entire route into that cess pool. You can "not" overlook any possible combatants as you march along with tunnel vision.
If we are going to rid them of the tyranny, then lets take "ALL" of his defenders with him.
And to those that say they are cheating by dressing in civilian clothes, pretending to surrender, then firing on our troops,
"WAKE THE ***** UP PEOPLE, THIS IS WAR!!!" A good warrior will go to any extreme to survive, and win.
I don't want this to turn into another Viet Nam. Call and get permission before returning fire, target only those clearly in the fighting force, and on and on and on.
Remember Lt. Calley? Took his platoon into a village filled with what appeared to be inocent civilians, and as they were moving out were fired upon from with-in, by those innocent villagers.
I don't blame his call, and if you haven't been there, don't bother
trying to comprehend it. We need to get down to business and complete the job we have talked about before going in.
In Viet Nam, we never lost a major battle, but simply walked away from it all, after losing 55,000 of my brothers and sisters.
The majority of the troops we have there are ready to do whatever it takes to complete our original mission. Lets not deprive them of their mission.
Marc
differed from Viet Nam.
Having experienced Viet Nam personally ( 4 tours, yes in combat)
from 69 through 73 , I see the same mistakes occuring.
We have to deal with "All" confrontations we encounter. To He!! with marching into Baghdad. Lets mop up our entire route into that cess pool. You can "not" overlook any possible combatants as you march along with tunnel vision.
If we are going to rid them of the tyranny, then lets take "ALL" of his defenders with him.
And to those that say they are cheating by dressing in civilian clothes, pretending to surrender, then firing on our troops,
"WAKE THE ***** UP PEOPLE, THIS IS WAR!!!" A good warrior will go to any extreme to survive, and win.
I don't want this to turn into another Viet Nam. Call and get permission before returning fire, target only those clearly in the fighting force, and on and on and on.
Remember Lt. Calley? Took his platoon into a village filled with what appeared to be inocent civilians, and as they were moving out were fired upon from with-in, by those innocent villagers.
I don't blame his call, and if you haven't been there, don't bother
trying to comprehend it. We need to get down to business and complete the job we have talked about before going in.
In Viet Nam, we never lost a major battle, but simply walked away from it all, after losing 55,000 of my brothers and sisters.
The majority of the troops we have there are ready to do whatever it takes to complete our original mission. Lets not deprive them of their mission.
Marc
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 705
Likes: 42
Bravo Marc, I'm 99.9% in favor of what you say! You sound like a guy that has been thinking about this for a long time.
By the way, that other .01% is my reservations about anyone that would sign up for FOUR, 4, IV, (now let me get that straight, Quatro, you got to hollar "short" four different times, and lied about three of them) tours in Nam. I did one with the 9th Division, more, let me repeat so as nobody is confused, MORE than enough for me thank you. I kneel in your presence...
By the way, that other .01% is my reservations about anyone that would sign up for FOUR, 4, IV, (now let me get that straight, Quatro, you got to hollar "short" four different times, and lied about three of them) tours in Nam. I did one with the 9th Division, more, let me repeat so as nobody is confused, MORE than enough for me thank you. I kneel in your presence...