Ending the last few major wars

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
bradly1101

bradly1101

Diamond Member
May 5, 2013
4,689
294
126
www.bradlygsmith.org
I'm talking about Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

We took a similar tack with all of them; we kind of backed out. We mostly didn't have fixed, uniformed forces to fight. The enemy 'blended in'. It appears this type of war is un-winnable. The people we fought just seemed to grow. The war itself fomented a greater response. Just look at the anti-West sentiment in many areas now.

Vietnam and Iraq were sparked by intelligence that turned out to be wrong. (Gulf of Tonkin, WMD). Maybe Karma is real.

Considering how the last two ended and will end amid violence and internal strife, did we win anything? Was more lost than was won? Do we need to rethink war and its support system? Does this activity reduce our prestige in the world?
 
Matt1970

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
There isn't an army in the world we can't defeat decisively if they show up on the battle field. If they hide in churches, schools and civilian homes, without leveling the towns it's not worth it.
 
Thebobo

Thebobo

Lifer
Jun 19, 2006
18,574
7,672
136
Best is not get on a war.

Vietnam and Iraq were totally unnecessary as we all know.

And the war on Iraq screwed over resources for the war in Afghanistan.
 
HTFOff

HTFOff

Golden Member
Oct 3, 2013
1,292
56
91
bradly1101 said:
I'm talking about Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

We took a similar tack with all of them; we kind of backed out. We mostly didn't have fixed, uniformed forces to fight. The enemy 'blended in'. It appears this type of war is un-winnable. The people we fought just seemed to grow. The war itself fomented a greater response. Just look at the anti-West sentiment in many areas now.

Vietnam and Iraq were sparked by intelligence that turned out to be wrong. (Gulf of Tonkin, WMD). Maybe Karma is real.

Considering how the last two ended and will end amid violence and internal strife, did we win anything? Was more lost than was won? Do we need to rethink war and its support system? Does this activity reduce our prestige in the world?
Click to expand...

Keep in mind these were not conventional wars where our goal was to commandeer and then subsequently annex the country. Laying waste to major towns and municipalities and wiping out infrastructure to make life miserable. Nor where there many times where we were overwhelmed by force.

the korean war...now theres a war where we took a MAJOR beating before turning the tables.
 
Agent11

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
Korea really should have turned into WWIII. If not for the restraint shown by the US and Russians it would have been.
 
A

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
i dont think the Republic will be around 21 years from today... it is scary but that is what happens with the State. confederations seldom wage offensive wars and they defend themselves well so obviously the solution is anarcho-confederalism.

anarcho-confederalism is about setting a good example but the State tries to conquer the world.
 
U

unokitty

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2012
3,346
1
0
bradly1101 said:
I'm talking about Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

We took a similar tack with all of them; we kind of backed out.
Click to expand...

800px-Saigon-hubert-van-es.jpg


Kind of backed out?

You may find some declassified NSA documents relevant. These were declassified 40 years after the war. (pdf format)

NSA Declassification

It turns out that in order to get Congressional Approval of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, President Johnson disregarded 90% of the intelligence and only revealed to Congress the 10% that fit his desire to go to war.

In effect Johnson told Congress about what he called a 4 August attack on US Navy ships in International Waters. In fact, there was no 4 August attack. The NSA knew it. And the US Navy, that had had planes above the ships that thought they were under attack, knew it as well. See also:

The Truth about Tokin

In contrast to what the President told Congress and the American People, the truth was as Johnson put it: "In 1965, President Johnson commented privately: "For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there."

Loss of prestige or loss of honesty?

Besides War is a Racket.

Uno
Sentry Dog Handler
US Army 69-71
 
Last edited:
G

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Think we would learn that if people desire freedom and a western style democracy. They will fight for it. We cant build it for them.

But I suspect we will continue to get into conflicts like this to keep our military industrial complex fill with profits. If we didn't have such a backlash last Summer about Syria. I bet we would have had boots on the ground in some safe zone within a foreign country.
 
A

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
Genx87 said:
Think we would learn that if people desire freedom and a western style democracy. They will fight for it. We cant build it for them. But I suspect we will continue to get into conflicts like this to keep our military industrial complex fill with profits. If we didn't have such a backlash last Summer about Syria. I bet we would have had boots on the ground in some safe zone within a foreign country.
Click to expand...
:thumbsup:

and i am sure you know that the same applies to us as well.

but for those who dont realize it... when we are attacked by al-qaida again, then it will be because of the American State's foreign policy. the only way people can and will defend their own liberty is if they do it on their own in their own homeland for themself and theirself includes who and what is important to them; fighting for a faux national interest is not motivating to those who want their liberty and the State will make sure that people never defend their liberty but that they will be fighting for a faux national interest... concscription, ranking, and/or pay do not defend liberty, they only take it away.
 
Last edited:
Texashiker

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
bradly1101 said:
Considering how the last two ended and will end amid violence and internal strife, did we win anything?
Click to expand...

There is nothing to win.

People in the middle east have been killing each other for thousands of years. You really think we can do something about that?

If you want to ensure there are no future attacks on the United States, pull our people out of the middle east. Not just the military, but also foreign workers.

There should be no infidels in muslim controlled nations.
 
Orignal Earl

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Matt1970 said:
There isn't an army in the world we can't defeat decisively if they show up on the battle field. If they hide in churches, schools and civilian homes, without leveling the towns it's not worth it.
Click to expand...

Lol
If the US could make it's enemies fight wars like they did hundreds of years ago, but the US could use all it's modern weapons... The US could beat anyone.
I have to wonder though, if other countries got to make up crazy things, if they would be unbeatable too?
 
Orignal Earl

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Texashiker said:
There is nothing to win.

People in the middle east have been killing each other for thousands of years. You really think we can do something about that?

If you want to ensure there are no future attacks on the United States, pull our people out of the middle east. Not just the military, but also foreign workers.

There should be no infidels in muslim controlled nations.
Click to expand...

Iif you didn't have the oil to drive your war machine, your machines really have no use
 
werepossum

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Not sure you can really compare those wars. In Vietnam we did have a uniformed foe, the NVA, which took over the entire war after the failed Tet '68 offensive which destroyed the VC's large unit capability. We left because we got beat, period. In Iraq we also had a uniformed foe, the Iraqi army, and only later had a non-uniformed insurgent force to fight. We left because we had won and the new government was ready for us to leave, period.

Afghanistan is a much different war, but it was fought largely by Afghanistan fighters with US and coalition assistance. Our large presence is more nation building than war, although as always it's difficult for the man on the ground to tell the difference. Most of us are convinced that the Afghanistan war will have been successful (toppling the Taliban and depriving al Qaeda of its safe haven) which the nation building will be a miserable failure, but none of us really know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom