Question on military morale in Iraq.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Ilmater
CkG, you shouldn't feel the need to justify yourself if someone should give you BS about, "Do you serve?" I feel I have every right to say everything you said (and I completely agree with you) and I've never signed up for military service. You know why? Because I don't want that life. I'm not willing to take a check and be obligated to serve. However, those that do had surely better be ready to serve when that call comes up. If you don't like it, you shouldn't have signed the paper.

As for this topic, I think that we should leave and let the people there rot. If they're going to shoot at us and blow us up, then fine. Screw 'em. Let them be taken over by an even more ruthless dictator. In fact, for those in the South that were rebelling and shooting at our men, I hope Saddam comes back into power and stops by for a visit. I wonder how long it'd take before they begged America to come back.

Thanks, but I'd wager a pretty hefty bet that you'd be in the minority here when it comes to looking for justifications;) I really don't like talking about getting screwed like I did because it just makes me upset, but it has some relevance to why I say what I say. I WANTED to join, and I probably would have been sent to Iraq. So basically I was willing to put my $ where my mouth is.

Hay- "Most were under the illusion when they signed on that if they fought it would be for defending the country and preserving American freedom. Instead, they got this. Their bad."

Umm.....It isn't the soldiers decision as far as "justification". They do what they are told to do, they knew that going in and were trained to do so. If I was that guy's commander(the one with the sign) - he'd have the proverbial latrene duty for quite some time. A "good" Soldier doesn't question his orders - he just does them to the best of his/her abilities. There is no check box for "I reserve the right to not serve if I don't feel like it" when you sign up ;)

CkG

Tell the Nuremburg judges.

Tell them what? That our soldiers don't gets to pick and choose orders?
Answer these: (Yes or No)
1. Is a soldier sworn to obey orders?
2. Is our current system a voluntary one?
3. Do they "let you out" if you can't hack BT?
4. Does Moonbeam need to get a grip on reality?

Hint: All 4 answers are the same ;)

CkG


 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
Truthfully y'all, if I were back over there again during this time of year, my morale wouldn't be at peak levels.

I don't think any reasonable person would blame you for your morale to be at peak efficiency either.

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Ilmater
CkG, you shouldn't feel the need to justify yourself if someone should give you BS about, "Do you serve?" I feel I have every right to say everything you said (and I completely agree with you) and I've never signed up for military service. You know why? Because I don't want that life. I'm not willing to take a check and be obligated to serve. However, those that do had surely better be ready to serve when that call comes up. If you don't like it, you shouldn't have signed the paper.

As for this topic, I think that we should leave and let the people there rot. If they're going to shoot at us and blow us up, then fine. Screw 'em. Let them be taken over by an even more ruthless dictator. In fact, for those in the South that were rebelling and shooting at our men, I hope Saddam comes back into power and stops by for a visit. I wonder how long it'd take before they begged America to come back.

Thanks, but I'd wager a pretty hefty bet that you'd be in the minority here when it comes to looking for justifications;) I really don't like talking about getting screwed like I did because it just makes me upset, but it has some relevance to why I say what I say. I WANTED to join, and I probably would have been sent to Iraq. So basically I was willing to put my $ where my mouth is.

Hay- "Most were under the illusion when they signed on that if they fought it would be for defending the country and preserving American freedom. Instead, they got this. Their bad."

Umm.....It isn't the soldiers decision as far as "justification". They do what they are told to do, they knew that going in and were trained to do so. If I was that guy's commander(the one with the sign) - he'd have the proverbial latrene duty for quite some time. A "good" Soldier doesn't question his orders - he just does them to the best of his/her abilities. There is no check box for "I reserve the right to not serve if I don't feel like it" when you sign up ;)

CkG

I understand a soldiers duty. I also understand the obligation of Command to look out for men and see they are not wasted. The C in C (President to you) has an obligation to them too. Responsibility is NOT a one way street. If you were in the service, and rose to the rank of command you would not be giving latrene duty to anyone for this. You would be destroying the morale vital for the long term sucess of the mission. If you were in Vietnam and pulled that crap, god help you, whatever your rank. A "good" soldier always questions his orders. He thinks about them. By your definition, there are no good soldiers, because they all ran out and got shot the first day. Tell me, did the people with the sign do their duty? Did they go? Yes to both. Are they happy? Hella no. As someone pointed out, soldiers grumble. Know what? Command lets them, because they sure as hell are grumbling too, although they don't say it in public. Far as following orders unquestioned- they had better not. They sure as hell better know when not to follow an order. People are NOT mindless machines, and "only following orders" did not hold up in Germany or in My Lai, no matter how rightously pissed Charlie Company was on 16 March, 1968.
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
JULY 1967 Cam Rahn Bay, Viet Nam - Day time temperature was 132 F.
Overnight low 105, Humidity was 100%, it was foggy. Don't bitch about hot.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
JULY 1967 Cam Rahn Bay, Viet Nam - Day time temperature was 132 F.
Overnight low 105, Humidity was 100%, it was foggy. Don't bitch about hot.

I hope you brought your camo parasol :D
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
JULY 1967 Cam Rahn Bay, Viet Nam - Day time temperature was 132 F.
Overnight low 105, Humidity was 100%, it was foggy. Don't bitch about hot.

I think your memory is foggy. :p

 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Ilmater
CkG, you shouldn't feel the need to justify yourself if someone should give you BS about, "Do you serve?" I feel I have every right to say everything you said (and I completely agree with you) and I've never signed up for military service. You know why? Because I don't want that life. I'm not willing to take a check and be obligated to serve. However, those that do had surely better be ready to serve when that call comes up. If you don't like it, you shouldn't have signed the paper.

As for this topic, I think that we should leave and let the people there rot. If they're going to shoot at us and blow us up, then fine. Screw 'em. Let them be taken over by an even more ruthless dictator. In fact, for those in the South that were rebelling and shooting at our men, I hope Saddam comes back into power and stops by for a visit. I wonder how long it'd take before they begged America to come back.

Thanks, but I'd wager a pretty hefty bet that you'd be in the minority here when it comes to looking for justifications;) I really don't like talking about getting screwed like I did because it just makes me upset, but it has some relevance to why I say what I say. I WANTED to join, and I probably would have been sent to Iraq. So basically I was willing to put my $ where my mouth is.

Hay- "Most were under the illusion when they signed on that if they fought it would be for defending the country and preserving American freedom. Instead, they got this. Their bad."

Umm.....It isn't the soldiers decision as far as "justification". They do what they are told to do, they knew that going in and were trained to do so. If I was that guy's commander(the one with the sign) - he'd have the proverbial latrene duty for quite some time. A "good" Soldier doesn't question his orders - he just does them to the best of his/her abilities. There is no check box for "I reserve the right to not serve if I don't feel like it" when you sign up ;)

CkG

I understand a soldiers duty. I also understand the obligation of Command to look out for men and see they are not wasted. The C in C (President to you) has an obligation to them too. Responsibility is NOT a one way street. If you were in the service, and rose to the rank of command you would not be giving latrene duty to anyone for this. You would be destroying the morale vital for the long term sucess of the mission. If you were in Vietnam and pulled that crap, god help you, whatever your rank. A "good" soldier always questions his orders. He thinks about them. By your definition, there are no good soldiers, because they all ran out and got shot the first day. Tell me, did the people with the sign do their duty? Did they go? Yes to both. Are they happy? Hella no. As someone pointed out, soldiers grumble. Know what? Command lets them, because they sure as hell are grumbling too, although they don't say it in public. Far as following orders unquestioned- they had better not. They sure as hell better know when not to follow an order. People are NOT mindless machines, and "only following orders" did not hold up in Germany or in My Lai, no matter how rightously pissed Charlie Company was on 16 March, 1968.

BS - Soldiers don't have time to question orders, but that doesn't mean they are mindless drones(which it seems you think I'm saying)
rolleye.gif
. Obviously there is an obligation by those giving the orders to give "good" orders. That is where accountability comes in. Soldiers only have the responsibily their orders dictate. I had a discussion with a freind who is basically a Liberal this past weekend about this sort of subject. Isn't there some deal with the UN right now with regards to the right to prosecute American soldiers for war crimes if under the control of the UN? Anyway -the discussion was about that and the question of who is responsible for a soldiers actions. We both concluded that the ultimate "responsibility" was with the person who pulls the trigger but not the bulk of the "blame" if he/she was following orders. Whoever issues the orders is mostly responsible for the consequences of those orders if followed. This means that a soldier must have a lot of faith in his commander and the commander must have alot of faith in the soldier.

Back on topic - I understand how morale could be waning but displays like that sign were downright disgusting. If you didn't want to serve- then don't sign up to potentially put yourself in a situation like this.

CkG
 

Zipp

Senior member
Apr 7, 2001
791
0
0
Of course there will be some morale problems,these soldiers are thousands of miles away from there loved ones under some rough conditions. Mutiny or revolt,I just can't beleive that.

...And if Gore was the president right now under the same circumstances,all the Bush haters would be saying he did the right thing reguarding the war for our security and we have to be there for the Iraqi's cause we liberals care so much about people here and all around the world. You would probably say that we are just hitting some rough spots but we have to continue keep at it and do the right thing.

And I would agree with you too....No matter who was the president...We are doing the right thing in my opinion.

Many of you just seem to have such a hatred for this current administration no matter what they do. It often seems that sometimes you hope for the worst to happen just so you can rip into them. You always dwell on all the negatives and brush off when any positive news is reported....Which is rare cause that doesn't sell newspapers.

No matter what you think,The Iraqi's are now and will always be better off without Saddam around and we are to. Of course it's going to take some time to get this mess straightened out and yes we are hitting some rough spots and will continue to but eventually I feel we will prevail.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
You shouldn't ask soldiers to die if you fear to say the reason why. You must never be so elitest ly arrogant as to take the nation down a path it would not itself willingly go. Bush is afraid of truth, afraid of democracy, afraid of the judgment of the masses. That is why he hears the voice of God.


Who hears the voice of God?... Bush...? Are you suggesting God told Bush to do something?
 

mastertech01

Moderator Emeritus Elite Member
Nov 13, 1999
11,875
282
126
The soldiers in Iraq have it 10X better than the soldiers in Vietnam had it 4 months into the operation, and possibly better than they ever had it. The problem is the soldiers are not nearly as disciplined as they were way back then and feel compelled to whine when things dont go just right.

You think these guys are in danger? Put a huge jungle around them and stoke the heat up, add all the great jungle beasts, bugs, rats and insects, and take away 80 percent of their current technology.... THATS DANGER! God bless their souls, but they have it a HELL of lot better than our boys in Vietnam could have dreamed of... IMHO.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: mastertech01
The soldiers in Iraq have it 10X better than the soldiers in Vietnam had it 4 months into the operation, and possibly better than they ever had it. The problem is the soldiers are not nearly as disciplined as they were way back then and feel compelled to whine when things dont go just right.

You think these guys are in danger? Put a huge jungle around them and stoke the heat up, add all the great jungle beasts, bugs, rats and insects, and take away 80 percent of their current technology.... THATS DANGER! God bless their souls, but they have it a HELL of lot better than our boys in Vietnam could have dreamed of... IMHO.

Snakes and lots more of them gorilla folks not to mention the NVA... who were still armed and angry, I'm told..

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Ilmater
CkG, you shouldn't feel the need to justify yourself if someone should give you BS about, "Do you serve?" I feel I have every right to say everything you said (and I completely agree with you) and I've never signed up for military service. You know why? Because I don't want that life. I'm not willing to take a check and be obligated to serve. However, those that do had surely better be ready to serve when that call comes up. If you don't like it, you shouldn't have signed the paper.

As for this topic, I think that we should leave and let the people there rot. If they're going to shoot at us and blow us up, then fine. Screw 'em. Let them be taken over by an even more ruthless dictator. In fact, for those in the South that were rebelling and shooting at our men, I hope Saddam comes back into power and stops by for a visit. I wonder how long it'd take before they begged America to come back.

Thanks, but I'd wager a pretty hefty bet that you'd be in the minority here when it comes to looking for justifications;) I really don't like talking about getting screwed like I did because it just makes me upset, but it has some relevance to why I say what I say. I WANTED to join, and I probably would have been sent to Iraq. So basically I was willing to put my $ where my mouth is.

Hay- "Most were under the illusion when they signed on that if they fought it would be for defending the country and preserving American freedom. Instead, they got this. Their bad."

Umm.....It isn't the soldiers decision as far as "justification". They do what they are told to do, they knew that going in and were trained to do so. If I was that guy's commander(the one with the sign) - he'd have the proverbial latrene duty for quite some time. A "good" Soldier doesn't question his orders - he just does them to the best of his/her abilities. There is no check box for "I reserve the right to not serve if I don't feel like it" when you sign up ;)

CkG

I understand a soldiers duty. I also understand the obligation of Command to look out for men and see they are not wasted. The C in C (President to you) has an obligation to them too. Responsibility is NOT a one way street. If you were in the service, and rose to the rank of command you would not be giving latrene duty to anyone for this. You would be destroying the morale vital for the long term sucess of the mission. If you were in Vietnam and pulled that crap, god help you, whatever your rank. A "good" soldier always questions his orders. He thinks about them. By your definition, there are no good soldiers, because they all ran out and got shot the first day. Tell me, did the people with the sign do their duty? Did they go? Yes to both. Are they happy? Hella no. As someone pointed out, soldiers grumble. Know what? Command lets them, because they sure as hell are grumbling too, although they don't say it in public. Far as following orders unquestioned- they had better not. They sure as hell better know when not to follow an order. People are NOT mindless machines, and "only following orders" did not hold up in Germany or in My Lai, no matter how rightously pissed Charlie Company was on 16 March, 1968.

BS - Soldiers don't have time to question orders, but that doesn't mean they are mindless drones(which it seems you think I'm saying)
rolleye.gif
. Obviously there is an obligation by those giving the orders to give "good" orders. That is where accountability comes in. Soldiers only have the responsibily their orders dictate. I had a discussion with a freind who is basically a Liberal this past weekend about this sort of subject. Isn't there some deal with the UN right now with regards to the right to prosecute American soldiers for war crimes if under the control of the UN? Anyway -the discussion was about that and the question of who is responsible for a soldiers actions. We both concluded that the ultimate "responsibility" was with the person who pulls the trigger but not the bulk of the "blame" if he/she was following orders. Whoever issues the orders is mostly responsible for the consequences of those orders if followed. This means that a soldier must have a lot of faith in his commander and the commander must have alot of faith in the soldier.

Back on topic - I understand how morale could be waning but displays like that sign were downright disgusting. If you didn't want to serve- then don't sign up to potentially put yourself in a situation like this.

CkG

Forgive me, it is plain you know everything. Sometime I will tell you about a base commander in Thule who spoke like you, and found out the hard way about how things really are. His tenure there was amazingly short.
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Originally posted by: mastertech01
The soldiers in Iraq have it 10X better than the soldiers in Vietnam had it 4 months into the operation, and possibly better than they ever had it. The problem is the soldiers are not nearly as disciplined as they were way back then and feel compelled to whine when things dont go just right.

You think these guys are in danger? Put a huge jungle around them and stoke the heat up, add all the great jungle beasts, bugs, rats and insects, and take away 80 percent of their current technology.... THATS DANGER! God bless their souls, but they have it a HELL of lot better than our boys in Vietnam could have dreamed of... IMHO.

The soldiers in Iraq are not nearly as disciplined as the soldiers in Vietnam.....hmmmmmm. WRONG!!!!!!! Vietnam had the least disciplined, least motivated, and least professional American military force since the Spanish American war. Our forces now are far far superior in every way to those deployed during Vietnam.
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,709
8
81
Originally posted by: mastertech01
The soldiers in Iraq have it 10X better than the soldiers in Vietnam had it 4 months into the operation, and possibly better than they ever had it. The problem is the soldiers are not nearly as disciplined as they were way back then and feel compelled to whine when things dont go just right.

You think these guys are in danger? Put a huge jungle around them and stoke the heat up, add all the great jungle beasts, bugs, rats and insects, and take away 80 percent of their current technology.... THATS DANGER! God bless their souls, but they have it a HELL of lot better than our boys in Vietnam could have dreamed of... IMHO.


Stoke the heat up? Uhh last time I checked Iraq gets alot hotter than Vietnam, plus there is no natural tree canopy to shade you. Another thing is the sand absorbs the ehat and continues to radiate it up providing you with an oven effect. Furthermore, the soldiers in Iraq have to wear body armor and will occassionally have biochemical scares where they have to don full protection chemical suits. Needless to say, those things dont come with AC. Couple that with frequent dust storms, depleted uranium and low supplies of water and you got something close to hell on earth
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Iraq is no picnic as it seems implied, however VN was much, much worse. We have an objective measure too. Count the body bags in each conflict.
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,709
8
81
Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Iraq is no picnic as it seems implied, however VN was much, much worse. We have an objective measure too. Count the body bags in each conflict.

Ok but you gotta remember a few things... Vietnam war lasted 9 years, and approximately 2.5 million troops served in Vietnam during that whole time (not all at ocne obviously). The peak was 550,000 soldiers in Vietnam at one given time. Now compare that to how many troops we keep in Iraq and how long the war has lasted. I'm not saying I believe it will be as bad as Vietnam however, because the American public is a little smarter now and is putting up some pretty good resistance already. We won't let it last 9 years.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
We won't let it last 9 years.


--------------------------------


I sincerely hope you are right, but here is a quote from Winston Churchill I posted before the war-

"Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events."


I posted this in a Feb. thread about alternatives to war. Too bad the administration was in such a hurry to discard options. Certainly the invasion went much better than it was believed, especially in Baghdad, but the war is not over, as has been said elsewhere.

Let's really hope we can get out and it not turn worse first.

 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: mastertech01
The soldiers in Iraq have it 10X better than the soldiers in Vietnam had it 4 months into the operation, and possibly better than they ever had it. The problem is the soldiers are not nearly as disciplined as they were way back then and feel compelled to whine when things dont go just right.

You think these guys are in danger? Put a huge jungle around them and stoke the heat up, add all the great jungle beasts, bugs, rats and insects, and take away 80 percent of their current technology.... THATS DANGER! God bless their souls, but they have it a HELL of lot better than our boys in Vietnam could have dreamed of... IMHO.


Stoke the heat up? Uhh last time I checked Iraq gets alot hotter than Vietnam, plus there is no natural tree canopy to shade you. Another thing is the sand absorbs the ehat and continues to radiate it up providing you with an oven effect. Furthermore, the soldiers in Iraq have to wear body armor and will occassionally have biochemical scares where they have to don full protection chemical suits. Needless to say, those things dont come with AC. Couple that with frequent dust storms, depleted uranium and low supplies of water and you got something close to hell on earth

Yeah .... heck in VN they even had to use artificial means to make it bad... Agent Orange, Malaria, Viet Cong and if you really look at it correctly... we lost 58,000 in VN thats only 5800 a year... or 111 a week... every week.. and the rain... that was the best ... when the rain came and cooled the place down... no rain like that in Iraq... ... my war's better than your war...
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,709
8
81
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: mastertech01
The soldiers in Iraq have it 10X better than the soldiers in Vietnam had it 4 months into the operation, and possibly better than they ever had it. The problem is the soldiers are not nearly as disciplined as they were way back then and feel compelled to whine when things dont go just right.

You think these guys are in danger? Put a huge jungle around them and stoke the heat up, add all the great jungle beasts, bugs, rats and insects, and take away 80 percent of their current technology.... THATS DANGER! God bless their souls, but they have it a HELL of lot better than our boys in Vietnam could have dreamed of... IMHO.


Stoke the heat up? Uhh last time I checked Iraq gets alot hotter than Vietnam, plus there is no natural tree canopy to shade you. Another thing is the sand absorbs the ehat and continues to radiate it up providing you with an oven effect. Furthermore, the soldiers in Iraq have to wear body armor and will occassionally have biochemical scares where they have to don full protection chemical suits. Needless to say, those things dont come with AC. Couple that with frequent dust storms, depleted uranium and low supplies of water and you got something close to hell on earth

Yeah .... heck in VN they even had to use artificial means to make it bad... Agent Orange, Malaria, Viet Cong and if you really look at it correctly... we lost 58,000 in VN thats only 5800 a year... or 111 a week... every week.. and the rain... that was the best ... when the rain came and cooled the place down... no rain like that in Iraq... ... my war's better than your war...

I see your point and I agree. War is hell... especially when you don't know why you're there.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,425
6,086
126
The assumptions people make about the value and meaning of other people's lives is really just amazing.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: mastertech01
The soldiers in Iraq have it 10X better than the soldiers in Vietnam had it 4 months into the operation, and possibly better than they ever had it. The problem is the soldiers are not nearly as disciplined as they were way back then and feel compelled to whine when things dont go just right.

You think these guys are in danger? Put a huge jungle around them and stoke the heat up, add all the great jungle beasts, bugs, rats and insects, and take away 80 percent of their current technology.... THATS DANGER! God bless their souls, but they have it a HELL of lot better than our boys in Vietnam could have dreamed of... IMHO.


Stoke the heat up? Uhh last time I checked Iraq gets alot hotter than Vietnam, plus there is no natural tree canopy to shade you. Another thing is the sand absorbs the ehat and continues to radiate it up providing you with an oven effect. Furthermore, the soldiers in Iraq have to wear body armor and will occassionally have biochemical scares where they have to don full protection chemical suits. Needless to say, those things dont come with AC. Couple that with frequent dust storms, depleted uranium and low supplies of water and you got something close to hell on earth

Yeah .... heck in VN they even had to use artificial means to make it bad... Agent Orange, Malaria, Viet Cong and if you really look at it correctly... we lost 58,000 in VN thats only 5800 a year... or 111 a week... every week.. and the rain... that was the best ... when the rain came and cooled the place down... no rain like that in Iraq... ... my war's better than your war...

I see your point and I agree. War is hell... especially when you don't know why you're there.

I'd probably do much to defend my or your right to be free... "here"... not too sure anymore ... if "there" holds the same allure.
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
There are some things being said that kinda are pissin' me off in the Nam Vs. Iraq comparison:

1) These 'Incidents' span a time difference of 30 to 38 years, the individual training of the troops
then - as is now, is the best that technology of the time allows.
2) There was a draft then, there is not now.
3) Then there were 'Dogers', usually well off college kids that could 'buy0out' like Bush did by
going FANG, then ducking out on service and having records greased, or those who weren't
well enough off to have daddy buy a polititian - they visited Canada, or whatever.
4) Technology today has evolved, equipment now with lessons learned - especially from 'Nam
is more accurate, and we are quicker to use it offensively. Remember - in 'Nam a lot of the time
we couldn't launch an offensive because of 'Politics', and sometimes couldn't shoot back.
5) The polititians are using a different method of micro-managing this time, all glory - no guts.
6) Disease - 'Nam had a Malaria infection rate of over 10%, in the Central Highlands, An Khe
and Pleiku in particullar at any given time 10% to 15% of the troops were down with Malaria,
and that was in spite of the Daily and Weekly orange and white pills.
7) Tenperature - Hot is hot, whether there is humidity or not, shade or not. A jungle canopy
for shade does not neccessarily cool things off - hot and dry direct sun exposure, where you can
find shade from a shed or vehicle is cooler than being in a steamy rain and mist environment.
8) Wet & damp - constant exposure to dampness at the temperature in the jungles makes some
forms of life extremely active - molds, green and blue hairy molds that can grow 2" long on your
boots overnight while you sleep. Atheletes foot, which in constant dampness inside boots for
days on end turn into immersion foot - where the shin comes off with the socks when the boots
are taken off.
9) Body Armor - Boy, what we would have given for the new tech ceramics that can stop bullets !
The old heavy flack jackets didn't do that good a job of stopping anything that had either velocity or mass.
10) MRE's - Meals Refused by Etheopia, they are better than the Alpo based C-Rats, and the C-Rats
were a welcome treat - except for the Lima Beans and Ham, truely a death sentance.
11) Corrupt Governments - in 'Nam the corrupt government we were propping up was over there,
in Iraq the corrupt government is the Bush Administration which is out-lying the Johnson one times 10.
12) Whole lots more - I'll add things as the paranoids point them out.

 

cpumaster

Senior member
Dec 10, 2000
708
0
0
we can say what we want while ignoring the fact that our soldiers are pissed off by the leaders incompetent and false promise (quick war, less than 6 months job), when mutiny happened, I'll support the soldiers with my gun and have them bring back home...
CaD, you can then talk to them and their guns, convince them to go back to Iraq to serve our country...
 

nallur

Senior member
Nov 8, 2000
209
0
0
From todays London Times:


'This is what the Iraqis think of us,' said the captain, cradling a charred helmet
By Daniel McGrory


A drive-by rocket attack is the latest tactic to be used against the Americans in Baghdad
IN A most audacious attack on American troops, an Iraqi fired a rocket-propelled grenade from the sunroof of a Chevrolet car at a passing patrol yesterday, incinerating one of the army vehicles and seriously wounding four of those travelling in the convoy.

Until now, the 22 Americans killed since President Bush declared the war over on May Day had mainly been victims of snipers or crude booby-trap bombs.

However, yesterday?s attack in northern Baghdad was reckless and inventive, and is an alarming demonstration of how organised and determined the Iraqi resistance is becoming.

Witnesses spoke of seeing two men appear through the sunroof of the white saloon with blacked-out windows and take aim with the shoulder-held rocket, launching it at the convoy from no more than 60ft away.

Sifting through what little remained of the burnt Humvee, a young infantry captain did not even try to hide his disgust as he picked up the charred helmet belonging to one of his comrades who had been inside the vehicle.

?This is what the Iraqis think of us,? the captain said, stamping out the last of the fires after the daylight attack at a busy crossroads. The Americans in the second Humvee had dived for cover, fearing that they too would be ambushed.

Within minutes, armoured reinforcements had sealed off the road and did what they could for the injured, before making a swift retreat and leaving lumps of wreckage at the mercy of gleeful trophy hunters.

What is worrying is that in suburbs such as al-Mustansiriya, a moderate, middle class enclave of academics and businessmen, there was little apparent sympathy for the victims.

Mohammed Alawi, 19, who claimed to have seen the attack, said: ?What do the Americans expect after what they have done to us? There will be more attacks like this until they leave.?

As the American rescue force accelerated away, the looters moved in, stealing metal parts of the Humvee?s chassis and half a camouflaged flak jacket that was badly burnt.

Two teenagers encouraged television crews to film a grotesque dummy that they made from a charred Kevlar helmet, the remains of a soldier?s body armour and a long blonde wig they fashioned from the stuffing ripped from one of the Humvee?s seats.

Jabar Khadoum, a 49-year-old father of five who witnessed the attack, said: ?I froze as I watched the Humvee arc into the air and crash back down on to the road.? His body was shaking with shock.

Mr Khadoum said he tried to help one of the Americans who ran at him, half his upper body on fire. ?It was hopeless,? he said. ?Soon his face was eaten by the flames.?

Less than 24 hours after Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, insisted that Iraq was not a new Vietnam, a day of spiralling violence saw at least four serious armed assaults on US patrols.

Two US soldiers were wounded in a rocket attack on their convoy near Baghdad airport and other American soldiers were said to have been injured in a shooting at Samarra.

Ten Iraqis were killed in an explosion inside a mosque in the troubled town of Fallujah, which local people blamed on a US airstrike. The Americans said it was caused by terrorists who blew themselves up in an illegal bomb factory.

Later in Fallujah thousands of Iraqis chanted anti-American slogans as they buried victims of the blast, including the imam, Sheikh Laith Khalil.

The US military, which has about 156,000 soldiers in Iraq, has carried out several operations to stamp out attacks. The latest, Operation Desert Sidewinder, began on Sunday with infantry backed by aircraft and armoured vehicles.

Rival Iraqi groups are also increasingly turning on each other, with the leader of Saddam Hussein?s tribe assassinated yesterday as he was driving through Tikrit, which still flaunts its support for the old regime.

An American military spokesman struggled yesterday to suggest that his troops were still in full control, using phrases such as ?isolated incidents? and ?seeing progress?, though on every street corner fear could clearly be seen in the eyes of many young Americans who had recently arrived, thinking the war was over.

One 23-year-old private, sent to root out gunmen who were said to have stormed a Baghdad hospital, said: ?I thought we were peacekeepers, but there isn?t any peace to keep.?
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Bush says Let's have a Cage Match

Yeah, right - like he and his buddies will be there to take part and help fight.
This is a blatent, open challenge to keep hitting us, harder and kill more of our troops.
Irresponsible idoit that has no sense of responsibility for what he put them into.

The way that this Administration is making one stupid mistake after the other in foriegn policy
shows the shallowness of the thinking, and narrow mindset of the LACK of leadership.
Oh, that's right - he talks to God, so he just does what the voices in his head tell him to do.