4 ms·

Considering the US hasn't won a single war against technologically and numerically inferior opponents since the turn of the century, I think we have even more f

Considering the US hasn't won a single war against technologically and numerically inferior opponents since the turn of the century, I think we have even more fundamental problems than just a rusty war machine dependent on Chinese blue jeans. Now granted I might be unfair to the US here; the Middle East is known as the graveyard of empires for a reason.

bluGill 2y ago
The US clearly choose to lose all wars lost though. The military was doing just fine, but the people back home got sick of the efforts.
- vundercind 2y ago
  1) That’s still losing. 2) I’m not sure the military was doing just fine in all of those. Vietnam comes to mind, but also Afghanistan—reading the Afghanistan papers, the brass seems to have given up on any kind of actual goals or accountability in favor of a system that let them continually cycle officers through and let them claim they succeeded at their mission (funny, they all keep achieving their mission, but facts on the ground remain exactly the same or worse!), for years and years. Fighting fitness may have been OK throughout, but military leadership in the military itself was absolutely not committed to any kind of winnable mission, let alone to actually winning it. That may have been driven (I’m sure it was) largely by civilian leadership, but the entire upper echelon of military leadership betrayed their commands and the soldiers counting on them, to keep up a convenient (to their careers, and a bunch of junior and mid-tier officers who got a big boost to their careers…) political fiction at the cost of any hope of something resembling actual success, and all it took was shitting all over their soldiers and the trust of the American people. I bet Iraq (part 2) was similar. I have some grave concerns about the state of our more-politicized-and-static professional officer corps since roughly Vietnam.
  - ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
    I'm with you 100% on point #2. Disagree on point #1. We occupied Afghanistan for 20 years. We operated with nearly absolute impunity in all population centers, through all trade routes, and all agricultural areas. Our casualties were a minuscule amount our total forces. Our culture completely transformed theirs (in a way that old school hardliners lament publicly). We killed a huge number of Taliban (and foreign fighters). Clausewitz says that "the political object is the goal, war is the means of reaching it." Can you tell articulate what the political goal of the war was? Thinking back to 2001 (I was in middle school), the goal was retribution. I believe the military achieved that in spades. Yes, in the end Afghanistan did not turn into a US vassal state or a US colony. But was that the goal?
    - Dalewyn 2y ago
      >Can you tell articulate what the political goal of the war was? The goal was to eradicate the Taliban, remove terroristic sentiments, rebuild Afghanistan, bring the country to 21st century democratic standards, and prevent future 9/11s. Did we achieve it? Hell no. Verdict: We lost. Over 20 years of bloodshed and misery on both sides for fucking nothing. We failed on every single fucking count. Every. Single. Count.
      - ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
        The discussion was more about if the military fumbled Afghanistan or if it was a political failure. You haven't shown a military failure. I also disagree with that list of objectives and their current status. Let's go through 1 by 1: +Eradicate Taliban. Complete. This is a new gen of fighters and the movement shares very little outside the name. Nearly all the Taliban from 2001 are dead of violent causes. +Remove terroristic sentiments. Not a goal, but also has Afghanistan committed many terror acts in the last 15 years? Current status is trending green. +Rebuild Afghanistan. Not an original goal (ie in Oct-2001). Also not a DoD goal, this was a State Dept goal after the military victory was secured. Also I'd argue that Afghanistan today has better infra than it did in Aug-2001, so this is complete. +Democratic standards. Not an original goal. Also not a DoD goal, this was a State Dept goal after the military victory was secured. Not met. +Prevent future 9/11s. Current status is trending green. So we met all but 1 goal. That's not bad as wars go.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- willcipriano 2y ago
  When the participation trophy generation grows up and becomes generals you'll hear things like, we would've won that war if it wasn't for all that attrition!
  - bluGill 2y ago
    What attrition? While deaths were not zero they were very low.
    - willcipriano 2y ago
      Roughly 2.2 trillion on the credit card for Afghanistan alone. That's without the interest that will be paid on it. Your grandkids children will be paying for that war.
      - bluGill 2y ago
        The only time anyone cares about that debt is when democrats are in control of the government - then republicans care. (sometimes when republicans control congress and the democrats control the president they care, but it is not as much then)
        willcipriano 2y ago
        The only president in my lifetime to not start any wars isn't really liked by either the democrats or the establishment republicans. Both parties are big fans of losing wars for some reason.
        mulmen 2y ago
        Were you born in 2020?
        willcipriano 2y ago
        > An armed conflict between Israel and Hamas-led Palestinian militant groups[ad] has been taking place in the Gaza Strip and Israel since 7 October 2023. > The United States has given Israel extensive military aid and vetoed multiple UN Security Council ceasefire resolutions. > United States provided advice and intelligence to Israeli forces during the raid, through its "hostage cell" stationed in Israel. The attack resulted in the deaths of 274 Palestinians. How would that work in your mind? Call that one for Harris because Biden is mentally unfit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war
rurp 2y ago
The US did not lose the war against Saddam. The war was started under false pretenses and they made a mess of the reconstruction after, but that's different from a military defeat. If one side of a war manages to destroy the other's military, execute its leader, and set up shop in his palaces; that's a win on the military front.

bluGill 2y ago

The US clearly choose to lose all wars lost though. The military was doing just fine, but the people back home got sick of the efforts.

vundercind 2y ago
1) That’s still losing. 2) I’m not sure the military was doing just fine in all of those. Vietnam comes to mind, but also Afghanistan—reading the Afghanistan papers, the brass seems to have given up on any kind of actual goals or accountability in favor of a system that let them continually cycle officers through and let them claim they succeeded at their mission (funny, they all keep achieving their mission, but facts on the ground remain exactly the same or worse!), for years and years. Fighting fitness may have been OK throughout, but military leadership in the military itself was absolutely not committed to any kind of winnable mission, let alone to actually winning it. That may have been driven (I’m sure it was) largely by civilian leadership, but the entire upper echelon of military leadership betrayed their commands and the soldiers counting on them, to keep up a convenient (to their careers, and a bunch of junior and mid-tier officers who got a big boost to their careers…) political fiction at the cost of any hope of something resembling actual success, and all it took was shitting all over their soldiers and the trust of the American people. I bet Iraq (part 2) was similar. I have some grave concerns about the state of our more-politicized-and-static professional officer corps since roughly Vietnam.
- ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
  I'm with you 100% on point #2. Disagree on point #1. We occupied Afghanistan for 20 years. We operated with nearly absolute impunity in all population centers, through all trade routes, and all agricultural areas. Our casualties were a minuscule amount our total forces. Our culture completely transformed theirs (in a way that old school hardliners lament publicly). We killed a huge number of Taliban (and foreign fighters). Clausewitz says that "the political object is the goal, war is the means of reaching it." Can you tell articulate what the political goal of the war was? Thinking back to 2001 (I was in middle school), the goal was retribution. I believe the military achieved that in spades. Yes, in the end Afghanistan did not turn into a US vassal state or a US colony. But was that the goal?
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    >Can you tell articulate what the political goal of the war was? The goal was to eradicate the Taliban, remove terroristic sentiments, rebuild Afghanistan, bring the country to 21st century democratic standards, and prevent future 9/11s. Did we achieve it? Hell no. Verdict: We lost. Over 20 years of bloodshed and misery on both sides for fucking nothing. We failed on every single fucking count. Every. Single. Count.
    - ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
      The discussion was more about if the military fumbled Afghanistan or if it was a political failure. You haven't shown a military failure. I also disagree with that list of objectives and their current status. Let's go through 1 by 1: +Eradicate Taliban. Complete. This is a new gen of fighters and the movement shares very little outside the name. Nearly all the Taliban from 2001 are dead of violent causes. +Remove terroristic sentiments. Not a goal, but also has Afghanistan committed many terror acts in the last 15 years? Current status is trending green. +Rebuild Afghanistan. Not an original goal (ie in Oct-2001). Also not a DoD goal, this was a State Dept goal after the military victory was secured. Also I'd argue that Afghanistan today has better infra than it did in Aug-2001, so this is complete. +Democratic standards. Not an original goal. Also not a DoD goal, this was a State Dept goal after the military victory was secured. Not met. +Prevent future 9/11s. Current status is trending green. So we met all but 1 goal. That's not bad as wars go.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
willcipriano 2y ago
When the participation trophy generation grows up and becomes generals you'll hear things like, we would've won that war if it wasn't for all that attrition!
- bluGill 2y ago
  What attrition? While deaths were not zero they were very low.
  - willcipriano 2y ago
    Roughly 2.2 trillion on the credit card for Afghanistan alone. That's without the interest that will be paid on it. Your grandkids children will be paying for that war.
    - bluGill 2y ago
      The only time anyone cares about that debt is when democrats are in control of the government - then republicans care. (sometimes when republicans control congress and the democrats control the president they care, but it is not as much then)
      - willcipriano 2y ago
        The only president in my lifetime to not start any wars isn't really liked by either the democrats or the establishment republicans. Both parties are big fans of losing wars for some reason.
        mulmen 2y ago
        Were you born in 2020?
        willcipriano 2y ago
        > An armed conflict between Israel and Hamas-led Palestinian militant groups[ad] has been taking place in the Gaza Strip and Israel since 7 October 2023. > The United States has given Israel extensive military aid and vetoed multiple UN Security Council ceasefire resolutions. > United States provided advice and intelligence to Israeli forces during the raid, through its "hostage cell" stationed in Israel. The attack resulted in the deaths of 274 Palestinians. How would that work in your mind? Call that one for Harris because Biden is mentally unfit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war

rurp 2y ago

The US did not lose the war against Saddam. The war was started under false pretenses and they made a mess of the reconstruction after, but that's different from a military defeat. If one side of a war manages to destroy the other's military, execute its leader, and set up shop in his palaces; that's a win on the military front.