An Odd Thought on the American Military
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-07-2013, 11:09 AM
An Odd Thought on the American Military
OK so I have posted this elsewhere so sue me.

The revolutionary war was a guerrilla war. Fought by people who knew the ground and used it and stealth and surprise to defeat a more traditional enemy.

Since then the american military has held to the notion of conventional war. The Civil War was one of massed armies marching to the beat of drums in a line against the other. Think of Pickett's Charge, a mistake that cost the Confederacy any chance of winning. Most of the time the Confederates only stood and fought when they were in superior defensive positions which led to some grisly Union defeats, such as Antietem/Sharpsburg.

Vietnam was the time when I began to understand our military was flawed. They tried to fight a guerrilla war with conventional tactics and lost. They did not know their own history.

I have often wondered at the reasoning for the frontal assault on the beaches at Normandy. There were other softer targets to invade. The US and British military made a point of not understanding proper tactics but chose to offer up soldiers for death to prove a point.

I raise this not because I agree with what we our using our military around the world for and might suggest that they improve their tactics. I do so because the US and its military forget their own history.

When you wage war against a united community (no matter how venal that unity is forged) one must use subtilty and stealth. The US in its foreign intrusions and with its military ignores its own history.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2013, 11:20 AM
RE: An Odd Thought on the American Military
Interesting- what were the softer alternatives to Normandy?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2013, 11:36 AM
RE: An Odd Thought on the American Military
(04-07-2013 11:09 AM)JAH Wrote:  OK so I have posted this elsewhere so sue me.

The revolutionary war was a guerrilla war. Fought by people who knew the ground and used it and stealth and surprise to defeat a more traditional enemy.

Since then the american military has held to the notion of conventional war. The Civil War was one of massed armies marching to the beat of drums in a line against the other. Think of Pickett's Charge, a mistake that cost the Confederacy any chance of winning. Most of the time the Confederates only stood and fought when they were in superior defensive positions which led to some grisly Union defeats, such as Antietem/Sharpsburg.

Vietnam was the time when I began to understand our military was flawed. They tried to fight a guerrilla war with conventional tactics and lost. They did not know their own history.

I have often wondered at the reasoning for the frontal assault on the beaches at Normandy. There were other softer targets to invade. The US and British military made a point of not understanding proper tactics but chose to offer up soldiers for death to prove a point.

I raise this not because I agree with what we our using our military around the world for and might suggest that they improve their tactics. I do so because the US and its military forget their own history.

When you wage war against a united community (no matter how venal that unity is forged) one must use subtilty and stealth. The US in its foreign intrusions and with its military ignores its own history.


This is actually not true. The American Revolution was not a true guerrilla war as that doesn't work with single shot muskets. That is more hollywood than history. Most battles in the Am Rev were small until fights as the americans being outnumbered and outgunned tried to avoid pitched battles with the main British forces.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
04-07-2013, 11:48 AM (This post was last modified: 04-07-2013 11:55 AM by Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver.)
RE: An Odd Thought on the American Military
(04-07-2013 11:09 AM)JAH Wrote:  OK so I have posted this elsewhere so sue me.

The revolutionary war was a guerrilla war. Fought by people who knew the ground and used it and stealth and surprise to defeat a more traditional enemy.

Since then the american military has held to the notion of conventional war. The Civil War was one of massed armies marching to the beat of drums in a line against the other. Think of Pickett's Charge, a mistake that cost the Confederacy any chance of winning. Most of the time the Confederates only stood and fought when they were in superior defensive positions which led to some grisly Union defeats, such as Antietem/Sharpsburg.

Vietnam was the time when I began to understand our military was flawed. They tried to fight a guerrilla war with conventional tactics and lost. They did not know their own history.

I have often wondered at the reasoning for the frontal assault on the beaches at Normandy. There were other softer targets to invade. The US and British military made a point of not understanding proper tactics but chose to offer up soldiers for death to prove a point.

I raise this not because I agree with what we our using our military around the world for and might suggest that they improve their tactics. I do so because the US and its military forget their own history.

When you wage war against a united community (no matter how venal that unity is forged) one must use subtilty and stealth. The US in its foreign intrusions and with its military ignores its own history.

I'd have to break this down section by section.

Quote:The revolutionary war was a guerrilla war. Fought by people who knew the ground and used it and stealth and surprise to defeat a more traditional enemy.

This is certainly true of colonial militias at the time. They utilized these tactics as confronting the British army using conventional tactics would have been suicide. Some of these rebel forces were very successful at creating havoc for British forces e.g. Ethan Allen and the 'Green Mountain Boys' of Vermont, Francis 'Swamp Fox' Macon of South Carolina, etc. The reality was we could not have won the revolution without the aid of the French army and navy to provide the manpower and destroy a naval blockade of the colonies.

Quote:Since then the american military has held to the notion of conventional war. The Civil War was one of massed armies marching to the beat of drums in a line against the other. Think of Pickett's Charge, a mistake that cost the Confederacy any chance of winning. Most of the time the Confederates only stood and fought when they were in superior defensive positions which led to some grisly Union defeats, such as Antietem/Sharpsburg.

Warfare was changed radically at that time; it had to because Napoleonic tactics (which both Lee and Grant were trained on at West Point) were unable to match the introduction of newer, more accurate and ever deadlier firearms. Seeking high ground, protective cover and ambush became more decisive factors while charges resulted in bloody slaughters. This was made ever more clear during WWI when the Maxim Machine Gun was introduced onto the battlefield.

Quote:Vietnam was the time when I began to understand our military was flawed. They tried to fight a guerrilla war with conventional tactics and lost. They did not know their own history.

Vietnam was an exercise in stupidity and futility for a bullshit ideology. Johnson and his incompetent General Westmoreland thought they could wage a clean, limited war against an indigenous population which had spent the past 30 years waging a guerrilla war against Colonialist powers. The U.S. had the ability to crush North Vietnam, but never did. Targets were off limits, we were 'peacekeepers', not soldiers, we didn't want to get China involved, etc. So we wasted 10 years hunting around in the jungles of SE Asia, lost 55,000 Americans, killed 3 million VC and NVA, but couldn't stem the tide of social change in that country.

Quote:I have often wondered at the reasoning for the frontal assault on the beaches at Normandy. There were other softer targets to invade. The US and British military made a point of not understanding proper tactics but chose to offer up soldiers for death to prove a point.

I believe these points were assessed as the weakest and easiest points along the Atlantic Wall to I) destroy the Nazi defenses and II) set up a beachhead and base of operations in central europe for deploying armor, air power, etc from. Part of the slaugher during the D-Day invasions was caused by the choice to land at low tide, which made landing craft less vulnerable to defenses but forced to infantry to cross more open ground under enemy fire as a result.

Quote:I raise this not because I agree with what we our using our military around the world for and might suggest that they improve their tactics. I do so because the US and its military forget their own history.

When you wage war against a united community (no matter how venal that unity is forged) one must use subtilty and stealth. The US in its foreign intrusions and with its military ignores its own history.

The real problem you face here is arrogance, both the belief that we can wage and clean war and that the indiginous population wants our presence there and our way of life. This is sadly proving to be false and really really doesn't work out. War is serious business. It's killing soldiers, women and children, destroying equipment, bombing infrastructure and keep doing so until an enemy sues for peace. You go to war to kill, not get killed, not run a peacekeeping operation. It's people coming back home with limbs amputated, and colostomy bags, and thousands of hours of physical therapy. It is NOT to gain a few approval points prior to an election or serve as a means to make businesses in the US money. You can ignore that at your own peril.

What we need to do is adopt a more libertarian view on foreign policy. Worry about out own business. Try and conduct economic trade with other countries and stop trying to play globocop. And if you do go to war, do it because it is absolutely necessary and do it to kill and end the conflict as quickly as possible.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver's post
04-07-2013, 11:54 AM
RE: An Odd Thought on the American Military
I would suggest the south of France which was easily attacked in August of 44. Holland where it would be known that the public would be welcoming. Perhaps through Spain and we could have removed that evil Franco in the course. Or simply around the corner in Brittany.

I do not pretend to know all the logistical and physical impedements to an attack on German forces other than Normandy. I do know that it was deliberately a frontal attack which guaranteed significant casualties. I will continue to suggest that the generals of WW2 fought without knowledge of how the US won its own independence.

Using thought instead of power is a way of winning with less destruction. The US choses power to its detriment.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2013, 12:18 PM
RE: An Odd Thought on the American Military
(04-07-2013 11:48 AM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  What we need to do is adopt a more libertarian view on foreign policy. Worry about out own business. Try and conduct economic trade with other countries and stop trying to play globocop. And if you do go to war, do it because it is absolutely necessary and do it to kill and end the conflict as quickly as possible.

I agree 100%, but I doubt it's going to happen anytime soon. I think the United States has been infected with some kind of "Glory of War" disease.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2013, 12:19 PM
RE: An Odd Thought on the American Military
I see others have jumped in while I was responding to Sandman.

I will stand by my characterization of the revolutionary war as a guerrilla war, with thanks to the French.

Carlo, I as I admitted above do not know what alternate places a major attack on France, or more appropriately the German army might have occurred. I do stand by my statement that it was a frontal attack. Not one of stealth and cunning but putting soldiers in harms way because it could be done.

While I will not characterize my own position on world politics as libertarian I would as an anarcho syndicalist agree that we should take care of our own and let the world be, absent of course real threat of which there is almost none. Terrorism being mostly made up to suit some politicians and the state.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2013, 12:21 PM (This post was last modified: 04-07-2013 12:35 PM by Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver.)
RE: An Odd Thought on the American Military
(04-07-2013 11:54 AM)JAH Wrote:  I would suggest the south of France which was easily attacked in August of 44. Holland where it would be known that the public would be welcoming. Perhaps through Spain and we could have removed that evil Franco in the course. Or simply around the corner in Brittany.

I do not pretend to know all the logistical and physical impedements to an attack on German forces other than Normandy. I do know that it was deliberately a frontal attack which guaranteed significant casualties. I will continue to suggest that the generals of WW2 fought without knowledge of how the US won its own independence.

Using thought instead of power is a way of winning with less destruction. The US choses power to its detriment.

I think this is a combination of logistics and geography. Northern France was an ideal location for an invasion as 1) it's very close to Great Britian so this provides an ideal location for using the British isle as a staging point for a quick 30-40 boat ride across the English Channel. 2) if you launch from Italy or Spain, you have to cross the Alps or Pyrannes Mountains in order to reach Germeny, which provided the Nazis with an effective defense - a fatal funnel - which probably would have cost a great deal more lives trying to cross.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2013, 12:34 PM
RE: An Odd Thought on the American Military
(04-07-2013 12:19 PM)JAH Wrote:  I see others have jumped in while I was responding to Sandman.

I will stand by my characterization of the revolutionary war as a guerrilla war, with thanks to the French.

I believe that the American Revolutionary War had a lot of Guerilla Influence at first, but as the war progressed, it essentially became a conventional war. Below is a link listing the major battles of the Revolutionary War. As you will see, the first 1.5 years are so have lots of guerilla activity and the rest is dominated by conventional means. http://www.theamericanrevolution.org/battles.aspx

So...I think that to characterize the Revolutionary War as a Guerilla War is a bit of a mis-characterization.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-07-2013, 12:36 PM
RE: An Odd Thought on the American Military
(04-07-2013 12:21 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  I think this is a combination of logistics and geography. Northern France was an ideal location for an invasion as 1) it's very close to Great Britian so this provides an ideal location for using the British isle as a staging point for a quick 30-40 boat ride across the English Channel. 2) if you laugh from Italy or Spain, you have to cross the Alps or Pyrannes Mountains in order to reach Germeny, which provided the Nazis with an effective defense - a fatal funnel - which probably would have cost a great deal more lives trying to cross.

Yeah, it's not a coincidence.

SAC did a fuckton of groundwork prior to the invasion.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: