View Thread

Atheists Today » Easy Reading » The Lounge
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Print Thread
An Odd Thought on the American Military
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.
Military leaders tend to want to control the battlefield and that can be difficult using guerrilla tactics. The whole notion of going straight at the enemy and breaking their defenses speaks to that; Its a way of ensuring that the enemy stays where you think they are. The real question to my mind is, "are wars necessary at all".
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana
The US is moving away from frontal assaults, to aerial assaults. The drones will allow them to murder indiscriminately from a distance - then they can send in troops to stand over the broken bodies of the enemies they made while smiling and giving the thumbs up.

I do think countries should have national service, but it should be just that, service to the nation.

Instead of training them to run up and down hills, and kill, train them to dig, build, restore and have them provide a service the countries could use (we need a great load of infrastructure in the UK, we have the oldest most expensive railways in Europe).

Some would argue this would damage private industry, but that is bullshit - you could have private companies tender for the trained national service workforce - the private company pays the government, receiving a tax benefit, and the people get some core training.
The drone attacks are really more of a tool than a strategy. The disadvantage of killing from a distance is that you aren't always sure who you are killing.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana
The disadvantage of killing from a distance is that you aren't always sure who you are killing.

Disadvantage if you are the one being attacked. So far, the US has not been concerned with the horrendous civilian death figures, choosing instead to reclassify them as Unidentified Enemy Combatants.
Jump to Forum:

Similar Threads

Thread Forum Replies Last Post
Article: Scientific American Interesting Articles and links 2 09/06/2013 12:09
Fuck the American media! Why are foreign news always scooping our own?? The Rant Room 6 11/05/2011 10:43
Obama certifies end of military's gay ban LGBT 3 07/23/2011 11:51
Equality Sought for Military Concerts The Separation of Church and State 3 07/08/2011 14:23
Study: No problems w/ gays in the military LGBT 11 12/02/2010 15:34