PJ24
Active member
jackehammond said:Dear Member
My member didn't write that post, I did. :mrgreen:
jackehammond said:Sorry, disagree. Even some Iraqi have stated as such. As to countering IEDs your own commanders have stated they are ahead of the curve. And the unconventional outside the conventional is an answer given to say "We don't know."
Okay, you can disagree. Won't change what I've personally seen, though.
And NO COIN or war against an insurgent has been won with the "less is more" tactic.
I didn't say anything about any "less is more tactic" that doesn't even exist. I said, you can't throw numbers at the problem and expect it to go away. No matter how many guys you have out there, you cannot solve an unconventional problem with completely conventional tactics.
And you just can't haul off and hide 152mm shells that easy in vast numbers.
Wrong. Sorry, but I've seen some very creative ways of hiding ordnance, and without local intel they never would have been found.
You won't do it. But read about World War One.
I find it kinda funny you assume I haven't already.
Your answer is very familiar to the answers that were given when at last some started to question the British and French generals (British Army commander General Haig in particular) about chewing barbwire for a few yards.
Then it is clear you didn't understand a word I said.
And how did Shinseki waste resources? He agreed with the VP Cheney when he was Secretary of Defense under Bush's father that it would be dangerous to take the nation below 14 US Army divisions after the collapse of the USSR. And after 9/11 Bush had a mandate easily to increase the US Army from 10 to 14 divisions or even adding another battalion to every combat brigade. He was a loyal soldier.
You know, it's always a good idea to read up on all of the decisions that's been made before making a guy out to be the "loyal soldier" based on ONE correct comment. He was very PC, changed a lot of things for the worse in the Army. Start with wasting so much time and money on the black beret and go from there.
Finally, in almost every interview (ie they have been ordered not to now) every brigade commander has stated they need more boots on the ground. And these are not arm chair generals either. And if you agree the numbers of US forces in Iraq are being determined by the commanders on the ground and not the politicians in the White House I give up...
Did you even read my post? Just curious. The whole point of my post was a) numbers don't solve all of the problems and b) tactics are our biggest issue. I didn't say anything about us not needing more boots on the ground, or that putting more would be a bad idea.
I also said the media screamed about our tactics, so the politicians screamed about our tactics, therefore, we've got conventional guys running an unconventional war conventionally. You can put as many guys on the ground as you want, but unless you change your tactics, they aren't going to do much good. If I have to explain why (and I certainly will if you need me to) then you aren't as informed on this as you think.
For purposes of discussion, please actually read the posts before responding. I know you get a lot of info from other forums (I see you gleen info on a few forums I post on as well) and articles so a lot of your stuff is pretty static, but there should always be room for reading what others are actually writing and being able to respond to what they actually said.
PS> The way a lot of the US troops (ie especially the enlisted) are rallying to Bush and Rumsfeld's defense reminds a lot of General George McClellan in the American Civil War. They almost all damned Lincoln when Lincoln at last had enough and first demanded an explanation why with his outnumbering Lee three to one he would not give battle and then when he did at Sharpsburg, Maryland almost was defeated by Lee and had a draw with 23,000 killed and wounded in one day and called it a victory. Lincoln fired him at last. The soldiers gave replies like yours about politicians and the press interfering. After the Civil War ended and they got to see the records they were shocked to learn that McClellan has used their loyality for his own ends. James Webb a famous Vietnam War Marine combat veteran and author and US Secretary of Navy under Bush senior stated there will be a lot of disappointed soldiers and marines the same years down the road.[/quote]
Where did I rally to the POTUS or SECDEFs defense? I didn't. You haven't seen any posts like mine in any historical readings. You didn't even see or read my post.
Dude, R E A D the posts! When you don't, you remove any chance of being able to respond because almost everything you claim I said or implied in your post wasn't actually the case at all in mine.
Eh, I'm probably wasting my time. I'll try this: Okay, you're right! Let's leave it there. :thumb:
Last edited: